should the Boer War be included as a Canadian victory? our participation was the same as WWI/WW2: proportionally smaller contingent under British command.Well, Canada has never won a war without American help, if you think about it. World War One, World War Two, Korea...a lot of people in this country seem to want to forget that.
I haven‘t forgottenOkay a few things you need to remmber,
Bull****. In 1917, the collapse of the Eastern Front allowed Germany to send thousands of fresh troops to the west - at a time when French divisions were mutinying, and British formations in the field were downsizing in order to keep the number of divisions constant. The German spring offensives of 1918 were a shocking blow. It is very possible that without American intervention, the western front may have collapsed, or at least extended the war into 1919.Canada entered both WW1 and WW2 before the United States, and did not need the Help of Amercians to win.
Exactly.Both those wars were won but an allied effort,
Read my post again; I said that these were all team efforts and I was not attempting to downplay the role of our military.and not because of American‘s entry into them.
Canadians didn‘t fight any major battles until April 1915, if you want to get picky, and with only one division that mostly destroyed itself in rash counter-attacks (ie St. Julien, etc.) 6000 men of the 10,000 man division became casualties. Because of their bravery, the line held and a major German breakthrough was prevented (though historians will point out the Germans had not planned for a deep breakthrough during Second Ypres anyway, and would have had to stop short of their own accord even if they pushed the Canadians aside - which they weren‘t able to do). A second division didn‘t reach the front until later in the year.Lets take WW1, It started in 1914, not April 1917. And Canadians were at the front perfecting the tactics that won the war.
Some historians would agree, others would not. I think you can say for sure that Canadians didn‘t win the war alone, and the involvement of the US made an appreciable difference.Amercian troops were in France in the spring of 1918, and after the Germans had lost their stream in their great push, their entry shorten the war, but did not win it.
And Canadian troops did what, exactly, during this period? Spitsbergen, and faced no opposition. Oh yes, and lost 6 men when the First Division moved to Brittany briefly before being withdrawn. At the same time, the US was providing material aid to Canada and Britain clandestinely. So while Canada was far more involved (mainly through the RCAF, BCATP, and naval escort duties on the North Atlantic run), America wasn‘t exactly idle. They also started drafting soldiers in 1940 to prepare their military for war action - Canada began drafting men in 1940 and refused to let them serve in combat until January 1945 (the decision was made in Nov 44, but they didn‘t arrive in theatre until the next year).WW2 again started in 1939 not Dec 7 1941.
Every Canadian armoured regiment used the Sherman tank by 1944 - guess where they were made?Yes Amercian troops and industrial machine played a major role in the defeat of German,
I never disputed either of these points. And again, the USSR was aided considerably by American help - GMC trucks, Sherman tanks, and lots of other goodies. The British too, got War Aid clothing from the US, Lee Enfield rifles produced in the US, etc. Again, my point was that WW II was a team effort - and that US involvement in that team was not just ‘nice to have‘ as perhaps in WW I, but a necessity.but so did our‘s and the of course lets not forget about the USSR. They really won the war agaist Germany.
This mystifies me - which cracks are you referring to? I am rereading Matthew Cooper‘s THE GERMAN ARMY - a masterful treatise on Germany‘s wartime direction. I think the cracks were apparent from before the war - Hitler made all the decisions, period, and they were usually the wrong ones, tactically and operationally speaking.It was their man power and their country that wore out the German war machine and forced the cracks ito show in the German leadership.
I disagree - China had a large burden in fighting the Japanese, from very early on, as did the Australians and the British (in Burma). It was not just the Americans fighting the Japanese - even the USSR came onside once it was clear the Japanese were defeated and there was territory to be gained.Japan is a different story as it was all the work efforts of United States, it was ther war to win. And Canada played a very small part in this war.
What do you mean "again"?Korea again it was an amercian conflict, and Canada played a small part with only 25,000 troops.
Of course it could, that was the point.Your statement could really applied to any nation who was an allie in those wars.
This is certainly true of WW II - Canada produced 60 percent of all Bren Guns, trained thousands of pilots through the BCATP, and performed the lion‘s share of escort duties in the North Atlantic. As for WW I, I think we had a profound influence on tactics (as you point out) and military science - the 40,000 troops we had in the field at any one time was only a drop in the bucket - but Canadian skill managed to multiply the force beyond what the mere numbers suggested. The Germans always braced themselves for the worst when they heard the Canadians or Australians were going into the line opposite them.I.e Could Britian of won ww1 and ww2 without Canadian help... and the answer would most likely be no they could not of won without our help or the help of the common wealth.
On the contrary, it puts it into the proper perspective - and doesn‘t allow anyone to downplay the vital role the Americans played in both world wars - something that is popular in this country, unfortunately.To make a statement like that down plays our role in this century.
Read my book DRESSED TO KILL and you will see how non-sensical this statement is. Or check out KHAKI by Clive Law. Canadian uniforms were very distinct from the British in WW i - they were also poorly made and had to be replaced en masse, from the boots on up. In WW II Canadian uniforms were highly sought after, being well tailored, of high quality cloth, and generally smart looking.Canada‘s problem has been that we‘ve always worked under someone else‘s rules and most this century dressed in someone else uniform....
I‘m not sure what this refers to. We sat up and begged for Dieppe, we had our own beach on D-Day in Normandy, we were certainly not overlooked in Hong Kong...what does this refer to?and we get over looked by our allies because we don‘t speak up.
I have to tell you that while this may be true, the Americans were getting their asses whipped in Korea before the Canadian contingent showed up, and with our superior knowledge, we helped keep the Koreans at bayKorea again it was an amercian conflict, and Canada played a small part with only 25,000 troops.
On June 25, 1950, seven North Korean assault Divisions, plus sundry other elements, invaded South Korea. As of 1 July 1950, the US had a total of 485 personnel in Korea. (NK forces totalled 150,000-200,000)...the Americans were getting their asses whipped in Korea before the Canadian contingent showed up, and with our superior knowledge, we helped keep the Koreans at bay
I don‘t think it was so much the Canadian effort single-handedly tipping the scale as the build-up of forces from all Commonwealth and UN coutries that participated.REMEMBER
26,791 Canadians served
516 died and 1,558 were wounded
33 were taken prisoner of war
- Royal Canadian Legion, Poppy Campaign Information card, Sources; DND, VAC, March 1992
This is probably a warning to stop here, but I‘m genuinely fascinated by some of your comments below.Alright, so my information was a bit biased (i got it from my grade 11 history text book.. it‘s canadian. so sue me)
"We"? I don‘t see anyone here disregarding Canada‘s participation in the Second World War, or advocating same.However, we can‘t disregard Canada‘s participation in the 2nd world war
What on earth are you talking about here? This entire paragraph is a flight of fancy. The British and Canadians operated on their own side of the front in Normandy, the Americans in a seperate area altogether. As for weeks of rehearsals, the Normandy battle only lasted from June to the end of August 1944. Are you speaking of Verrierres Ridge? The Americans were nowhere near it. I don‘t recall reading about the British ever going anywhere near it either.First, there was hill 127. This was a stratigic hill that the Germans had occupied, and seeing that it was smack dab in the middle of plains, the germans had a grand killing time, whenever someone tried to take the hill. The Yanks tried to take it, without success. The brits tried to take the hill, and got slaughtered. So, they decided to give it to the Canucks. Well, the Canadians rehersed a battle for a few weeks, and then when the timing was perfect, they attacked the hill. After alot of casualties, the germans finally surrendered, and the Canadians gained what neither the Brits, nor the Americans could take.
Really? Name one.Then there‘s Dieppe. A tragedy, right? WRONG! true, a lot of Canadian soldiers gave their lives in the attack gone awry, but without Dieppe, a lot of historians, and mil. stratagists said that Normandie would have not been a success, as the Allied forces did not know what to expect.
Really? If Hitler was fooled into thinking there would be no landings in Normandy, then why did he spend all those resources making extensive concrete fortifications on the Normandy coast?It also boostered Hitler‘s ego, in thinking that there won‘t be any attack on the coast of Normandy, as the conditions were similar to Dieppe.
The Juno landings happened well after the Omaha landings. Juno‘s first wave came ashore at about 8 am, Omaha‘s first wave landed an hour early at about 7 am.Lastly, there‘s Normandy. Not much to say, except that Canadians were the first to land in Normandy (both in the airdrops, as well as Juno Beach had the first Contact Rep)