What County Was Most Responsible For The Defeat Of Germany In WW2?

[KG_Cloghaun]

Probably for the same reason it's referred to as 'The War of the Century'

Or because a poorly trained, unprepaired army usually incurres heavy losses when facing a superior army. Or follow Stalin's early war armored doctrine of counter-attacking whether the tanks had the required fuel, so they ran out just as they arrived to engage the enemy.

'Pissed Away'? Are we talking about the same WW2 here?

No, I'm talking about the other WW2.

Source? Not arguing, just looking for clarification.

Appendix with original sources.
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...y/sources.aspx
Source.
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...roduction.aspx

Are we going to be talking about 'at the end of the war' (your US figures) or 'August 1945' (your British figures)?

Whichever. It's not like it would be that hard to get back to the front.

Eleven million is the figure I have for the Soviet army,

11 million?! Your going to dispute Overy?! Say it isn't so!

Must you continue to use these tired old 'Cold War' bs definitions?

I'm sorry, did the US & Russia stop pointing Nuclear Missiles at one another and no one told me? Seeing as you don't know anything about me, you would be hard pressed to identify my use of sarcasm. I find it amusing that you take issue with my silly "cold war" monologue, but have no problem with KG_Soldier's earlier "hypothetical" making "England" complicit to the Holocaust.

How much influence would "England" have put on Hitler to not exterminate the Jews (or would they have supported it)?

But where do those figures derive from? I know where Overy gets his figures from, but these are all secondary sources.

You want me to look up the sources 19 different authors used for the purposes of this discussion? Boy, that's not asking alot. You've cited one author in this whole discussion. You certainly put alot of stock in one persons research to refute 17 other authors/publishers, Keegan being the only exception. He is British ofcourse. Do you work for his publisher? Or did you attend one of his history courses? It's just that England is so small, what are the odds, ya know? Just kidding.
I also see where Overy gets his figures for his book, "Russia's War" from newly released K.G.B. archives. Those figures would'nt be distorted in the slightest, would they? I mean shit, they were so forthcoming about the Kursk disaster and that just happened 6 years ago, no reason to think Stalin didn't keep the record books straight.

(I still see 29 million mentioned in some books and web sites) so I'm unwilling to take a 'median' figure for either side.

Well, if you count "hanging chads",.. (that's a joke for any American voters out there, Monty. Pay no attention).

Additionally, just citing German losses distorts the picture somewhat given that there were Rumanians, Hungarians, Italians and Spaniards all fighting on the side of the Axis.

Now you're trying to take a freebie there! The site I gave clearly stated "Germany", not "Axis", and listed German military manpower losses. When counting casualties, it is common practice to seperate nationalities out from the armies they fought for at the end of wars.

Picking isolated instances like this proves nothing.

My example is far from being an isolated event & if I had the time, I'd be happy to prove it. However, you are correct, there is no point as the end result is the Germans lost, plain & simple.

[KG_Soldier]

John Keegan: "The Price of Glory" the section on the Somme is the best ever written. Man, that dude can write, awesome style. Without question, one of my favorite guys to read--and of course, A.J.P. Taylor.

[KG_Mauserman]

definatly russia for me. once hitler open pandoras box there was nothing he could do.