If you are french, you should thank the russians for liberating france from germany. Certainly not the US. The russians beat the germans in ww2. Not the british, not the US, not anyone else. Just look at the data.
Also, if the germans won ww2, you'd be saying the exact opposite. You'd be saying how thankful you are that germany gave you freedom from the anglo imperial economic world order.
- Russia did tie up the bulk of the German forces. And they suffered and inflicted the bulk of the causalities. So in a sense, this is true.
- Regarding the topic at hand, the US and UK literally liberated France.
- As others mentioned, Russia was reliant on critical US industrial help. They didn't do it alone.
- The US had still not fully mobilized when the Germans and Russians were having some of their largest conflicts. I would argue that the US had not fully mobilized even by the end of the war (e.g., look % of population enlisted, industry still ramping up). Even if Russia had not fought, the US/UK would still have defeated the Germans. If you look at the size of the Armies that could be fielded, the Germans had little chance. Their best bet was to reach some agreement with the US and UK, occupy Europe and focus on the Russians. Having said that, when their opening push against Russia failed, they'd were doomed there also (i.e., once Russia regrouped, they could have defeated Germany alone).
- The US had strategic plans to defeat the Germans if both the UK and Russia fell. The size of the planned navy, army and air force proposed was bonkers.
The Russians did take part in beating Germany, I didn't want to imply it wasn't the case, but they did with heavy logistical support from the US, which is what the comment was about ("guns made, ships launched"). And can you really say that the US were for nothing in Germany's defeat when more than half of the Panzer divisions were fighting in the Western front?
> Also, if the germans won ww2, you'd be saying the exact opposite. You'd be saying how thankful you are that germany gave you freedom from the anglo imperial economic world order.
well, I don't have a time machine to go and test that hypothesis, but considering how Germany was treating occupied territories, I think we got a better outcome under anglo imperial order than under German occupation (or soviet occupation had they continued West after taking Berlin).
> You'd be saying how thankful you are that germany gave you freedom from the anglo imperial economic world order.
No. Very few people were happy with the German occupation. Many occupied countries had very active resistance movements. The only people who were happy with the German occupation were fascist collaborators.
The western allies gave the countries they liberated their freedom and autonomy back. Neither Germany nor the USSR did that, and that matters a lot.
> Also, if the germans won ww2, you'd be saying the exact opposite. You'd be saying how thankful you are that germany gave you freedom from the anglo imperial economic world order.
Probably not, no. Germany was not promising freedom to people on the west. The plan was living space and genocide in east and domination under Aryan rule in the west. The freedom for French was not the plan. So, nazi in west would be remembered the same way Russia is remembered now.
And looking at history, Russia is not remembered as liberator in Ukraine or Poland or Czech Republic or Slovakia or Estonia either. Russia is remembered as the country that too away freedom, that stole and that killed or tortured people.
Then, Hollywood won.
[0] https://www.ifop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/3025-1-study... (page 5)