Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
Tangent from reading about British aircraft.
Ultimately, the Allies won because (despite instances of American/British/Soviet bravery, strategic brilliance, and incredibly good designs) the biggest contributions of all three nations were essentially unexciting. The USA contributed overwhelming logistics from factories and oilfields which weren't bombed; the USSR was simply so *large* that with any logistical support whatsoever it could grind down a Wehrmacht successful in going after smaller countries; simply by being *there*, Britain pulled German and Italian energy that would otherwise be directed eastwards, and provided a valuable staging ground later in the war.
This is not something that gets your country into the history books for brave, tough military men commanded by legit geniuses and supplied with fantastic equipment. Especially since afterwards the USA and USSR are trying to indoctrinate kids while they build empires abroad, and Britain's dealing with the national embarrassment of no longer being an empire. (The first step, before you get to embarrassment of empire being not actually a good idea.)
This transfers undue attention to the Pacific theater for Brits (Slim and Wingate were legitimately brilliant) and Americans (tough Marines, Nimitz's incredible abilities, awesome designs like the Superfortress and F4U, without having to credit Brits, Aussies, Chinese or Sovs). Throw in subtle racism too if you're American (remember, but as soon as Asians got involved, the same rightwingers who were trying to keep us *out* of a war were suddenly on board).
Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
@Leucrotta One time in college we played a game of Axis and allies, specifically the version simulating the Pacific theater. I played Japan, one of my friends played the allied East Asian countries, and another played America. We ended up accidentally simulating the way the war went; I focused on the easy victories taking over most of the islands, beating back the west flank somewhat effectively, and then (cont.)
Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
@Leucrotta America spent more money than I could dream about and showed up with so many aircraft carriers that we had to use the placeholder tokens to represent full fleets of them. I was summarily obliterated. Perhaps I, like they, overextended myself out of greed, but also perhaps there was an economic reality that spelled my doom from the beginning.
Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
@Leucrotta I mean, thank god, I guess. The alternate history where the axis won would be infinitely shittier, but it does take some sheen off of whatever pride I might have had to know that our advantage was that we were better able to throw more cash and gas and steel and bodies at the problem.
Also perhaps makes me less surprised that later conflicts with no clear winner have been between the US and Russia
Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
@Cheff I don’t think it needs to affect national pride - I feel like in any war especially one fought that hard, you can point to leaders, men and materiel which were amazing (and similarly every country had leaders, men and materiel which were simply dismal) - it’s just that, whatever else wins battles, logistics wins wars. And logistics was on the allies’ side as soon as Lend-Lease.
