WW2 - Was it really the best war?

The “What are you reading thread” comments about the atomic bombs made me want to start this one. WW2 is often referred to as the most important war the USA has fought in, but was it as necessary as we think?
Discuss any aspects of the war, from any angle.

I think dropping the atomic bombs was ultimately a good move by the US. We could have defeated Japan by using conventional warfare methods, but, it was beneficial to us to end the war as fast as possible; in a situation like that, our own well being matters more than anybody else’s. IMO, some points to consider-

  1. If we had invaded Japan, American casualties would have been extremely high, and it’s hard to think that a huge number of Japanese civilians would not have been killed…through the crossfire, but also on purpose.(Probably more than those killed by the atomic bombs.)
  2. The USA and our allies were wearing down under the strain of the war (both emotionally and logistically)
  3. Making a statement to the world that reads - don’t mess with us.
    Another issue is with the racial aspect. I do think we were more willing to drop these devastating bombs on Japan because they aren’t white. If Germany had not surrendered, I doubt we would have “experimented” with the atomic bombs there.

Here’s a simple analogy I find informative regarding WW2. Two neighborhoods are separated by a river. In one neighborhood, a bunch of adults are fighting because one asshole, who like many others just like him before, thinks his family should run the whole neighborhood. There’s one other major family who stands in his way. So he goes to war with them and the battle rages on, with both families experiencing huge losses. One of these adults says, Hey, across the river there’s a bunch of kids who might be willing to help out since we’re beating each other up over here. The kids join the battle, for the most part away from the real action, and help win the war. The kids, comparatively, have lost very little compared to the adults. And so after the war they are the only ones who can function since the adults are bloodied and beaten to the core. Their role was important but relatively small BUT because of when they joined, they come away with this notion that they were the heroes and somehow they were the most important player. The adults secretly hate them because of their misplaced egotism.
That’s how I see it. The US role was important but relatively speaking, pretty minor, especially when you look at the number of injured and killed by country. And since WW2 had such a minimal effect, again relatively speaking, we’re able to aggrandize it in movies, TV, etc. and work it into our culture that somehow we are special, we’re the real heroes. That’s not to denigrate the individual soldiers and their families who lost their lives. They did the job they were supposed to do. But from a macro level, in terms of sheer #'s the US was a minor player whose assistance was helpful but possibly not necessary. WW2 was between Germany and Russia. Everyone else was a side player, though some bigger than others, like GB of course.

Cuthbert, … really?

That's how I see it. The US role was important but relatively speaking, pretty minor, especially when you look at the number of injured and killed by country. And since WW2 had such a minimal effect, again relatively speaking, we're able to aggrandize it in movies, TV, etc. and work it into our culture that somehow we are special, we're the real heroes. That's not to denigrate the individual soldiers and their families who lost their lives. They did the job they were supposed to do. But from a macro level, in terms of sheer #'s the US was a minor player whose assistance was helpful but possibly not necessary. WW2 was between Germany and Russia. Everyone else was a side player, though some bigger than others, like GB of course.
You mean the European theater of WW2 was between Germany and Russia. ;-) I agree the American military role in the European theater was and is, over-exaggerated; not only by historians, but by the reverence everyone is supposed to show to the "greatest generation". This commercial touches on that - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI2aWk_OASQ The US was a relatively minor military player in Europe, but we were a huge logistical player, the Soviet Union absolutely needed the aid from America in order to keep fighting the Germans. And in the Pacific theater (our more important fight) we were a major player in every way.
Their role was important but relatively small BUT because of when they joined, they come away with this notion that they were the heroes and somehow they were the most important player. The adults secretly hate them because of their misplaced egotism.
IDK about this....if our allies like Britain, France, Italy, etc. hated us, it was because we could finish the job they couldn't finish themselves. Plus, we had sex with their girlfriends! Another issue to consider is that Western Europe's influence on the world died after the war, and the redneck, uncouth USA superseded them on the world stage.

How about framing the question this way?: If the Axis powers had been allowed to pursue their imperialistic objectives unchecked, would the world be a better place today?

That's how I see it. The US role was important but relatively speaking, pretty minor, especially when you look at the number of injured and killed by country. And since WW2 had such a minimal effect, again relatively speaking, we're able to aggrandize it in movies, TV, etc. and work it into our culture that somehow we are special, we're the real heroes. That's not to denigrate the individual soldiers and their families who lost their lives. They did the job they were supposed to do. But from a macro level, in terms of sheer #'s the US was a minor player whose assistance was helpful but possibly not necessary. WW2 was between Germany and Russia. Everyone else was a side player, though some bigger than others, like GB of course.
You mean the European theater of WW2 was between Germany and Russia. ;-) I agree the American military role in the European theater was and is, over-exaggerated; not only by historians, but by the reverence everyone is supposed to show to the "greatest generation". This commercial touches on that - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI2aWk_OASQ The US was a relatively minor military player in Europe, but we were a huge logistical player, the Soviet Union absolutely needed the aid from America in order to keep fighting the Germans. And in the Pacific theater (our more important fight) we were a major player in every way.Yes, that's a more accurate description. Thanks.

I’m listening to this guy on a podcast free via Stitcher] He’s wrapping up a series on WWI and will probably be taking on WWII next. I’m still catching up, so I’ll comment on this thread in a month or so.

The "What are you reading thread" comments about the atomic bombs made me want to start this one. WW2 is often referred to as the most important war the USA has fought in, but was it as necessary as we think? Discuss any aspects of the war, from any angle.
"Was it really the best war?" There is nothing good in any war so how can we ask such a question.
The "What are you reading thread" comments about the atomic bombs made me want to start this one. WW2 is often referred to as the most important war the USA has fought in, but was it as necessary as we think? Discuss any aspects of the war, from any angle.
"Was it really the best war?" There is nothing good in any war so how can we ask such a question. Good point. Lois