The United States' involvement in WWII was just as important in saving Europe as the Soviet Union's.

Thank you for the reply. I must explain that each time I say anything to the liking of "The US presence on the other side of Germany," I'm referring to the Allied army on the other side because of the US,-----------------------------Much of Con's argument is gravely irrelevant to the resolution. Con is focusing too much on how much of a role Russia played in winning the war, while the resolution is about the saving of Europe, which is not the same thing. It's likely Russia would have still defeated Berlin none the less without the US sending soldiers. The question is, would the Nations of Europe have been saved without the US there?Rebuttal I: The Soviet military contributions overshadowed the help that the allies received from American Supplies.The number of men killed is irrelevant in who saved Europe. Being the deadliest battle and the important battle are two separate things. Con is misled to think the the number changed a lot. Yes, many Germans died, but at the end of the year, the number barely changed. In 1941, the number of Germans was 3,767,000. In 1942 of the same month, it had gone down to 3,720,000 (1). Again, much of Con's arguments don't relate to the Resolution. Russia may have won the war, but they didn't save Europe. It was the US on the other side of Germany that saved the remainder of Europe from the Soviets. Con talks about how, in 1943, the Soviets were producing 3x what the Germans were. This would be a standing argument except that it took US supplies for Russia to reach that goal. Until then, Russia depended on US aide to make up for what the Soviets had lost until they could take back much of their land and factories, and reboot production. The US also provided up to 400,000 vehicles. With out the vehicles, including trucks and jeeps, Russia would not have been as mobilized as they required. The automobiles aided their military and industry greatly. The US also provided nearly 12,000 armored vehicles, 7,000 of which were tanks. This came at a time when Stalin had been trying to replace the nation's tanks with newer ones. This also included 340,000 telephones for on the field. That number of phones was vital for the Russian military.The Soviet Union would have been in a hard spot without the early supplies.When the US entered the war is absolutely irrelevant. The US could have entered the war last second and the resolution would stand. The US presence on the other side of Germany is important, not when it entered the actual battle. It is to be remembered that the US had been supporting the Allies since before Russia entered the war. Until Russia had entered the war, Russia had been supplying Germany (3). The reason the Allies couldn't open the front in France was because of the lack of manpower and equipment. This was made up for by the US entry in the war, providing half the man and most the ships used in D-Day, and helping to break Britain out of Africa.1) http://en.wikipedia.org...(World_War_II)2) http://www.history.army.mil...3) http://en.wikipedia.org...(1939)Rebuttal II: The United States did not save Europe from the Soviets, Stalin did.Don't confuse yourself. Stalin wasn't saving Europe. He was waiting. The Soviets had prior begin replacing their tanks with T-34s (4) and rebuilding their Army. Stalin found out after the Winter War that he did not have the Military infrastructure to enter a large war. After the purge, the army was left with little to no officer corp, and Stalin knew he could not enter a full war. This is why Hitler was so successful in the first two years on the Eastern Front, as Con acknowledged. After the war started, Stalin quickly built up his army's infrastructure. By the time the war had ended, Stalin had the manpower and infrastructure needed.Con contradicts. One second he says Stalin had the manpower to bulldoze Germany, the next he says Stalin didn't have the infrastructure needed. Con is trying to make it out as though Russia didn't take over Europe by choice. Russia had no means to at the time. It wasn't until the war ended that the Russian's had the power. Stalin would have kept going, taking over France and Italy as well in his political conquest of Germany's prior held land.Stalin didn't save Europe. He simply didn't have the infrastructure. Especially not to take down Berlin at that time. By the time he had took Berlin, he had the military needed. It was the US presence on the other side that kept Stalin out of the remainder Europe.4) http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com...5) http://russiapedia.rt.com... Rebuttal III: Britain could have saved Europe from the Soviets alone Con is right to mention that the US made up about half the force. The UK and Canada could have without stormed the beach with 80,000 men. The problem with his contention is that, with all 156,000 of the soldiers that was there, we almost lost D-Day.Britain could never have stormed those beaches. With all their soldier's and the US's, D-Day was still almost lost. So badly, in fact, that Eisenhower was writing letters explaining the defeat (6). The battle was almost lost even with double the manpower. With just Britain alone, the battle would never have won. Con is gavely mistaken to assume Britain could have stormed the beaches. His argument again contradicts. One minute he says Britain could do it without the US, the next he's talking about how they kept failing to do it until D-Day... A battle that was almost lost with American support.Germany had already sent forces out of France.... To fight the US in Italy. By the time Hitler sent man to Russia, the British would not have got far through France. Britain literally could not land on France, better yet get far enough in to withstand Soviet mongering past East Germany. Especially if the US had never supplied Britain. 6) http://www.archives.gov...Rebuttal IV: ConclusionCon did not show how overshadowed these supplies were. Especially since he ignored US Supplies to Britain. The US supplies played a vital role in the early parts of the Eastern Front. Without them, the Soviet's under-performing military complex would have contributed little, although Russia would likely have still entered Germany in time. The British could have never invaded France by itself because it almost lost even with the US.Stalin didn't save Europe from himself. He was simply waiting after his Purge in the earlier years. After the war, Stalin had the military infrastructure to bulldoze France and the rest of Nazi-controlled Europe. It was the US on the other side of the fence that saved Europe.Conclusion:A great deal of Con's arguments were about how Russia helped win the war, not how they helped save Europe. As my arguments go, it was Russia the US saved the remainder of Europe from.The Russians depended a lot on US supplies, including armored vehicles, telephones, and food, as well as vehicles, in the beginning of the war. After had hit Berlin, it was the US presence on the other side of Germany that saved the freed France, Italy, and remainder of nations from the Soviets. Stalin had politically took over every nation Germany held on the East, and would have took the nations Germany held on the West as well if the Allied army hadn't been there.The Allied army would never had been there in time, or even in Europe, if not for the US. The US pushed Britain into France. With the US, D-Day was almost a disaster, without them (doubling the manpower) D-Day would never have succeeded (or even attempted.) Especially not without the US supplies. Without the US, Russia would have politically conquered the remainder of Europe, wit the exception of Spain and Britain.For the sake of debate, I should say that if the US's supplies weren't as helpful as I claim, the resolution would still be upheld. In fact, Con must understand that if Russia didn't need the supplies, it wouldn't simpl make the US presence on the other side of Germany even more important.While Russia helped a lot in winning the war, it was the US that saved the remainder of Europe from Russia, who would have easily ran over the remainder of German-held land if the US hadn't pushed the Allies into Germany.