From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 - 10:52:57 PST
Hi,
>Gee Steve, giving kinda short shrift to some, eg
>Canada ?
In an ordered list someone has to be at the top and someone has to be at
the bottom. Although Canada's contribution was significant and
meaningful, it fits in where I said it does. Right after Britain. When
I said "Commonwealth" as a collective, I was accounting for the fact that
Canada was responsible for the lion's share of that contribution.
I it makes you feel any better I could put Canada separately after
Britain and stick Australia, NZ, and South Africa further down the list
separately and others, such as India even further down :-)
>But please just remember, you won WITH the allies
>England, Canada, the ANZACs, South Africa, India,
>Russia, (free) Poles Czechs etc etc, not alone.
Check my list... I put the US second to the Soviet Union, so I'm not sure
what your point is about me needing to remember something. I also
included all of the other nations you listed, though not India and the
plethora of smaller contributors by name. Too many to list. I could if
I wanted to spend the time on it, since the study of WWII ETO is my
academic, professional, and hobby life all rolled up into one nice package :-)
BTW, to some degree I consider the efforts of Canada and the US to be
linked. We worked VERY closely and very well together, supplying each
other with things we lacked or needed more of than was domestically
available. In fact, my first and foremost military vehicle, the Weasel,
was a joint US and Canadian project. I think the two countries combined
were able to do far more than either one would have been able to do
separately. Perhaps far more than any other two allied countries in the
war. And being a direct neighbor to Canada I always look very fondly
upon our long standing relationship (and really good beer <g>).
Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:38:49 PDT