[001]
CPFMfan
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
to:
I think the description should be rewritten, but I\\\'m not exactly sure how to do it. It seems rather biased, focusing nearly entirely on how Americans think they won the war rather than the hubris of all nations involved, and seems to actually downplay how important American contributions were in an attempt to avert this trope. In addition to being the leaders and main presence in all theatres of war after their entrance (except the Eastern Front of course), and supplying huge amounts of materiel to their allies, Stalin himself said that the war would\\\'ve been lost without American industrial capacity. RedOrchestra and Operation Darkness are also for some reason listed as aversions, even though they just swap out \\\"America Wins The War\\\" for \\\"The Soviet Union Wins The War\\\" and \\\"Britain Wins The War\\\" respectively.
Anyway, my point is that I think it should be rewritten so that it focuses on all nations rather than just the United States with a little note for every other country at the end.
Also, oddly enough, the first paragraph states \\\"America Wins The War is a form of Hollywood History in which a story implies or outright states that the United States single-handedly won World War II\\\", then proceeds to spend four paragraphs on American perceptions of the war and how wrong they are. But later in the article it states that this is \\\'\\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\'\\\' specifically an American trope, and then only spends three or so sentences on it. These seem to contradict each other and the laconic page.
Anyway, my point is that I think it should be rewritten so that it focuses on all nations rather than just the United States with a little note for every other country at the end.
Also, oddly enough, the first paragraph states \\\"America Wins The War is a form of Hollywood History in which a story implies or outright states that the United States single-handedly won World War II\\\", then proceeds to spend four paragraphs on American perceptions of the war and how wrong they are. But later in the article it states that this is \\\'\\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\'\\\' specifically an American trope, and then only spends three or so sentences on it. These seem to contradict each other and the laconic page.
