Jerry = Gerrie = Ger(man) IIRC. Kraut from Sauerkraut - a German food. (Much like the French calling the English rosbif = Roast Beef)
Kraut is an easy one to explain: its origin comes from the word sauerkraut, which is a common German food. Good stuff with Nurnberger brat and brochen, too. I think the original use comes from seafaring days when sauerkraut was used as a source of vitamin C among sailors to avoid scurvy. The British Navy switched to limes but he German Navy continued to use sauerkraut. Thus Brits became known as "limies" and Germans "krauts." The term Jerry, however, is a bit elusive. I started looking into this years ago and found no definitive explanation. The most likely is that it is simply a phonetic play on the word "Germany." There's a long tradition of using personal names to create a pejorative for other groups or nations, particularly in war. This is often a general personal name that refers to all members of the group in question. Examples include: "Charlie" for the North Vietnamese (which comes from abbreviation of their designation Viet Cong, which renders phonetically to "victor charlie" in US military alphabet); "Tommy" for the British (chosen by the British War Office itself as "Tommy Atkins"), and "Ivan" for the Russians.
ok another question then how come during ww2 there was so much ditrust with the alies among common soldiers like the american thought the brits were useles and the same with the british ??
I don't think it was "distrust" so much as it was rivalry. The Americans began to dominate the European theater with regard to planning, strategy, and logistics and the British were understandably put off by this seemingly arrogant and presumptuous attitude. The Americans, however, had technology, manpower, and deep pockets, which were undeniably advantageous resources. Joint operations often led to competition for "moments of glory" that each side knew would go down in history. Sometimes this led to bungles in the execution of their plans as well as oversight with regard to the actual forces on the ground in German occupied territory, such as with Operation Market Garden where the German soldiers were supposed to be old men and kids.
over all i think the russians and the germans were the srongest nations during ww2 but i also think that america had the advantege of coming in 2 years later than anyone else.
Some other names for the Germans were Fritz, and Heini. That is a very disputably idea, from the reading I have done on the economics of the rise of WWII Germany I would not place them above the U.S. as a strong nation, and the same could be said for the Russians, almost a third of Russian equipment came from the west during the war, and it was equipment that they couldn't manufacture in enough quantizes for them selves, Transportation being one of those items, a 1/3 of their tank forces were armed with American and British tanks, and a 1/3 of their Air Force was American and British aircraft, half of the trucks in the Soviet Army at the end of the war were U.S. manufacture, and with out those trucks the Soviets would have been a foot sore, slogging through the mud army, and the Germans Mechanized formations would have run ring around them and chopped them up peace meal.
sorry let me corect thi russians i belive without them the war would have been lost germany could have took on evry evry nation one on one that is.
No, you still GROSSLY underestimate the economic power, natural resources and industrial capacity of the U.S. You also seem unaware that we bombed Germany's industrial sectors to rubble. And you also completely fail to understand that for Germany to win the war they would have had to occupy the U.S. - something they had neither the manpower nor equipment to do.
For starters, compare the population of Germany and the U.S. Next, just how long would the German supply lines have to be to support and sustain a U.S. invasion?? You're overlooking several quite obvious things. I believe your understanding of things military is really very lacking, sorry. Better for you to stick with other topics that you might actually know about.
jesus man im just trying to talk about that so erm hows about scre you Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! but to be fair would have america been able to invade germany on it's own say if germany had conqured britian and never invaded russia i think that it would have been about an even battle
You really should read more then you would understand better. http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/c...p://www.euronet.nl/users/wilfried/ww2/ww2.htm
They worked together with many different countries to overcome the Germans. Without the aid and support of ALL nations involved the war could have dragged on allot longer. Please read the link I gave to you.
No offense intended. You asked what I took to be an honest answer and I gave you an honest answer so that you could begin to understand how far off the mark you were. The rest was just a personal observation because it seems you've never done any real study on the subjects. My point is that you were making statements as if they were facts - a serious mistake if you don't know what you're talking about. (And you're still making them.) Much, much better to just ask questions when you don't know something.
never clained they were facts if u rember i said in my opinion as in i nether said that i was right it is what i thought
Yes, I'll back up and apologize - sorry! Because you did indeed say, "I think." Just a suggestion - it would still be better to simply ask in question form.
