Why was America crucial to winning World War 1?

by Hououin_Sunovabitch

I'm writing an essay, and already have a ton of information about French mutinies, the German Spring offensive, America stopping German momentum, and the drained morale of the Allies.

This makes up one paragraph, and I need another two reasons why America was crucial (I'm trying to get reasons for American Technology and the American homefront, but I can't find much on it).

So why was America crucial to winning the war? Also, do you guys have any sources, being books or websites that I could use to find more information on the topic? Thanks!

For the curious, this is my outline so far: https://docs.google.com/document/d/110YBY9XGTAkdF0ga6H-buq6gw5j_-3u3ikFZ2xFzjaA/edit?usp=sharing

DuxBelisarius

Well, I can say that your part about the French Army mutinies could use some work; the French did NOT decimate their units, with about c. 50 out of thousands sentenced to death being executed. Raymond Poincare, the French President, intervened to over turn most of the sentences. At the time, French First Army supported the British at 3rd Ypres, while the French armies subsequently enjoyed success at Verdun and Malmaison.

I'd avoid relying to heavily on Historylearningsite.co.uk; it's pretty general and quite inaccurate, at least from my experience with it.

America's financial support of the Allies (Britain, France), and the contributions of it's industry were the most decisive contributions. Certainly, the presence of millions of Americans in France by 1918 was key in the German decision to surrender, but the AEF didn't really partake in major operations until c. August/September 1918, by which point the BEF and the French Reserve and Northern Army Groups had begun the Hundred Days Offensive, which smashed the German Army.

Moreover, American methods left much to be desired. Pershing had been under instruction from Wilson that no American forces should serve under foreign command. Ultimately, Pershing disregarded this to an extent, and some American units (like the Harlem Hellfighters) served in the French armies. But when American troops went into battle, at Belleau Wood, and during the Meuse-Argonne offensive, their tactics were better suited to 1916 than 1918. Losses in the Meuse Argonne were about 120 000, from September 26th to November 11th; it was the AEF's Somme.

The Spring Offensives, although they bent the Allied Armies, did not break them. The British 5th Army, although it's retreat was chaotic, managed to keep up rear-guard actions, while Byng's 3rd Army further south was better manned and defended, and withdrew in good order. Further north, Plumer's 2nd army and Horne's 1st also fell back in good order, containing the Georgette Offensive.

The German offensive took lots of prisoners, and captured lots of ground, but had no Operational or Strategic goals. All that ground was useless, compared to the c. 350 000 casualties suffered in 2-3 weeks to take it. The German Stormtrooper units suffered horrible losses, and the advance stalled because of it. It was the coordinated efforts of Haig and Petain, to contain the breech, that brought the offensives to a halt.

Edward Lengel's "to Conquer Hell" is a good account of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive. Martin Middlebrook has a good book about the first day of the Michael Offensive. Gary Sheffield's Forgotten Victory is also good for 1918; Elizabeth Greenhalgh's Victory Through Coalition and Robert Doughty's Pyrrhic Victory cover the French experience in the war. William Philpot's War of Attrition and Peter Hart's 'Great War' are both good general military histories of the war.

Hope that helps!