I keep on hearing the quote
"If I had Canadian Soldiers, American technology and British Officers, I would rule the world"
-Winston Churchill
I'm now curious. Is there any truth in what he said or was he just saying it to make the Allied nations feel good about themselves. Is there a reason for what nations and troops he chose? Did America have superior technology? Did Canada have better troops? Did Britain have better officers? I'm aware that during war time, it's important to raise morale, and was it just that? Do the combat records indicate and prove what Winston Churchill said, and, I know this is a bit out of this subreddits specialty, but does this statement still hold true in the modern world, if it was true to begin with.
There is always more to say, but the quote you are interested in is an example of a pretty common historical trope in which the virtues of different groups and nations are agglomerated, generally via the same triple rhythm you cite here. (The best known such combination is probably the suggestion that "WWII was won with British intelligence, American steel and Russian blood". Another example might be one dating to the First World War cited by David Woodward in his Armies of the World, 1854-1918: "The saying still went the rounds – the ideal army would have Turkish privates, British NCOs and Australian officers.")
There is, moreover, no proof Churchill actually said this. An earlier thread here, led by u/ted5298, examined the quote you're interested in and also took a look at the thinking underpinning its assumptions. You might like to review that while waiting for fresh responses to your question: