I wonder how is what
@libertad said neutral ?
It's like you have an accident on a bridge and you blame the bridge for being exist.....
In WW1, Germany and UK were
ALREADY AT WAR before US involved. What he said only make sense if British Surrender before hostility. And when War are being Progress, then bloodshed
HAD ALREADY started. Or you are not counting the people dead before US involvement is bloodshed?
Same thing in WW2. UK, France were already at war and China were already at war with japan before US involvement. Again, whatever peace there are, unless either party take it before hostility, it will not be bloodless.
US involvement changed the victors,
NOT THE WAR.
and the fact to the matter is, US involvement speed things up (WW1 finish 1 and a half years after US involvement, while WW2 finished 3 years and 10 months after US involvement), I can argue this is the point to limit bloodshed if you want another 100 years war, or 30 years war in European Soil.