No idea, sorry. Austerlitz was during the Napoleonic Wars.

the battle of Beersheba, where the palestine front was broken thru in 1917.
And it was one of the last great mounted charges in warfare that worked?
It was carried out by 4th and 12th Australian light horse regiments (actually mounted infantry) with the 11th lighthorse in reserve. they charged 4 miles to capture the wells in the town before the were blown up. against entrenched infantry and machine guns while only losing 32 men killed and the same number wounded.

If the R.A.F had lost the Battle of Britain then the German forces would have invaded Britain and we would have been undoubtedly beaten.

With Britain under German control we would have to surrender our Empire to to them such as Nornth Africa, which would mean no second front.

Resistance fighters in France would not get the equipment that they needed to keep up the harrassment of the Germans

There would be no place to launch D-Day from either unless Britain was re-captured first. But then the war would have dragged on for another two maybe three years at least.

The Battle of Britain prevented the Germans invading Britain and so led us to helping resistance, Jumping off points for D-Day and a second front.

The battle of Stalingrad. With a German victory, and russia almost certainly falling to Germany, Hitler could've focused all of his military on the Americans and British. No doubt the hardened veterans of the eastern front would have crushed the greenhorn invaders, many of whom hadnt seen any combat. No extensive training could've saved them had this been the case.

WW2 Battle for Moscow followed closely by the Battle of Stalingrad.

I agree with Spartan ( a very clear thinker).

If the Germans had all their best divisions still existing and a full strength Luftwaffe available in 1944, they would have kicked our arses in Normandy! (a good forum topic)

I doubt we could have got off the beaches! Lucky Hitler went after the Soviets.

Remember folks, on D-Day the only high quality troops that the allies faced was at Omaha beach and look what happened. The Luftwaffe hardly existed. Rommels Panzer units were nowhere near the beaches (not Rommels choice!). The first Panzer division didn't really get into action until the next day around Caen on the Orne River.

The allies overwhelmed the Germans with their airforce and Naval Guns.
PanzerLehr Division was destroyed by US bombers during operation Cobra. Das Reich Panzer Division was shot to pieces from the air as they tried to move to Normandy and then got belted by naval guns at Normandy. Montgomery destroyed the Germans at Caen (and most of Caen itself) due to saturation bombing.

Sure the Germans were still dangerous as a fighting force but by 1944 they had most of the stuffing knocked out of them and were spread way to thin over multiple fronts.

There was a battle between i think charlemange? (cant remember how to spell his name) and the muslims in the south of france in the 12-13th centuries that prevented the muslims from capturing any more of europe!
I think the battle of britain was very important as it showed that the luftwaffe could be beaten, it boosted morale and started the move towards allied victory, as if this battle had been lost there would of been fewer convoys to russia so they would not of had the supplies for stalingrad, moscow kursk etc. There would of been no staging post for the normandy landings and who knows how long it would of taken before america got involved in the european sector of the war as there would of been no bases for them!

Originally Posted by skywalker

There was a battle between i think charlemange? (cant remember how to spell his name) and the muslims in the south of france in the 12-13th centuries that prevented the muslims from capturing any more of europe!
I think the battle of britain was very important as it showed that the luftwaffe could be beaten, it boosted maorale and started the move towards allied victory, as if this battle had been lost there would of been fewer convoys to russia so they would not of had the supplies for stalingrad, moscow kursk etc. There would of been no staging post for the normandy landings and who knows how long it would of taken before america got involved in the european sector of the war as there would of been no bases for them!

Yes, good comments. It has always made me wonder how the war would have gone if the RAF had been beaten. The Germans really didn't have the boats to invade Britain with. I don't think the German generals and Hitler were that keen on invading. He left it up to the Luftwaffe to pound the Brits hoping they would sue for some kind of peace. The Luftwaffe should have kept bombing the airfields. Hitler was to keen to get stuck into the Soviets.

Hitler was the cause of many losses for the germans such as the battle of britain where he ordered them to stop bombing the airfields and bomb london! He sent an under prepared army to russia (just like napoleon)! He interfeared in many aspects of the german army-i think i am right in saying that he did not allow the introduction of the first submachine gun into the german army until it was too late!
With the RAF gone britain would of had to surrender though not without a fight!

Originally Posted by Young 1

I don't know the name of the battle, but I saw a picture of it once. It was between the invading Mongols and the Russians. Something like 500,000 people dies that day. I actually saw a picture of it once. Anyone know the name?

If I'm not mistaken it could be the battle of Chernigov, with the Russians commandeered by Ilya Muromets.

Sorry, I was thinking of Tartars. The Russian-Mongol battle may be the Kalka River battle.