Most decisive battle in WW2? - Page 19




View Poll Results :Most decisive battle in WW2?
Battle of Stalingrad 34 33.33%
Battle of Kursk (Operation Citadel) 15 14.71%
Battle of Moscow 10 9.80%
Battle of Leningrad 0 0%
Battle of El Alamein 3 2.94%
Operation Overlord (Battle of Normandy) 17 16.67%
Battle of Midway 11 10.78%
Other 12 11.76%
Voters: 102. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
 
May 15th, 2008  
Njaco
 
 
No prob. I will admit I'm not as knowledgable about Moskow as I am am about Stalingrad and your points may very well be true. Another little area to research!
September 13th, 2008  
Topmaul
 
 
Farseer I agree Krusk, was the last chance for a German Victory they gambled big and lost big.
September 13th, 2008  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topmaul
Farseer I agree Krusk, was the last chance for a German Victory they gambled big and lost big.
Hey Topmaul, I am a big fan of the German military system but even if Kursk had been successful, it would not have prevented a Soviet victory. It was too late even before Stalingrad for Germany to win a decisive victory.
--
September 14th, 2008  
errol
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by behemoth79
I agree with Doppleganger. Kursk was the turning point in the war. If Germany was going to rebound at all it would have to come from a qucik defeat of Russia in order to get te troops back on the western front. Kursk was a long and extremely costly battle for Germany. So many tanks were lost that even if they did eventually beat Russia, they would have had no chance of recovering in the west.
The Battle of Kursk was not that long. The Germans, after Kursk could only retreat, but I feel that even before Kursk they had lost the decisive initative on the Ostfront.

Moscow was the biggest blunder followed closely by Stalingrad. Kursk third!

Stalingrad was the bloodiest and most costly but is it the most desisive? I guess the result was the most clear cut as the 6th Army was destroyed but was the loss greater in importance than the loss at Moscow? Its a good discussion on its own.
September 14th, 2008  
errol
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
The Battle of Moscow was a far bigger setback for Germany than the Battle of Britain ever was. Perhaps you are not aware but Army Group Centre, which contained the cream of the Panzer and motorized units, was pushed back 200 miles and almost routed. This was partly due to the weather, but mostly due to the fact that the Germans over-extended themselves and then were counter-attacked by fresher, better equipped troops. Hitler's 'meddling' back in July may have saved Army Group Centre from taking large casualties even before they were even in a position to push towards Moscow.


Hitler's logic to take Kiev before Moscow was based on sound military principles that the German Army (and other armies) had followed for over 100 years. That is to operate assuming the following priorities :
  1. Destroy the enemy armies in the field
  2. Seize economic and industrial resources
  3. Capture prestige targets
The Kiev operation clearly fell under 1 and 2 whereas targeting Moscow fell under mainly 3. Who is to say Hitler was wrong?
I think some of our US friends don't have a good knowledge of the Ostfront. WW2 was won and lost there!
September 14th, 2008  
Topmaul
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
Hey Topmaul, I am a big fan of the German military system but even if Kursk had been successful, it would not have prevented a Soviet victory. It was too late even before Stalingrad for Germany to win a decisive victory.
As a kid I read everything I could get my hands on concerning Word War Two from US perspective, years later I was getting ready to sail and I picked up "The 10,000 Mile War" about the war in Alaska because that was where we war headed. When I finished that I found a used copy of "Operation Drumbeat" and was hooked I read every thing I could find on the German U-Boat are and Surface forces, after that I started reading books like SOLDAT, Panzer Aces, etc. I found I knew almost zero about the Russian Front so I got a few books like "BLOOD UPON THE SNOW" and others so I consider myself pretty well read on the subject but a bit rusty on details because it's been a long time.

Also I was a Re-Enactor with the 11th Panzer Granaders and learned to use German Heer field gear it really puts things into perspective. For example with all that metal field gear how did the Germans move so quietly at night? I used to clank!
September 15th, 2008  
errol
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topmaul
As a kid I read everything I could get my hands on concerning Word War Two from US perspective, years later I was getting ready to sail and I picked up "The 10,000 Mile War" about the war in Alaska because that was where we war headed. When I finished that I found a used copy of "Operation Drumbeat" and was hooked I read every thing I could find on the German U-Boat are and Surface forces, after that I started reading books like SOLDAT, Panzer Aces, etc. I found I knew almost zero about the Russian Front so I got a few books like "BLOOD UPON THE SNOW" and others so I consider myself pretty well read on the subject but a bit rusty on details because it's been a long time.

Also I was a Re-Enactor with the 11th Panzer Granaders and learned to use German Heer field gear it really puts things into perspective. For example with all that metal field gear how did the Germans move so quietly at night? I used to clank!
There are some excellent books around on the Battle of Moscow. I have one in my possession which I will have to dig out again. The immensity of the battle described in this book just blew me away. The Germans were pretty close to securing ww2 but stuffed it up. They (Army Group Centre) nearly got anihilated (as Doppleganger described) and Russian losses were immense. It was a major crisis that lasted for a couple of months in the freezing conditions of 41/42.

ww2 was decided on the Ostfront.
September 17th, 2008  
Papashah41
 

Topic: World War 2's most Decisive Battle


Once Hitler attacked Russia the die was cast. The moment operation Barbarossa commenced Germany lost the war. In this respect I suppose I would pick as the most decisive battle on the Ostfront, Stalingrad. But the most decisive battle was the battle which took Hitler's mind away from the west towards the red giant known as the Soviet Union. The most decisive battle of WW 2 was The Battle of Britain. By Sept. 1940 the R.A.F. was on the ropes. A few more weeks of this pummeling of the airfields and sector stations would have brought the R.A.F. to it's knees. Then an event happened which changed the war forever. Some German Bombers lost their way and dropped their payload on central London. The British retaliated and bombed Berlin. Hitler's next move was motivated by rage, not common sense. He immediatly ordered the terror bombing of British cities, especially London. But,he was always pre-occupied with the Soviet Union and with a twisted logic decided to attack it. He stated that an attack and victory of the Soviet Union would bring England to it's senses. For Britain will have lost it's last ally. What Hitler didn't know or wouldn't admit was Britain had put it's salvation in the hands of the United States. Churchill was getting huge amounts of aid from America and was determined to drag the American nation into the war, kicking and screaming if need be. As we all know Japan did the trick for him. But this does show the fantasy world the German leader lived in. His under-estimation of the tenacity of the Russian soldier and his complete surprise when his troops and armour ran into the T34 and the KV series of heavy tanks shows his intelligence agencies were not doing their work properly. But I do digress. The Battle of Britain won by the R.A.F. and a tenacious British public started Hitler on his great series of mistakes, which makes it the most decisive battle in WW 2.
September 17th, 2008  
MontyB
 
 
I agree with your logic but disagree with your conclusion.

The short answer is that even Hitler knew the German army could not cross the channel successfully for at least a year he had been told by both the Luftwaffe and the Kreigsmarine that they could not prevent the Royal Navy from intervention and he accepted this by all accounts therefore even had the Luftwaffe gained control over southern England it is unlikely Operation Sealion would have gone ahead because of the presence of a very dominant Royal Navy.

It is because of this I do not believe that the Battle of Britain is a contender for this title.
September 17th, 2008  
Papashah41
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
Each Battle in it's own way was important in winning the war, I think one one of the most important ones in the European Zone was the Battle Of Britain for if Britain had fallen, Hitler would have taken the whole of Ireland as well and mad it almost impossible for an attack to have taken place to retake Europe. If Britain had fallen the Spain would have joined in with Hitler and Taken Gibraltar which would have closed up the Mediterranean so the Suez Canal and the oil fields would have fallen into Germany's hand. Hitler could then have attacked Russia a bit later on with a far bigger Army that Stalin might have been unable to stop it, as there would not have been the number of troops require in Africa or Norway or in air defence to protect the father land. Which would mean that Hitler might have had another two million men to throw into the battle in Russia
Le Enfield, I agree totally with this position. Hitler lost the war with Barbarossa. If he would have left the Soviet Union alone and concentrated on Britain he may very well have won the war. Even before the battle of Britain, Grand Admiral Raeder tried unsuccessfully to get Hitler to not only leave the Soviet Union alone for the time being, but also to leave England alone. Rommel came to the same conclusion six months later. Raeder showed the Fuhrer how he could destroy Britain without a costly cross channel move. He proposed the instant taking of North Africa, with the target being Egypt and the Suez Canal in particular. After this was accomplished, Malta would be next on the list. With the Mediterranian becoming an Axis lake all sorts of raw materials would fall into German hands. Oil, rubber and exotic food stuffs from the far east could be got quite easily. And they would also have a clear path to their Japanese allies at Singapore and beyond. From Egypt, the Germans could easily have taken Palestine and eventually Iran. By this time Franco would have taken Gibralter. The Greeks and Yugoslavs would have jumped to the Axis ship and all of this could have been done with three panzer divisions with support from the still strong Luftwaffe. Turkey would probably have been enlisted into the Axis camp, and Russia all of a sudden does not look so frightening.