View Poll Results: What was the most 'decisive' battle of WWII - ETO?

Voters
153. You may not vote on this poll
  • Dunkirk / Dynamo

    2 1.31%
  • Battle of Britain

    16 10.46%
  • Battle of the Atlantic

    22 14.38%
  • Moscow

    8 5.23%
  • Stalingrad

    61 39.87%
  • Citadel / Kursk

    11 7.19%
  • Bagration / Destruction of AGC

    3 1.96%
  • Normandy / Overlord

    12 7.84%
  • Battle of the Bulge

    4 2.61%
  • Strategic Bombing

    4 2.61%
  • Other (plz specify in post)

    10 6.54%
Page 1 of 25 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 373

Thread: The Most Decisive Battle of WWII - ETO

  1. #1
    Banned deadkenny's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Posts
    428

    The Most Decisive Battle of WWII - ETO

    As per suggestions in zraver's thread, a poll on the 'decisive battle' of WWII in the European Theater of Operations.

  2. #2
    Banned Defense Professional Bluesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Misawa Airbase, Japan
    Posts
    8,578
    I take my cue from Winston Churchill, who ought to know what he was talking about.

    He said the only thing that really scared him during the war was the U-boat threat. It really is the only thing that could've knocked the Brits out of the war, and when the threat was defeated, victory in Europe was absolutely assured.

    If the U-boats had won in the Atlantic, Great Britain was lost, and with her, the war.

    But when the convoys became unstoppable, so was the Western Allies' war machine, and the Reich was simply doomed.

  3. #3
    Lord High Hullabalooster Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,020
    I'm going with Dunkirk. I think that if the BEF's losses had been total (or near-total) Churchill's govt might have been overturned, and without Churchill...

    -dale

  4. #4
    Banned Defense Professional Bluesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Misawa Airbase, Japan
    Posts
    8,578
    Dam' good point.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    02 Jan 07
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    673
    Though WWII had a lot of decisive battles, all of which couldn't happen one without another, but if we anyway are looking for "the most decisive", this was, of course, Stalingrad battle. Just look at scale of battle, numbers of participating troops, losses of sides. At least the Germans themselves absolutely have no doubts which battle was decisive.

  6. #6
    Regular
    Join Date
    28 Apr 07
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by dalem View Post
    I'm going with Dunkirk. I think that if the BEF's losses had been total (or near-total) Churchill's govt might have been overturned, and without Churchill...

    -dale
    Dunkirk could have been decisive, if there was sufficient explanation that after the loss, the British government might have been ready to negotiate a peace settlement.

    But, nonethless, until summer 40 Hitler had not developed any basic plans for the continuation of the war against Britain.

    I vote for the Battle of the Atlantic.
    Usus magister est optimus

  7. #7
    Banned deadkenny's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Posts
    428
    Arguably Dunkirk was more decisive than the Battle of Britain, unless you define the 'Battle of Britain' to include the potential defeat of the RN and actually successfully landing in England on a bunch of converted river barges. As it was the Germans had at least 3 major hurdles to cross, and they didn't even manage the first one (air superiority over SE England).

  8. #8
    OAF-Old Aggravating Fart Senior Contributor Shamus's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Apr 07
    Location
    Sebastian,Florida
    Posts
    4,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluesman View Post
    I take my cue from Winston Churchill, who ought to know what he was talking about.

    He said the only thing that really scared him during the war was the U-boat threat. It really is the only thing that could've knocked the Brits out of the war, and when the threat was defeated, victory in Europe was absolutely assured.

    If the U-boats had won in the Atlantic, Great Britain was lost, and with her, the war.

    But when the convoys became unstoppable, so was the Western Allies' war machine, and the Reich was simply doomed.
    I'm with Bluesman on this..If Hitler had given his U-boats more resources early in the war before effective countermeasures were developed and cut the sea lanes to England,..No more England,No realistic base for opening of the second front and Europe under the Nazi bootheel for a long,long time.
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

  9. #9
    Banned deadkenny's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Posts
    428
    Unless the Germans 'win' the Battle of the Atlantic and still manage to lose to the Russians. Of course, that still leaves Europe under a boot heel, it's just Stalin's in place of Hitler's.

  10. #10
    OAF-Old Aggravating Fart Senior Contributor Shamus's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Apr 07
    Location
    Sebastian,Florida
    Posts
    4,059
    Quote Originally Posted by deadkenny View Post
    Unless the Germans 'win' the Battle of the Atlantic and still manage to lose to the Russians. Of course, that still leaves Europe under a boot heel, it's just Stalin's in place of Hitler's.
    Good point...you're still gettin' squashed.
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

  11. #11
    Lord High Hullabalooster Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,020
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkis View Post
    Dunkirk could have been decisive, if there was sufficient explanation that after the loss, the British government might have been ready to negotiate a peace settlement.

    But, nonethless, until summer 40 Hitler had not developed any basic plans for the continuation of the war against Britain.

    I vote for the Battle of the Atlantic.
    But Hitler doesn't have to be able to actually invade GB in order for the people or King to lose confidence in Churchill and sack him. And I think that if Churchill goes, the next UK govt. signs a peace treaty with Hitler which Hitler EAGERLY accepts.

    No opposition in the Med, the Southern route into the Caucasus opens up, and maybe the U.S. eventually actively fights the Reich, and maybe not.

    Maybe I'm suffering from "great man" sydrome, but I think Churchill is the lynchpin for the entire structure of the latter half of the 20th century.

    -dale

  12. #12
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by dalem View Post
    Maybe I'm suffering from "great man" sydrome, but I think Churchill is the lynchpin for the entire structure of the latter half of the 20th century.

    -dale
    Which is why that I do not believe that the lost of the BEF would degrade Churchill one bit. As I stated before, WWII is as much about personalities (FDR, Churchill, Hitler, and Stalin) as it is about capabilities.

    Morale wise, I don't see how Churchill could not have recover from the lost of the BEF at Dunkirk as he did from the lost of the Allied Effort, DK's idiotic inclusion of two other campaigns not withstanding.

    Churchill had Canada and India ... and the most important point, he knew it. This was at a time when the British were looking for whatever little hope there was ... and Churchill gave it to them. Unless anyone can convince me that the Brits could give up hope merely on the lost of the BEF, then Churchill would have lead British Empire through it and to the defeat of Hitler's Germany.

  13. #13
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    13,261
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Which is why that I do not believe that the lost of the BEF would degrade Churchill one bit. As I stated before, WWII is as much about personalities (FDR, Churchill, Hitler, and Stalin) as it is about capabilities.

    Morale wise, I don't see how Churchill could not have recover from the lost of the BEF at Dunkirk as he did from the lost of the Allied Effort, DK's idiotic inclusion of two other campaigns not withstanding.

    Churchill had Canada and India ... and the most important point, he knew it. This was at a time when the British were looking for whatever little hope there was ... and Churchill gave it to them. Unless anyone can convince me that the Brits could give up hope merely on the lost of the BEF, then Churchill would have lead British Empire through it and to the defeat of Hitler's Germany.
    The voters can be very fickle... especially when handed bad news. Bush 41 had the highest aproval ratings of any president in history, had just led America to the most lopsided military victory of all time, saw the USSR dissovle and the winning of the Cold War, the hope of real peace in our time and lost the presidency on rumors of a recession.
    If the BEF had gone into the bag Churchills future is very much in doubt. He does after all have a history of getting Tommy's mauled in forgien adventures. he also lost an election late war after beating Hitler.

  14. #14
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    13,261
    I voted fpor the strategic bombing campaign that starved Germany of guns, steel, planes, fuel, and production.

  15. #15
    Lord High Hullabalooster Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,020
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Which is why that I do not believe that the lost of the BEF would degrade Churchill one bit. As I stated before, WWII is as much about personalities (FDR, Churchill, Hitler, and Stalin) as it is about capabilities.

    Morale wise, I don't see how Churchill could not have recover from the lost of the BEF at Dunkirk as he did from the lost of the Allied Effort, DK's idiotic inclusion of two other campaigns not withstanding.

    Churchill had Canada and India ... and the most important point, he knew it. This was at a time when the British were looking for whatever little hope there was ... and Churchill gave it to them. Unless anyone can convince me that the Brits could give up hope merely on the lost of the BEF, then Churchill would have lead British Empire through it and to the defeat of Hitler's Germany.
    Mmm, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that, assuming a total or near-total loss of the BEF, Churchill's morale wouldn't matter as much as Parliament's and the King's and the people's. If that were true, then Churchill could have gone the way of Chamberlain, right? Then the rest (in my opinion anyway) could follow.

    That all assumes that the loss of the BEF would have been perceived as a mortal blow by any of the three entities I mention above, which may or may not have been true.

    -dale

Page 1 of 25 12345678910 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Most Decisive US Civil War Battle
    By Shek in forum American Civil War
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: 24 Oct 10,, 11:19
  2. Bloodiest Battles in History
    By sparten in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07 Jun 08,, 05:29
  3. Carrier Battle Group Essay
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 05 Sep 07,, 17:27
  4. Articles and links for the Military Professional
    By Officer of Engineers in forum The Staff College
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 20 Nov 06,, 15:28
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05 Nov 06,, 14:42

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •