Decisive battles of WW2

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I think the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain is over-rated (this despite my middle name being 'Douglas' after the famed BoB ace -- and wingman of Calgarian Willy McKnight -- Douglas Bader). I've done a lot of reading on the subject, and it's clear that the German military didn't have the capability to launch an amphibious invasion of the British isles in 1940 even if the Luftwaffe had been successful in gaining air superiority over Southern England. As decisive victories go, the Battle of Britain is more or less a moot point. By early 1941, both the RAF and the Luftwaffe had manufactured enough aircraft and trained enough pilots to replace their losses in the summer of 1940. It did provide a huge boost to the morale of the British people, though, and the psychological effect on the civilian population shouldn't be understated.

As was noted previously in this thread, it wasn't the Battle of Stalingrad that turned the tide on the Eastern Front, but rather the Soviet defense of Moscow in 1941. If the Germans had been able to advance to and capture the capital before the onset of winter, it likely would have forced Stalin to surrender before there even was a Battle of Stalingrad.

I second (or third) the suggestion of Antony Beevor's book. It's one of the most gripping and tragic accounts of the war that I've ever read.

Maybe...but it bought time. Lots of time. And to me, that is a decisive turning point.

Hitler's intent was not to invade the British Island, but to bomb Britain into submission and surrender. By committing so much into Britain and failing, the German air superiority no longer had the ability it once had. The main problem with Germany is that most of their most experience pilots died over the battle of Britain. They were able to replace their planes, but they could not replace the experienced season vets.

After 1941, we didn't really hear much or anything of significance from the Luftwaffe after that.

[Mr.Coffee]

Great thread. Currently I'm in history of world war 2 up at the U of C... not that that means anything- in fact it doesn't, but today's lecture focused on the Stalingrad/Kurstk stuff, so it was kind of weird seeing this thread.

Originally Posted by TheDragon

True enough!

I remember sitting in the food court in SouthCentre, and talking to an old German guy who claimed to have been a former Nazi Soldier that was captured and brought to a prison camp just outside of Lethbridge. He said the second he found out it was Canada, he decided he was never going to go back home and has been living here ever since. He didn't find out about the SS and the Holocaust until long after the war, either, which was part of the reason he decided to stay.

It's interesting that much of the Nazis were in fact unaware of the Holocaust and that even if they did, the extent of its undertaking. Once Rommel became aware of the true extent of the Holocaust he became vehemently opposed to Hitler and what he stood for. Hitler then had Rommel killed- but I think it's important for us to understand that Germans at the time, although they were racist, that doesn't necessarily link them to believing that murdering 6 million Jews was a viable alternative.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I remember reading Mein Kemp and coming to the realization that it was written by a somewhat rational mind that had thought his hatred through.

Hitler likely wasn't completey insane until his last few moments when it was reported to him that the Allies had broken through the Gothic Line in Italy and were well on their way to Berlin. This combined with the troubles on the Eastern front led Hitler to start making irrational comments and committing irrational acts. He actually was a very intellectual person fueled by hatred and acting in racism. Claiming that Hitler is "insane" just seems like a cop-out doesn't it? I think he turned insane in his last 3 days before he went to his bedroom with his brand new wife and all was heard was a gunshot as the last reports of his life.

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I think the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain is over-rated (this despite my middle name being 'Douglas' after the famed BoB ace -- and wingman of Calgarian Willy McKnight -- Douglas Bader). I've done a lot of reading on the subject, and it's clear that the German military didn't have the capability to launch an amphibious invasion of the British isles in 1940 even if the Luftwaffe had been successful in gaining air superiority over Southern England. As decisive victories go, the Battle of Britain is more or less a moot point. By early 1941, both the RAF and the Luftwaffe had manufactured enough aircraft and trained enough pilots to replace their losses in the summer of 1940. It did provide a huge boost to the morale of the British people, though, and the psychological effect on the civilian population shouldn't be understated.

Yeah I agree, it did have its psychological effects and perhaps changed the way people within respective countries thought about the war (they could now be attacked or bombed), but generally I think the Stalingrad battle was one of the biggest.

Also it was mentioned by somebody else but the battles in Africa were HUGE for the Allies. Not only did an Allied Africa allow for key transportation routes through the Red Sea and Meditteranean (at the end of the Desert War), but also Middle Eastern resources such as oil were then freed, the Vichy French joined the Allies for a campaign in Italy, and Tunisia was used as a training setting for victorious Ally troops that were about to engage in Italy and France. Because of its remarkably similar landscapes to southern Europe, Tunisia helped train and reinforce Allied divisions, as well as organize. It allowed for a European assault that WAS NOT through the English Channel- because any type of attack that occurred before D-Day would have been tremendously disastrous along that front.

[CaptainCrunch]

[quote=Mr.Coffee;793476]
It's interesting that much of the Nazis were in fact unaware of the Holocaust and that even if they did, the extent of its undertaking. Once Rommel became aware of the true extent of the Holocaust he became vehemently opposed to Hitler and what he stood for. Hitler then had Rommel killed- but I think it's important for us to understand that Germans at the time, although they were racist, that doesn't necessarily link them to believing that murdering 6 million Jews was a viable alternative.[quote]

While the common soldier was unaware of the holocaust, I think that a lot of German's were aware of where the trains were going and that the sausage factory in the middle of no where was not actually a sausage factory. While the average german was probably no fully aware, I think there was a lot of denial going on because of the fear of the Gestapo and ending up in the same place.

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Hitler likely wasn't completey insane until his last few moments when it was reported to him that the Allies had broken through the Gothic Line in Italy and were well on their way to Berlin. This combined with the troubles on the Eastern front led Hitler to start making irrational comments and committing irrational acts. He actually was a very intellectual person fueled by hatred and acting in racism. Claiming that Hitler is "insane" just seems like a cop-out doesn't it? I think he turned insane in his last 3 days before he went to his bedroom with his brand new wife and all was heard was a gunshot as the last reports of his life.

My theory is kinda funky, but I honestly think that Adolf lost his virginity on the last night of his life. Again, I don't think his suicide was a irrational act considering he knew what the Russian's would do to him. The letter to the German People where he blamed them for the failure of the war is testiment to a nervous breakdown though.

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Also it was mentioned by somebody else but the battles in Africa were HUGE for the Allies. Not only did an Allied Africa allow for key transportation routes through the Red Sea and Meditteranean (at the end of the Desert War), but also Middle Eastern resources such as oil were then freed, the Vichy French joined the Allies for a campaign in Italy, and Tunisia was used as a training setting for victorious Ally troops that were about to engage in Italy and France. Because of its remarkably similar landscapes to southern Europe, Tunisia helped train and reinforce Allied divisions, as well as organize. It allowed for a European assault that WAS NOT through the English Channel- because any type of attack that occurred before D-Day would have been tremendously disastrous along that front.

Agreed the defeat of the Afrika Corps was huge because it removed the unlimited fuel resources from the table and ment that Germany was now vulnerable to a sea, air, land blockade if the Allies decided not to push the war to its obvious conclusion. A crueler more pragmatic allies could have sat back and starved and froze Germany to death. Unfortunately at that point they couldn't control Stalin who was determined to seize Berlin no matter what the cost.

[burn_baby_burn]

Mr Coffee. Wasn't Rommell killed because of his part in the failed bombing attempt on Hitler's life?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

Mr Coffee. Wasn't Rommell killed because of his part in the failed bombing attempt on Hitler's life?

The theory is that Hitler requested that he do the honorable think and kill himself instead of being hung with piano wire.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

Mr Coffee. Wasn't Rommell killed because of his part in the failed bombing attempt on Hitler's life?

My understanding is that Rommell was accused of being involved in a plot to overthrow incompetent Nazi leadership (this included Hitler).

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

Mr Coffee. Wasn't Rommell killed because of his part in the failed bombing attempt on Hitler's life?

One of the suspected plotters, while being tortured, claimed that Rommel was involved in the bomb plot, but there's no proof about how aware or involved he actually was. Hitler gave him the choice of suicide or execution; Rommel chose the former.

Maybe...but it bought time. Lots of time. And to me, that is a decisive turning point.

Hitler's intent was not to invade the British Island, but to bomb Britain into submission and surrender.

Totally untrue. The Germans had every intent of invading the British Isles in 1940. The gaining of air superiority over southern England and eliminating the RAF was supposedly the first step in that plan. Hitler didn't order the terror bombing of civilian targets until after Churchill bombed Berlin (in retaliation of a German bomber drifting off-course and releasing its bombs on London by mistake).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sealion

The aerial battles which resulted due to Operation Eagle (Unternehmen Adler in German), later became known as the Battle of Britain. Eagle's objective was for the Luftwaffe to achieve air superiority over the Royal Air Force and allow the German invasion fleet to cross the English Channel. However, the change in emphasis of the bombing from RAF bases to bombing London (the Blitz) turned Eagle into a strategic bombing operation. This switch afforded the RAF, reeling from Luftwaffe attacks further inland, time to pull back and regroup.

[simonsays]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

You know doing this, I was thinking that one of the major blunders by the German's was in the evacuation of Dunkirk which was a huge defeat for the Allies except for one thing, because they didn't have sufficient naval power they allowed 300,000 British and French troops to survive to fight another day. I think thats a significant tipping point, and a major defeat at the same time.

I somewhat agree on Dunkirk, as I don't know how much stomach Britain would have had for the BoB had the BEF been captured or killed. Dunkirk was the first visable chink in the armor as far as the western allies are concerned, and is still one of the major "what if's" of the entire war. I'd also like to join Rathji's camp on Barbarossa, while it wasn't a decisive battle it was a huge turning point in the war.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Totally untrue. The Germans had every intent of invading the British Isles in 1940. The gaining of air superiority over southern England and eliminating the RAF was supposedly the first step in that plan. Hitler didn't order the terror bombing of civilian targets until after Churchill bombed Berlin (in retaliation of a German bomber drifting off-course and releasing its bombs on London by mistake).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sealion

I believe it is the "intent" that is questioned here. What was his intention? To carry out a full invasion as the main objective, or to quicken the British surrender by providing the pressure of a promised invasion? Most of the history books I've read believed that Hitler knew it was diffucult to carry this out, and had only said this to quicken Britain's surrender (had hoped that they would surrender before an invasion was necessary). First of all, the germans did not have the kind of sea superiority the british had. There were no indications the germans were amassing a huge navel fleet in preperation of the invasion. No double time in navel production.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

Hitler hoped perhaps to frighten Britain into peace before an actual invasion was launched, and used the invasion preparations as a means to apply pressure.

[CaramonLS]

Just a further question to the Battle of Britain, how close was it to breaking? I've heard different opinions (my History class for example), that if Hitler didn't make the switch to terror bomb, he likely could have bombed them into submission and completely shattered their capacity to produce airplanes.

[Flash Walken]

Soviet implementation and training of night attacks to me is the turning point of the war.

Launching night attacks against the german 112th, using countryside peasantry along with the geography of the region to not only hide retreating forces, but also to delay german advancement (hiding trains and equipment in towns and heavily wooded areas) and not overreaching territory grabs made at night (mostly because of an outdated field regulations) were what stalled the german's from getting to moscow, demoralized the force and created huge losses (500 lost to frostbite alone) amongst the german attacking forces. There is literature to suggest that the soviet night attacks were so effective at demoralizing german troops that some even became treasonous to the german ideal, believing the soviet soldier's lifestyle created the better soldier. They began to fear the night, and, mixed with the bitter cold (which from the german point of view did not seem to hinder the soviet soldier as they would often lay motionless in wait for hours on the snow and ice to complete a mission), terrifying darkness and war fatigue, became a shell of their previous fighting stature.

The night battles that turned excellent day-time german regiments into 'innadequate' forces. Testing out these raids in smolensk as well as other areas gave the Russian army time to develop their night-attack techniques for the defense of moscow. By 1944, there are estimates that 60 percent of all russian offensive were carried out at night.

Hell, if it hadn't of been for great german counter blows and inept paratrooper deployment behind the german lines by the soviets, that front may have collapsed by march 1942.

[RougeUnderoos]

I've got what is probably a dumb question but what the hell, you can't get embarrassed on the internet!

Question: What happened to all the dead soldiers? In a book I once read the line "he was one of those unfortunate boys who disappeared into the mud at Passchendale" (something like that) and it stuck with me. I know that was WWI, but I'm sure the same thing happened to thousands or hundreds of thousands of guys fighting in WWII. They weren't all retrieved and buried. What happened to them?

I hope that isn't construed as disrespectful or anything. I'm genuinely curious.

My old man's step-dad was in the war. I never met the guy but the one story I did hear was that they got pretty close to the Germans so instead of pointing anti-aircraft guns at the sky the Germans were pointing them at the enemy on the ground, and he saw the effect this had on a fellow soldier and it bothered him for the rest of his life. I don't even know where it happened or if it makes sense from a "weapons" standpoint, but that was the story.

On a related note, Ottawa is planning on awarding the Unknown Soldier the Victoria Cross. Veterans are not impressed.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/...s-soldier.html

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I've got what is probably a dumb question but what the hell, you can't get embarrassed on the internet!

Question: What happened to all the dead soldiers? In a book I once read the line "he was one of those unfortunate boys who disappeared into the mud at Passchendale" (something like that) and it stuck with me. I know that was WWI, but I'm sure the same thing happened to thousands or hundreds of thousands of guys fighting in WWII. They weren't all retrieved and buried. What happened to them?

I hope that isn't construed as disrespectful or anything. I'm genuinely curious.

My old man's step-dad was in the war. I never met the guy but the one story I did hear was that they got pretty close to the Germans so instead of pointing anti-aircraft guns at the sky the Germans were pointing them at the enemy on the ground, and he saw the effect this had on a fellow soldier and it bothered him for the rest of his life. I don't even know where it happened or if it makes sense from a "weapons" standpoint, but that was the story.

On a related note, Ottawa is planning on awarding the Unknown Soldier the Victoria Cross. Veterans are not impressed.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/...s-soldier.html

thats the furthest thing from disrectful that I can think of. For the most part the ones that were recovered were buried in graveyards in Europe, with unidentified soldiers being placed under John Doe gravestones.

The sad thing is that they continue to discover bodies throughout Europe, I believe they found a flight crew from a Lancaster Bomber a couple of years ago. Remember that a lot of soldiers were buried where they fell by both thier friends and enemies alike and they'll probably continue to find them.

In the second world war, the germans faced with a massive Russian tank attack, cranked thier 105 mm artillary tubes to be level with the ground and used them as fairly efficient but slow loading anti tank weapons. Weapons are weapons, its not how you use them, its the effect.

On the article that you posted, I have to side with the vets, the Vic Cross was awarded for indivdual acts of bravery or valour, its not a group reward, and this isn't taking away from the soldiers who died un named, but there are other ways to honour them.

[SaskaBushFire]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Just a further question to the Battle of Britain, how close was it to breaking? I've heard different opinions (my History class for example), that if Hitler didn't make the switch to terror bomb, he likely could have bombed them into submission and completely shattered their capacity to produce airplanes.

yes this is true if the germans didnt switch from bombing radar stations air strips and factories the british would have been very near or at the point where surrender was the only option

the main thing that saved the british was that when a plane went down it was over their own soil so the pilot was almost always returned if he was still alive
the germans however lost their pilots almost every time a plane went down

as seasoned pilots became scarce for the germans goering began to panic slightly since the british had not yet shown any signs of weakening on the surface and he shifted to civilian targets

[Thunderball]

First off, this is an awesome thread... I really have enjoyed reading it.

And now for my partially educated take...

The Miracle at Dunkirk to me was the first of a few turning points. The allies were getting beaten at every turn, and the fact that they were not obliterated there gave them a lot of hope and confidence that the Germans were not invincible.

The Battle of Britain was another, since it severely depleted the luftwaffe. This one was more psycological than anything though. From what I have read, Hitler had no real intent of conquering Britain... he wanted them to join willingly. He had a deeply rooted belief that the "anglos and saxons" were Aryan brothers and should rule the world together, with a new Roman empire policing the lesser peoples of the Mediterranean.

Stalingard and Smolensk were the crucial defeats on the eastern front, and since the wehrmacht were devoting so many divisions there, it opened a hole for the Allies in the west.

The loss of Rommel was a huge one... the Afrika Korps were a feared division and his tactics were amazing. From what I saw and read, he was disgusted by the genocides and felt that this war was meant to assert German dominance, reclaim lost territories ("anschluss") and make amends for Versailles. He then helped plot Hitler's assasination, and failed in the attempt.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I've got what is probably a dumb question but what the hell, you can't get embarrassed on the internet!

Question: What happened to all the dead soldiers? In a book I once read the line "he was one of those unfortunate boys who disappeared into the mud at Passchendale" (something like that) and it stuck with me. I know that was WWI, but I'm sure the same thing happened to thousands or hundreds of thousands of guys fighting in WWII. They weren't all retrieved and buried. What happened to them?

I hope that isn't construed as disrespectful or anything. I'm genuinely curious.

My old man's step-dad was in the war. I never met the guy but the one story I did hear was that they got pretty close to the Germans so instead of pointing anti-aircraft guns at the sky the Germans were pointing them at the enemy on the ground, and he saw the effect this had on a fellow soldier and it bothered him for the rest of his life. I don't even know where it happened or if it makes sense from a "weapons" standpoint, but that was the story.

On a related note, Ottawa is planning on awarding the Unknown Soldier the Victoria Cross. Veterans are not impressed.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/...s-soldier.html

Going by my relatives that were killed in action and are laid to rest in Europe. In the First World War I beleive it was more common to not retrieve all the bodies, or to just have a massive burial ground with unmarked graves. My Great Grandfathers brother was killed at Yrpes in Belgium and for the Canadian (possible British Commonweath) dead there is a huge archway over the road that is a memorial for the fallen soilders. It bears the names of 55,000 men who were lost without trace during that part of the war.

In the Second World War I think it was more common to recover the bodies, if possible, and give them a proper burial.My Grandpa's brother who was killed in Ortona, Italy in December of 1943, is laid to rest in Canadian Military Graveyard near there. My Grandmother's brother who was killed in 1945, in Belguim I beleive, is laid to rest in a Canadian Military Graveyard near there as well.

If anyone has a family member or friend that they lost in either of the Great Wars. Here is a link to the Virtual War Memorial. You can type in the person your looking for. And it will tell you where they are buried.

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/s...TOKEN=17465734

[liamenator]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

The loss of Rommel was a huge one... the Afrika Korps were a feared division and his tactics were amazing. From what I saw and read, he was disgusted by the genocides and felt that this war was meant to assert German dominance, reclaim lost territories ("anschluss") and make amends for Versailles. He then helped plot Hitler's assasination, and failed in the attempt.

I agree... I think a huge mistake for the Germans was, after El Alamein, Hitler's reassignment of the "defeatist" Rommel... Instead of reassigning him to the East, where he would have been most effective as a military tactician and commander, he instead was assigned to the Atlantic wall strategic defense project on the western front.

Now, as brilliant a military tactician as Rommel was, a great defensive strategist he was not. He sacrificed the training of new recruits in order to plant an almost medieval arsenal of obstacles along the beach: millions of mines on land and underwater, "Rommel asparagus" (antiaircraft stakes), flame-throwers, etc.

He bickered with von Rundstedt and Sodenstern about where to place Panzer divisions to best defend the attack, with Rommel being so obsessed with Allied air superiority he wanted to place them right up against the beach, where they would be vulnerable to both sea and air attacks, and the others wanting them further inland.

Because of this, Hitler tried to appease both camps and split the 7 Panzer divs, 3 at the beach, 4 inland, and we all know how that turned out.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The intelligence end of the Nazi war machine was incredibly dumb

Disagree completely. They were very good. The Allies were better and more inventive.

The intelligence community suffered from being lead by morons who would take their own advice and ignore intelligence. The Germans knew of the build up in southern and eastern Britain but refused to change their belief.


Hell the D-day invasion was almost a full week on before people chipped through the wood and Hilter relented.

[Alpha_Q]

Hitler's underestimating of the Russian resolve combined with the resiliance of the British during the Blitz are obviously the two main factors that won the war for the Allies. (And the American involvement.) There are so many minor conflicts that were so important - for example, the often overlooked battle of Mers-el-Kebir which saw the British attack and destroy most of the French fleet rather than have the ships handed over to Germany.


I lost one grandfather in the war - his ship was sunk in 1945. My other grandfather made it back, wounded, but my mother has always said that though he was alive, he was for all intents and purposes, a destroyed man. She vaguely remembers waving good-bye to him when she was 7, in 1940, and did not see him again until she was 12. The first time he saw his youngest daughter in person, she was 5. 5! It's hard to imagine, the sacrifices... what a nightmare to just think about. He would only relate one story; the finding of a dead soldier that everyone else had mistaken for a burnt-out tree stump.

My sister's father-in-law was shot down over Poland. With a broken leg he struggled to find his way anywhere when he was caught and taken to the nearest camp, which was a concentration camp. They put a cast on his leg and put him in a part of the camp with Russian and Polish POW's. (His last name is of Ukranian descent) He remembers waking up one day, as usual, and forming a line with the other men. They waited. And waited. After it became apparent that the camp's guards were no longer there, some men finally began looking around. Allied soldiers liberated the camp that afternoon, and some of the men who lined up in the morning were still standing in line, refusing to move until the Axis soldiers came to tell them to. Horrible.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

My Grandpa's brother who was killed in Ortona, Italy in December of 1943, is laid to rest in Canadian Military Graveyard near there.

And your brave relative brings up another important turning point, and one that Canada was engaged in.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

The Battle of Ortona (December 20, 1943 to December 27, 1943) was a small yet extremely fierce battle fought between German Fallschirmjäger (paratroops), and assaulting Canadian forces from the 1st Canadian Division. It was considered among Canada's greatest achievements during the war.

Taking place in the small Adriatic Sea town of Ortona, with its tiny peacetime population of 10 000, the battle was the site of what were perhaps the deadliest close quarter combat engagements of the entire war. Some dubbed this "Little Stalingrad".