[cowofzot]

6 of em picked Stalingrad, some went with Pearl Harbor, & another went with Oct 41 gates of Moscow. I was always a Stalingrad thinker myself as it was where the Germans really went backwards & kept for the most part going in that direction, but interesting article & gave me pause to consider these other points.

http://www.historynet.com/what-was-the- ... war-ii.htm

Guadalcanal & El Alamein also significant turning points & the decision to send lend Lease goods to England & Russia another.

[Thunderhawk]

The two theatres are in many ways two seperate wars. Aside from the allied powers having to do some actions in the middle east and south Asia which could affect both theatres, the actions of one theatre didnt really have a large impact on the other theatre except for the fact that they were occuring at the same time.

For the Pacific theatre Pearl Harbor marks the entry of the USA into the war and that ended the Japanese dominance in the theatre. For the European theatre it is eruption of hostilities between the Nazis and the Soviet Union.

If you dont consider the entry of those powers into the war as turning points but as the start of major action, then I would argue there were no turning points as no battles were so decisive that their win or loss had huge impacts on allied/axis ability to fight the war.

[Potemkin]

I would argue there were no turning points as no battles were so decisive that their win or loss had huge impacts on allied/axis ability to fight the war.

I would disagree. Stalingrad was pretty decisive, and after the Battle of Kursk the Axis powers lost the military initiative and never regained it.

[JohnRawls]

Stalingrad , Kursk and battle of Midway.

[cowofzot]

Winning Battle of Britain is no guarantee of beating Russia, ( large numbers of troops would be required to garrison the place that would otherwise be used in Russia), & Hitlers original intention was to conquer continental Europe & become so powerful that he could not be dislodged, this was blunted in Russia, not over channel. Battle of Britain bled Luftwaffe to a degree, but otherwise had little impact on events east.

[Oxymoron]

I would say one overlooked battle is for Smolensk, Odessa and Kiev all of which slowed the German progress and led to the success at the gates of Moscow.

[Thunderhawk]

I would disagree. Stalingrad was pretty decisive, and after the Battle of Kursk the Axis powers lost the military initiative and never regained it.

Bear with me, its an idea I running with.

Assume the Germans win Stalingrad. That doesn't mean the Soviet forces just go poof nor does it mean Stalingrad becomes an economic engine for the Germans. On the other hand, Soviet production outside of Stalingrad continues to turn out products and the Germans did loose many lives and much equipment historically. Though Stalingrad was a large battle that tied up many resources for all concerned, it wasn't the only place fighting went on. Would a pyrrhic victory for the Germans at Stalingrad really have tipped the balance? I'm not sure, but I thinking no - they would still need to have many more victories then they did historically.

For me the Battle of Britain was the most important turning point.

The British loosing the BoB does not equate to the islands being invaded, the island not being an allied staging point for the future nor to GB leaving the war.

[cowofzot]

Norway was occupied before battle of Britain began. British would have continued fighting after Island occupied as did Norwegians, Poles etc. Navy would still be in business.

The Island was a staging point for Dieppe raid & for Normandy invasion.

If the Germans had won BOB. they still would likely have to deal with American Lend Lease to the British in Egypt & Russia. Operation Torch probably still would have occurred.


Would someone care to explain "why" winning the Battle of Britain means the Germans then win Barbarossa??





P.S. The other reason Stalingrad was such a turning point is that because the armies were split in two & the one headed to Baku had to turn round & attempt to relieve the one surrounded at Stalingrad, it meant the end of the 1 hope, ( or 1 of a very few), the Germans had of beating the Russians, that being Baku. No oil, no gas, no rolling army or functional airfrorce. That window had now closed.

[fuser]

The war in pacific and Europe were indeed two different wars... In pacific I think it would be midway.

Then in Europe the most important ones will be IMO moscow, stalingrad, kursk, normandy, bagration.

[Jarlaxle]

I the Pacific, there were two: the first is Midway. The second, perversely, is a battle the Japanese actually WON: Santa Cruz. The US Navy lost the carrier Hornet and the destroyer Porter, and had the Enterprise badly damaged. The Japanese lost no ships, though carrier Shokaku and light carrier Zuiho were damaged. However, the Japanese lost more than 100 planes trying to sink Enterprise...with them went their elite carrier pilots. Never again would Japanese naval aviators match Americans in aircrew quality.

[cowofzot]

If britain surrendered , the british in egypt would naturally be compelled to do the same.

Not true.

True about northern flank at Stalingrad. Which again points at it's being a major turning point.


Winning battle of Britain does not free up troops, does the opposite, troops have tp garrison the place.

British navy could still support Torch, but not really neccessary. RAF in desert used US planes to a large degree. Half of army was commonwealth.

[Potemkin]

Winning battle of Britain does not free up troops, does the opposite, troops have tp garrison the place.

If Britain had lost the Battle of Britain, we would have had little choice but to make terms with Hitler, to avoid an invasion. This would have removed Britain from the War. Germany would not have required troops to garrison Britain; one of the terms of surrender (because that's what it would have been) would have been no German occupation; in return, Britain would have probably signed a Non-Aggression Treaty rather like that which existed between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union at the time, and agreed to supply Nazi Germany with raw materials, just as the Soviet Union was doing.

[cowofzot]

Churchills speech comes to mind. & there's no reason to surrender wheh the rest of its empire can still fight.

[cowofzot]

British wouldn't agree to it is all. The bulk of Norways ships escaped continued to fight along side the British. RN would do the same. British still had their base at Gibralter.

& there was no entirely British prong at Torch, in fact their participation was much smaller than US.


The Allies planned a three-pronged amphibious landing to seize the key ports and airports of Morocco and Algeria simultaneously, targeting Casablanca, Oran and Algiers. Successful completion of these operations was to be followed by an advance eastwards into Tunisia.

The Western Task Force (aimed at Casablanca) comprised American units, with Major General George Patton in command and Rear Admiral Henry K. Hewitt heading the naval operations. This Western Task Force consisted of the U.S. 2nd Armored Division, the U.S. 3rd and 9th Infantry Divisions—35,000 troops in all. They were transported directly from the United States in the first of a new series of UG convoys providing logistic support for the North African campaign.[3]

The Center Task Force, aimed at Oran, included the US 509th Parachute Infantry Battalion, US 1st Infantry Division, and the US 1st Armored Division—18,500 troops. They sailed from Britain and were commanded by Major-General Lloyd Fredendall, the naval forces being commanded by Commodore Thomas Troubridge.

The Eastern Task force, aimed at Algiers, was commanded by Lieutenant-General Kenneth Anderson and consisted of two brigades from British 78th and the US 34th Infantry Divisions and two British Commando units—No.1 and No. 6 Commandos; in all a total of 20,000 troops. During the period of the amphibious landings the force was to be commanded by U.S. Major-General Charles W. Ryder, commander of 34th Division, because it was felt that a U.S.-led invasion would be more acceptable to the French defenders than one led by the British.

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

[cowofzot]

Britian would set up its government in Canada if Germans invade. 8th army was not a prong at Torch.

[Potemkin]

Britian would set up its government in Canada if Germans invade.

And fight the Germans with what? Mind-control rays?

[cowofzot]

Fight them with what they did, their navy & P-40s & Grant tanks. America even sent millions of tons of food to England in 1940, & was perfectly willing to send hardware as well.



the products of American industry sold both prior and after Hitler’s invasion of Poland had been blooded in extensive and fierce combat by the late summer of 1940. (In fact, a French-piloted American-built Curtiss Hawk 75 scored France’s first aerial victory in the Second World War, and the first RAF airplane to engage in aerial combat with the Luftwaffe was an American-built Lockheed Hudson maritime patrol airplane).

http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/EA ... nsep98.htm


Already, by the late summer of 1940, Great Britain was well along towards acquiring thousands of American aircraft to fulfill a variety of roles ranging from training and air combat to strategic bombing and maritime patrol. Table 2 presents a listing of American combat aircraft in operational use with the Royal Air Force in 1939-1940



Further, thanks both to prewar agreement and wartime sales arrangements, American suppliers delivered sufficient quantities of performance-enhancing 100 octane fuel to England in time for use by RAF Fighter Command during the Battle of Britain, a contribution of profound significance to the operational success of both the Spitfire and Hurricane fighters.






June 1 1940, for example, as France’s Third Republic writhed in its final agonies, Roosevelt directed that the War and Navy Departments assess what they could immediately spare for Britain, to make up for the tremendous weapons stocks lost during the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force from Dunkirk. By June 11, hundreds of cannon, thousands of rifles and machine guns, over 130 million rounds of ammunition, and assorted explosives and bombs were being loaded onto a dozen British freighters docked off New Jersey.

[pugsville]

Yes the Americans were willingly to sell a lot of stuff to Britain, but one wonders if they would have equally sold stuff to the Germans if the Germans had free access (in ww1 they were happy to sell stuff to german merchant U-boats in 1916, and there were serious protests bout the british blockade as the American business thought they were being denied access to a lurcative market)

The US industrial might was swinging into gear, and they didnt have a high capacity in 1940, (12000 aircraft britian 15000 aircraft) and while they were no doubt happy to get whatever aircraft, the critical thing was Pilots and fighter aircraft which he US provided very little.

quick reserach into when these ircrft were delivered -

Lockheed Hudson 2000 -
Northrop Nomad ?
A-17A (USAAC) Boeing Flying Fortress On Order B-17C (USAAC) 20 in 1941
Consolidated Catalina Initial Delivery PBY (USN)
Curtiss Cleveland Delivered SBC-4 (USN)
Curtiss Mohawk On Order = undelivery french aircraft 300?
P-36 (USAAC) Curtiss Tomahawk Initial Delivery total 1250
P-40 (USAAC) Curtiss Kittyhawk On Order 0 delievered 1942 - 848
P-40D (USAAC) Lockheed Lightning On Order only 3 delivered!! (250 orderd 416 french order taken over but bumped by US military)
P-38E (USAAC) Bell Airacobra On Order - delivery started july 1941 (650 ordred, 200 sent to russia, 179 returned assigned training limited service)
P-39D (USAAC) Martin Maryland Initial Delivery june 1940 300?
(not applicable) Martin Baltimore On Order - oct 1941 - 1575
A-30 (USAAC) Douglas Boston On Order 1000?
A-20 (USAAC) Consolidated Liberator On Order first 6 dec 1940 - 2000 all up
B-24 (USAAC) Lockheed Ventura On Order june 1942 400?
B-34 (USAAC) Brewster Buffalo Initial Delivery 38 erlry - 170 july 1940
F2A (USN/USMC) Grumman Martlet On Order 1100 - july 1940
F4F (USN/USMC) Vought Chesapeake On Order?
SB2U (USN/USMC) ?
North American Mustang On Order P-51A (USAAC) = oct 1941 2000?
North American Mitchell ?

most of these planes werent strted to delivery till mid 41, listing the lighting with only 3 actual deliveries, the Aircobra was found vastly unsuitable limted use as ground attack mostly sent to russia , return to US or used as trainers, most of the aircraft were pretty avereage aircraft, second rate fighters. Medium bombers is the biggest contribition early with maritime patrol roles important.

Impact on the battle of Britain - not a lot.

[cowofzot]

Except for fuel.

& Germans didn't land in North Africa til 41.

[cowofzot]

Men would escape on ships to fight another day, plus many men were already stationed overseas in Egypt, Singapore, India & the other British outposts. Plus the enormous number of Commomwealth soldiers in Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand etc were available.