Would you say that the Battle of Stalingrad was *the* decisive battle of World War II?

Question

My son sent me the "WORLD AT WAR" DVD that the Daily Mail are giving away on that subject (I recall the television original series!) and there was a BBC programme on it a couple of weeks ago.
I also have heared of a book that I *may* buy - Anthony Beavor?
Anyway the original question is as in the headline as it got me thinking i.e. :

Would you say that the Battle of Stalingrad was *the* decisive battle of World War II

And does that explain how ordinary Russians feel about current relations with the U.K./U.S.A./the "West"?
Best wishes,
Joan.

Hello Edgein - yes I saw the Snow's programme which is why I watched the old "World At War" DVD on Stalingrad last night which was also informative.
I shall try to get the book from the library.
Thank you to all other answerers too - and more replies are welcome from all points of view so I shall leave the question open.
Best wishes,
Joan.

Answer 1

I wish my boyfriend was in right now as he is a bit of a specialist when it comes to the battle of Stalingrad.

From what I know about it Stalingrad was a significant battle as the German forces were crushed in that battle, thousands and thousands of german soldiers (850,000 german and german allies) were killed or captured and this was a major blow to Hitler. Described as the bloodiest single battle going on for 199 days and from what I know and recall from A level history it was a decisive battle in Europe and a major turning point for the war in Europe, but of course WW2 went beyond the battles in Europe...but it was very important. Stalingrad also was of major strategic importance, a major industrial centre for Russia and access route to the Caspian Sea from the river Volga.

Just on your point about current relations with Russia, I do not think Stalingrad has any real bearing on that, we were allies with Russia against Nazi Germany. I think the disolving of the USSR and Russia losing terriotiry has more of link to current relations than battles of WW2.

Sorry I cannot give more info or be more informative but I would recommend the book titled Stalingrad, or I should say my BF recommends.

Answer 2

There were many decisive battles throughout WW2, but Stalingrad was Germanys. They had only tasted victory up till this point. After Stalingrad the Germans knew they weren’t invincible and moreover the Russians knew it too. Anthony Beavors book is excellent, although quite heavy going it is well worth a read for someone interested in military history, otherwise maybe just skip through it.
It would also be advisable to have a look at the1993 film “Stalingrad” by Joseph Vilsmaier.

Answer 3

Stalingrad was important, but Germany had two chances to salvage or at least greatly extend the war after that, and either one of those battles could be the decisive one. First was the Battle of Kursk, after which there was very little standing in the Soviets' way of marching on Berlin. The other was the Battle of the Bulge, where the Germans just came up a little short of seriously threatening the Allies' position in Europe. Losing both of those battles, Germany never had the chance to mount another offensive, and the end was inevitable.

Answer 4

The Russians took appauling numbers of casulties fighting the Germans. This isn't recognised properly - that during the second world war they suffered the most by a mile.

It isn't in question that Stalingrad was a turning point of the war - when Russian defeat was staved off - but in terms of decisive battles /actions D-Day has to be the key event. However if the Germans weren't having to fight on two fronts would it have suceeded ? It would have been much more touch and go - that's for sure.

Answer 5

The Germans put everything into the battle of Stalingrad but so did the Russians. The Russians are peeved that the west do not give them the due credit for breaking the back of the Third Reich and that is part of the problem.

You see, for propaganda reasons, the Americans and the British like to claim sole victory in the second world war but if Hitler did not attack Russia and invest so much of his resources in trying to subdue them, America and Britain would not have prevailed. It can be seen from the US adventures in Korea and Vietnam that they neither had the staying power nor the will that is required to win a serious war of attrition.

Answer 6

Yes I think it was.

The problem the Germans had was that even though they used "Battle hardened troops" in Stalingrad, these troops were not experienced in hand to hand, close quarter street fighting.

These battle hardened German troops hailed from the battle fields where they advanced in platoons and took aim through their sights across an expanse of space.

In Stalingrad, the bayonet and hand grenade were the order of the day, fought in the confines of rooms in buildings.

The Russians intimate knowledge of their own city including it's sewers etc, made for a very different and difficult battle for the Germans.

In the end, despite the influx of many many German troops, despite orders to take the city at all costs, the task just proved to be too much for the Germans.

This was their first and biggest battle defeat and must have sent shivers of realism through the German people and their leaders.

Answer 7

Hi Joan,
I have read Stalingrad by Antony Beevor it is a brilliant read and is brilliantly written. I think that the battle for Stalingrad was a huge turning point in the war and Hitler had used up so many of his resources that it weakened his army.
The recent documentary by John and Dan Snow called 21st Century Battlefields actually featured Stalingrad and it shows you how hard they fought.

Answer 8

It was decisive in the sense that it really sapped the strength of the German army. Eventually the 6th army were surrounded and eliminated altogether. It was also very much a psycological victory of one philosophy over the other, as the city had taken Stalin's name and victory was seen as symbolic.

There can be no doubt that without Stalingrad the pages of history would read very differently as D-day would not have happenned in 1944 and the Germans would have had more time to develop their super weapons.

Answer 9

Not really. Stalingrad demonstrated that Germany was not going to WIN the war. It was the battle of Kursk which showed they were going to LOSE it.

I would say that the War of Intervention where the US and Britain poked their noses into a Russian internecine conflict did more to shape Russian opinion of those two countries.

Answer 10

Not THE decisive battle of the war, but it was up their in overall importance and was the decisive battle of Germany's invasion of Russia and on the Eastern Front. It allowed Russia to push back and it kept the Nazi's out of the Middle East.