|
Posts:
1,630
Registered:
1/12/05
|
|
(1 of 56)
Jan 16, 2005 8:25 AM
|
I propose to determine the greatest battle of all times.
1. Most important
2. Biggest in territory
3. Biggest in troops
4. Bloodiest
And most important 5. GREATEST EVER BY COMPLEX OF THINGS
My number 5 is by far STALINGRAD!
that name makes me chill!!!
Brrrrrrr.....
|
|
|
Posts:
7,478
Registered:
10/6/01
|
|
(2 of 56)
Jan 18, 2005 11:15 AM
|
|
There have been so many important battles that it is hard to pick just one. You mention Stalingrad. I might counter that the battle of Kursk was greater and more important. But were either greater or more important than the Battle of Hastings or Saratoga?
|
|
|
Posts:
17
Registered:
1/6/05
|
|
(3 of 56)
Jan 18, 2005 7:18 PM
|
|
probably one of the more anciant battles such as thermopalae or one one of them. maybe waterlou but seeing as it is def not bloodiest i dont know. maybe hastings. everyone will have their own
|
|
|
Posts:
73
Registered:
1/25/05
|
|
(4 of 56)
Jan 26, 2005 1:18 PM
|
Although this fits only the last three... I like the battle of cannae
double envellopment...
76,000 Romans dead in an area the size of Central Park...
80,000 Romans v. 45,000 Carthaginians (appx.)
Romans never fought against Hannibal again on open ground until Zama.
--
Cry "havoc!" and let slip the dogs of war,
(Julius Caesar 3.1.275)
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
1/26/05
|
|
(5 of 56)
Jan 26, 2005 4:19 PM
|
|
I liked the battle of hastings. Short and decisive, back in the day when the fate of a country could be decided in a day!
|
|
|
Posts:
7,478
Registered:
10/6/01
|
|
(6 of 56)
Jan 27, 2005 8:56 AM
|
|
You know I thought about Cannae, but I thought that since it did not give Hannibal the total victory he wanted that it didn't qualify.
|
|
|
Posts:
7,478
Registered:
10/6/01
|
|
(7 of 56)
Jan 27, 2005 8:58 AM
|
|
I think that one of the problems with picking the most important battle is the definition of "battle". When one speaks of Hastings it is much different than, say, Stalingrad. The battle of Stalingrad might more properly be called a campaign.
|
|
|
Posts:
33
Registered:
11/15/03
|
|
(8 of 56)
Jan 28, 2005 8:14 AM
|
|
I'm going to go with the Battle of Normandy. Maybe not the bloodiest but think about this. The initial assault targeted the beaches and some drop zones a few miles inland on the Carentan Pennisula. Now this is by no means a large ground taking battle but..... This battle affected all of the Northern France Region as well as the whole of Europe because German troops had to be moved in order to stand up against the growing tide of US, Canadian, and British Divisions. Talk about shock waves, D-Day was immense. Kursk and Stalingrad were massive giants compared to D-Day but they were only 2 dimensional, whereas D-Day was 3 dimensional. And to top it off it had Paratroopers! Battles with Paratroopers are always interesting.
|
|
|
Posts:
7
Registered:
12/5/04
|
|
(9 of 56)
Jan 28, 2005 12:57 PM
|
I see we have a lot of one dimensional opinions here...but the greatest battle should include land,air and sea forces...
Invasion of the Phillipines - Leyte Gulf, it also includes the destruction of a major portion of the Japanase fleet.
Sea, Land and air..combined...
|
|
|
Posts:
53
Registered:
1/28/05
|
|
(10 of 56)
Jan 28, 2005 8:34 PM
|
|
I would have to say cannae,but there are some more that might be better.
|
|
|
Posts:
7
Registered:
1/28/05
|
|
(11 of 56)
Jan 28, 2005 11:41 PM
|
The Battle of Adrianople.
Goths numbering about 100,000 destroyed nearly 75,000 Romans and killed, most importantly, Emperor Valens.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,255
Registered:
2/21/04
|
|
(12 of 56)
Jan 29, 2005 3:34 AM
|
Concerning biggest and bloodiest battles -
Cannae and Adrianople for ancient battles
Lepanto and Towton Heath for medieval
Battle of the Frontiers, 1st Somme, Verdun, 3rd Ypres, Stalingrad and Kursk for modern.
According to my admittedly rather old Guinness Book of Records the First Battle of the Somme is the bloodiest modern battle with losses of more than 1,200,000 of which some 420,000 were British/Commonwealth.
By contrast some of the most important battles in terms of historic consequence were some of the smallest - like Hastings.
|
|
|
Posts:
39
Registered:
12/27/04
|
|
(13 of 56)
Jan 30, 2005 8:35 PM
|
|
not sure about the most terrible and most death, but the greatest(best) battles are definitely in the three kingdom period in China.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,065
Registered:
5/9/01
|
|
(14 of 56)
Jan 31, 2005 7:27 AM
|
Stalingrad MAY have been a turning point, but even AFTER Stalingrad the German Amry was able to rest & refit and launch the attack at Kursk....
As for all his criteria....WELL we ALL could debate until judgement day....
Kursk was the death of the German Army...Over 5,000 tanks combinded, nearly 2 million troops in an area not much smaller then the city of Philadelphia (I did the size comparison once, Philadelphia is larger then the Kursk battle area, but I found the dimensions make a good reference point, I live here so it was easy)
Biggest in area would of course have to be barbarosa, but Kursk is the largest in troops for the area fought,
BLOODY!!
in the days that it was fought MAINLY from July 4 to 12 (although fighting DID continue until the 22)....over 300 Germans were killed an hour, while over 1,000 soviets were killed an hour....Soviets lost half their tank strength....
In recent releasing of soviet era documents it has been seen (Thank you military history magazine, WWII 1943 edition) that at Kursk the soviets spent MOST of their operational tanks srength....had Hitler NOT called off the assault on July 12, after the invasion fo sicily, the Germans MAY have actually carried operation citidel.
In German records it is show that in the southern prong of the attack, with 2nd SS Panzer Corps and and 4th Panzer army.....had NOT commit all of it's reserves AFTER the Soviets had attacked with ALL of the 5th Guards tank army. 5th Guards was a spent unit by the 12th and IF Manstein was allowed to commit what would have equaled two full Panzer divisions, it MAY have turned the tide of the battle and would have CERTAINLY caused the Soviets to pull reserves from other front to plug this one, in turn MAYBE calling off ALL offensives for the up coming year... i.e. the MASSIVE attack on Army Group Center in 1944 that shattered the Germans forever in the soviet union.
I call Kursk the battle to end all battles. SURE there were some ancient battles that for the forces fought and killed or captured you MAYBE have to try them....but think Kursk is the big boy on the block....
Later!!
|
|
|
Posts:
1,065
Registered:
5/9/01
|
|
(15 of 56)
Jan 31, 2005 7:43 AM
|
If we need to talk about Roman loses....it would be either the lose of the legions at Teutoburg wald...30,000 dead...but THAT also did nothing to Rome but kill some soldiers....
Now I KNOW Byzantium isn't rome to many, but it IS Eastern Empire....in 376, at Adrianople, the eastern emperor Valens lead out a force nearly 50,000 strong to do battle with the goths.
in a series of rash attacks Valens and his ENTIRE army were killed and the door to the conquest of Western empire, which we ALL know had become a feeble shadow of it's former self...
So maybe THAT is more important then Canne....Although some Historians consider the lose by the Eastern Empire in 1071 at the battle of Manzikert a TRUE rival to canne...although the Eastern army was not destroyed, the Seljuk Turks under Alp Arslan DID take MOST of what is now Turkey...what was prime farm AND recruiting ground of the Byzantines....the area was called Anatolia...
We could debate forever...
Later!
|
|
|
|
|
