Which battle was the most important: El Alamein Stalingrad Battle of Britain Battle of the Atlantic or D-Day?

Answer 1

== == There were many important battles in WWII but the Battle of Britain was by far the most important. If the UK had lost then the war was over. Hitler had to take the British to achieve global domination, he failed and the world was saved.

The Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union was a suicide rush and little more. Hitlers dream was over and he wanted as many people to die as possible.

The Battle of Britain gave hope to the allies, it shocked the world as most thought the UK outnumbered could not win, but they did.

If the UK had lost then Africa, Asia, Europe and the Middle East would ALL be under nazi control.

If the Nazi had taken Russia they would have still lost as the allies were already on their way to Berlin.

Of these four, only Stalingrad and the battle for the Atlantic were really important from a strategic standpoint. Germany winning or loosing in North Africa had little consequence beyond that desert region. It was fairly important for England to control Egypt so that her middle East and Indian empires would remain docile and not go into revolt. Otherwise, these battles in Libya and Tunisia were inconsequential. The battle of Britain was likelywise unimportant despite all the gas put out by Churchill on the matter. Even if Germany had achieved a huge victory, their chances of invading, occupying and hold Britain were virtually nil. Thus the whole thing was a waste of resources for Germany. D Day, America's biggest adventure in the war, likewise was given a lot of press. However the battle came too late in the war to really affect the outcome. About all it did was prevent the Soviets from taking even more of Europe and they did in the event. Stalingrad was a major battle. A German victory here probably means that Russia looses her petroleum supplies (from the Caucasus/Baku area, further south) and becomes immobilized. Without oil, the Russians can probably hold Moscow and Leningrad, but cannot expand west. The war thus becomes a stalemate although one that would probably have continued to be very bloody in localized battles. With the eastern front thus stabilized, Germany can then concentrate on putting up an adequate defense in the west. Personally I doubt a Normandy invasion in 1944 would have been an Allied victory had Germany been able to hold the Russians at the Volga. Holding the Russians that far East means Germany can release resources to the west. This would include air forces adequate to at least compete with the western Allies on the beaches. A competitive German air force makes D Day victory for Britain/USA all but impossible. The battle of the Atlantic was our course, a long drawn out affair covering many years and a vast array of technology. Germany had some shot at dominating here in 1942 but it would have taken much better submarines for Germany to continue their successes beyond that time. It is too much to get into here, but assuming a German victory, which basically means Germany is sinking more ships than the Allies can produce and a build up of American forces to invade Africa and Normandy is prevented, means Germany has security on her western front too. Britain never had the strength to take on Germany alone and thus was absolutely dependent on the Soviets draining German strength and the Americans paying the bills and taking on the bulk of land/air fighting in the west. A German submarine victory could have forced a political settlement with Britain by 1943 or 1944, thus effectively ending the war on all fronts. u pendjo This short list of battles leaves out the most important one of all, that being the battle for Moscow in 1941. Germany wins that, the Soviet system in is in deep disarray. Yes, fighting would have continued, probably for a year or two, but Germany would have had the interior lines and been able to dominate the conflict. As noted above, a stabilized Russian front puts Germany in a position to hold in the west and likely win the war.