most destructive battle of the european theatre

Personnally, i think the battle which destroyed the myth of the german invincibility was Moscow. Yes, the battle of britain save G-B but could the united-kingdom have won the war alone? I am not so sure. The fall of france was a terrible shock in great-britain, i think and it determined the politic of Churchill with the USA.

But the battle of moscou is terrible: The axis raised a formidable army to invade the soviet union, they easily trapped russian forces in Kiev and took Smolensk, what a spectacular advance. An here, not far from Moscow, the Blitzkrieg no longer work, the massive counter-attack of the russian reserves have an horrible effect on german moral. They are stop with a lot of men being killed and they must stay in Russia for the winter.

And in Western front, Tunisia was a severe blow, Normandy too, then the failure of the offensives in the Ardennes and against Alsace, the collapse of colmar pocket combined with the disastrous loss of an entire army group in the Ruhr. If i must choose one battle, I say Normandy in the West, and Belarus in the East.

 

Yes, but was there a more destruction per square mile or whatever math you want to have in those battles?

 

This is what I have been trying to say ,but people keeping going back to numbers of deaths and so on

 

Indeed that was a bloodbath, interesting fact after the sixth army was surrounded only one soldier managed to make it back to German lines. So as a battle in itself Stalingrad was the bloodiest and the most destructive as the German-Axis forces never recovered.

 

Yup, that was the most destructive battle. Hitler should have never invaded until England was no longer a threat.

 

So it looks like we all agree that stalingrad is the most destructive then?

 

Can you please explain your thoughts on this matter to this benighted soul?

 

In that case, the battle of France was quite destructive.

 

do you mean by the loss of their army and country?

 

For the moral too, and not only for the french. Churchill had to struggle against a strong pacifist party after, but he finally won.

 

Gets my vote, if we are counting bodies and destroyed terrain. But not for its over all impact on the course of the war.

 

I will vote for the fall of the Rhineland!

 

There seems to be a lot of mixing between campaigns vs individual battles. If you look at strictly "battles"...Stalingrad or Berlin would have to rank as the most destructive. We know the casualty figures and can compare the two, but it would be interesting to see the monetary losses compared between the two cities. I would have to believe that Berlin lost more economically than Stalingrad just based on the pre-war populations and economies of the two cities.

 

My dear friend, lets not forget Leningrad. No population of any city during WW2 suffered as much as those unfortunate soles had. Not to mention that out of thousands of building only one escaped the shelling and till this day stands as a shrine visited by many.

 

You are quite correct...I sometimes forget Leningrad because the military casualties are not categorized the same as Stalingrad or Berlin. The civilian population certainly suffered more than any other because of the duration of the siege.

 

the battle of leyte gulf was the most destructive to marine environment.