Most important ww2 battle?

MVHAGEY · Jul 12, 2009

marc780 said:

Single most important WW2 battle (or mission) - Nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. To split hairs the two nuke strikes strictly speaking were not a " battle" - but the sheer magnitude and damage done to the enemy were devastating since the A-bomb as the only weapon ever built up to that time, that was a war-winner. You may debate the the issues on the morality/legality of the A-bomb strikes forever, and certainly they caused immense suffering among innocent Japanese civilians. Yet America had an agenda, which was, finish the war with the fewest American and allied casualties possible.

It was the ferocity of Japanese defense of Iwo Jima earlier that year, and the huge American casualties suffered in this battle, that convinced Truman that dropping the bombs was an option. Certainly he did not want to do it and no doubt gave the decision a great deal of thought - while nukes had been tested, once, and proven to work, there was no guarantee that they would even work when deployed - but Truman was just as war weary as the rest of the American population and simply wanted to end the war.

Truman made the pragmatic decision, given the time and circumstance, much as many of us would have done, and he ordered the nuke strikes. Bottom line is that No military commander (Truman was of course, commander in chief) would ignore a potential war-winning weapon in their arsenal, (especially when you know the enemy cannot counter it) if it would help their side achieve victory!

Critics of this action often argue that dropping the bomb on "yellow people" was racist and that the Japanese were seen as less than human, so this is why they got nuked. The facts speak otherwise since Nazi Germany was first in line to be nuked. The German surrender in May 1945 prevented this. The Manahatten project was working night and day, yet the nukes were simply not deployable at that time. By August 1945 they were ready, barely- the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were the only two operational nukes in the arsenal, and it would have taken months to build more. If the Japanese had refused to surender despite the world's first nuke strike, history would have been different, yet probably the end result the exact same.
Click to expand...

Certainly a monumental "battle", but I think the Japanese could have been defeated without it, even with a horrific loss of life. I think Pearl Harbor is a good candidate (if you could even call it a battle). I think the U.S. entering the war was a huge relief to Britain and allies and I'm not sure if the war could have been won without the U.S.

Devilsadvocate · Jul 12, 2009

MastahCheef117 said:

Yes, but they're so damn expensive it'd be hard to replace three carriers while have the enemy try and bomb you every day. Plus the US lost six fleet carriers and six escort carriers throughout the war. Twelve carriers is hard to remake in three and a half years while trying to pump out other warships too. Escort carriers, although carriers themselves, aren't as expensive, but still take a long time to build.
Click to expand...

Where do you get your data?

The USN lost a total of four CV's (Fleet carriers); in order, Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet. No US fleet carriers were lost after Hornet, although a couple of CVL,'s and a handful of escort carriers were lost.

Had the US lost all it's three carriers at Midway, it still would have had more carriers that Japan (7 CV's 7 CVL's, 850 planes to 6 CV's, 2 CVL's, 560 planes) no later than the end of 1943. By the middle of 1944, the USN would have had nearly a 2 to 1 advantage in carriers and planes over Japan. Losing at Midway would have delayed victory in the Pacific war by perhaps nine to twelve months, no more.

Here's the actual breakdown in numbers.

[SIZE=+1]Date[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]American CVs / CVLs
(# of aircraft)
[SIZE=-1](ships in bold indicate new builds)[/SIZE][/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Total Ships / Total Aircraft[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Japanese CVs / CVLs
(# of aircraft)
[SIZE=-1](ships in bold indicate new builds)[/SIZE][/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Total Ships / Total Aircraft[/SIZE] 7/1/42-
12/31/42 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76) 2 CV

164 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30) 6 CV
2 CVL

561 1/1/43-
6/30/42 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (82), Independence (33), Princeton (33) 3CV
2 CVL

321 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30) 6 CV
2 CVL

561 7/1/43-
12/31/43 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington II (91), Intrepid (91), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Cabot (33) 7 CV
7 CVL

850 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30) 6 CV
2 CVL

561 1/1/44-
6/30/44 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington (91), Wasp II (91), Intrepid (91), Hornet II (91), Franklin (91), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Bataan (33), San Jacinto (33) 10 CV
9 CVL

1189 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30), Chiyoda (30), Chitose (30) 6 CV
4 CVL

621 7/1/44-
12/31/44 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington (91), Wasp (91), Intrepid (91), Hornet (91), Franklin (91), Ticonderoga (91), Hancock (91), Bennington (91), Shangri-La (91), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Bataan (33), San Jacinto (33) 14 CV
9 CVL

1,553 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Taiho (60), Unryu (65), Amagi (65), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30), Chiyoda (30), Chitose (30) 9 CV
4 CVL

811 1/1/45-
6/1/45 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington (91), Wasp (91), Intrepid (91), Hornet (91), Franklin (91), Ticonderoga (91), Hancock (91), Bennington (91), Shangri-La (91), Bon Homme Richard (91), Randolph (91), Antietam (91), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Bataan (33), San Jacinto (33) 17 CV
9 CVL

1,826 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Taiho (60), Unryu (65), Shinano (45), Amagi (65), Katsuragi (65), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30), Chiyoda (30), Chitose (30) 11 CV
4 CVL

941 7/1/45-
12/31/45 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington (91), Wasp (91), Intrepid (91), Hornet (91), Franklin (91), Ticonderoga (91), Hancock (91), Bennington (91), Shangri-La (91), Bon Homme Richard (91), Randolph (91), Antietam (91), Coral Sea (120), Lake Champlain (91), Boxer (91), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Bataan (33), San Jacinto (33) 20 CV
9 CVL

2,128 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Taiho (60), Unryu (65), Shinano (45), Amagi (65), Katsuragi (65), Kasagi (?) (65), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30), Chiyoda (30), Chitose (30), Ibuki (?) (27) 12 CV
5 CVL

1,033 1/1/46-
6/30/46 Saratoga (88), Wasp (76), Essex (91), Bunker Hill (91), Yorktown (91), Lexington (91), Wasp (91), Intrepid (91), Hornet (91), Franklin (91), Ticonderoga (91), Hancock (91), Bennington (91), Shangri-La (91), Bon Homme Richard (91), Randolph (91), Antietam (91), Lake Champlain (91), Boxer (91), Kearsarge (91), Princeton II (91), Oriskany (91), Tarawa (91), Coral Sea (120), Franklin Roosevelt (120), Independence (33), Princeton (33), Belleau Wood (33), Cowpens (33), Monterey (33), Langley (33), Bataan (33), San Jacinto (33) 25 CV
9 CVL

2,612 Kaga (90), Akagi (91), Soryu (71), Hiryu (73), Zuikaku (84), Shokaku (84), Taiho (60), Unryu (65), Shinano (45), Amagi (65), Katsuragi (65), Kasagi (?) (65), Aso (?) (65), Ikoma (?) (65), Ibuki (?) (27), Ryujo (38), Zuiho (30), Chiyoda (30), Chitose (30) 14 CV
5 CVL

1,163

The Essex class carriers were built in an average of 18 months, one was launched 14 months from the keel laying and that was early in the war before American production methods hit their stride. The carriers were expensive but many more Essex class could have been built without putting even a modest dent in the US war budget.

paraboy · Jul 13, 2009

I think - agree with C. Evans - there was too many important battles in this war. But I think very importnat battle was
1./ El Alamein- if Rommel beat Britains, Rommel could occupy MiddleEast, Suez, and it's mean that German could control the Medditerranean
2./ Moscow-Stalingrad-Kursk- defeat moral, because it's mean that German not unbeatable
3./ D-Day and Battle of Normandy (many battles: Carentan, Caen, Cherbourg, Falaise etc.)- this was the base of the final defeat of Germany

ps. sorry my wrong english

lwd · Jul 13, 2009

paraboy said:

...
1./ El Alamein- if Rommel beat Britains, Rommel could occupy MiddleEast, Suez, and it's mean that German could control the Medditerranean
Click to expand...

Suez possibly but that's about all he's got the logistics for and he probably couldn't hold that if the British wanted to take it back.

Very good point about it being difficult to impossible to pick out a most important battle.

Franek · Jul 13, 2009

I give a lot of credit to the industrial might of America. We supplied Ships, food, and war materials to Britain and Russia. Not counting keeping the Germans busy in Italy and the Second front in Europe.
If all German forces were available.. Russia would not exist today.Without US support Britain could never have invaded Western Europe.

freebird · Jun 20, 2010

ozjohn39 said:

This question has been asked many times.

In my view the answer remains the same,

'Battle of the Atlantic'.

John.
Click to expand...

I think you are correct.
If they had lost this battle, there would be no second chance

Gebirgsjaeger · Jun 20, 2010

Tomcat said:

I disagree with that, stalingrad for example was a turning point not only on the eastern front but for the entire German war. This in turn almost guaranteed the destruction of Germany just as did the A-bombs on the Japanese mainland.

Some operations are more important then others, some that could end the war faster or others that simply tear the enemy to pieces. What if Market Garden had really worked, would that not have been a crucial part of not only ww2 but also to do with the cold war? Perhaps the Western Allies reached Berlin before the Russians.
Click to expand...

Great said! I fully agree with you!

Regards

Ulrich

Log in or Sign up

Most important ww2 battle?

MVHAGEY Member

Devilsadvocate Ace

paraboy Member

lwd Ace

Franek WWII Veteran

freebird Member

Gebirgsjaeger Ace

Share This Page

About US

Useful Links