Nice!
Think of me when you are standing by where AS Johnston died through blood loss. He is undoubtedly one of the war’s great enigmas and what ifs.
Forrest came to the fore at this battle and one of my favourite generals was present too: Patrick R Cleburne, commanding a Brigade.
Hope the weather is not to bad.
The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World
-
the battle of kulikovo.
prince dmitri donskoi defeated a mongol army. paving the way for later russian independence. also paving the way for russia to be able to look westward towards europe.
-
Those are all good choices for pre-1851. How about post-1851? Nukchebi0 had a pretty good list, lets hear what others have to say. :wink:
-
Battle of Britain
If it had not been won by Britain the Nazis may have been able to invade Britain leading to one can assume an extremely different end of WWII
-
Germany would have had a horrific time trying to invade Britain anyways. Their landing craft weren’t sufficient to convey the large amounts of supplies necessary to sustain an invasion.
Polywog is right. The Somme was horrendously indecisive. I would change the Somme to Antietam, which destroyed any chance the Confederates had of winning the Civil War. Having a divided U.S. would have influenced world events greatly.
-
post 1865 list:
1.Stalingrad
2.Marne ( first one)
3. Dunkirk
4.Midway
5.Verdun
6.Tannenburg
7.Inchon -
I forgot Tannenburg.That was pretty crucial to hastening the Russian defeat in WWI, and ushering in the revolution.
-
post 1851……
how about the battle at porth arthor? b/w the russians and the japanese. it showed that an asian army/navy can match a western style combination. that was crucial to geo-politics and also helped begin to pave the way for revolution in russia, the decembrists used the loss to catapult their attempted coup. ever since then, the russian tsar was just trying to hold onto power. poor nicholas.
and mech, may i add, that true your list is important for us in the west… how about battles that are more centered on maybe africa and india, china and the middle east, not forgetting s. america. there is a lot that happened there. i’ll think of some here soon.
-
Did any of these areas actually affect the geo-politics of the world greatly. Essentially: Would the world have been radically different with an opposite outcome?
(The second part, China, S. America ect.)
-
post 1865 list:
1.Stalingrad–- obvious conclusions. Nothing is bigger than this battle for deciding the wars conclusion.
2.Marne ( first one)— failure to win would have been a quick german victory in 1914 and not have caused ww2
3. Dunkirk— if the brits failed to leave intact Hitler would have immediatly invaded and captured England and ended the war.
4.Midway— The japanese would have lost one way or another but it ended the string of victorys up until then.
5.Verdun— this meat grinder was supposed to totally sap the french of soldiers to fight… but it also sapped the strength of the germans buying the allies enough time to bring in the americans.
6.Tannenburg— total reversal of the eastern front leading to collapse of imperial russia and cold war and many other things
7.Inchon— created the present day situation with N Korea -
@Imperious:
post 1865 list:
1.Stalingrad–- obvious conclusions. Nothing is bigger than this battle for deciding the wars conclusion.
2.Marne ( first one)— failure to win would have been a quick german victory in 1914 and not have caused ww2
3. Dunkirk— if the brits failed to leave intact Hitler would have immediatly invaded and captured England and ended the war.
4.Midway— The japanese would have lost one way or another but it ended the string of victorys up until then.
5.Verdun— this meat grinder was supposed to totally sap the french of soldiers to fight… but it also sapped the strength of the germans buying the allies enough time to bring in the americans.
6.Tannenburg— total reversal of the eastern front leading to collapse of imperial russia and cold war and many other things
7.Inchon— created the present day situation with N KoreaSedan in May 1940 - more important for the lack of any major fighting since the German crossing of the Meusse river nearly unopposed by large numbers of German tanks sealed the fate of the French army.
-
I was also going to note that the battles are very Euro-centric and pretty biased. Look at what the guy has to say about Persians in just a few lines.
I’ve got a book that highlights quite a few battles, all the way up to former Yugoslavia.
The battles which stand out to me (I don’t know them all, even after cursory checking on the ones I’m not familiar with): Tours, Hastings, Spanish Armada, Saratoga, Valmy, and Waterloo. Tours, Hastings, Armada, & Waterloo were all about stopping/reversing the flow of power; Valmy and Saratoga were integral in the US and French Revolutions and showed the power of a volunteer army.
I would also include the suggestions of Metz/Sedan in uniting Germany, the First Marne for stalling a German victory, Tsushima for showing that war doesn’t mean the biggest gun (or boat) and rising power in Japan, Stalingrad (imagine if Hitler went for Moscow instead?), Midway, the entire Mongol Conquest (Japanese exception), Battle of Britain (ushered in Air Superiority for the Allies - which was an enormous strength).
My suggestions are:
Battle of Sekigahara - unified Japan and established the Tokugawa shogunate which ruled Japan for hundreds of years. Its isolationist policies, which led to Western pressure, eventually gave way to the Meiji Restoration. That, in turn, went on to form the power of Japan seen in some of the other battles listed here.
Battle of Chi Bi - Besides being a pivotal battle in post-Han China (Three Kingdoms Period), it is said to be one of the most lethal, and involved naval and land forces. The allied efforts of the Shu and Wu forces somehow overcame the far more numerous Wei forces, and allowed them to set up their own domains (Wei was far more dominant). I also just found out that it’s being made into a movie by John Woo starring Chow Yun Fat.
D Day - the sheer size of this naval invasion is impressive, not to mention the organization, collaboration with French Resistance, and the fact that it totally caught the Germans off guard. It was inevitable, but I think it succeeded quite well.
Pearl Harbor - Reinforced the importance of carriers, sneak attacks, and air power. We were pretty lucky not to have our own carriers caught in the fight - if we did, the Pacific war would have dragged on a lot longer.
Yorktown - Got the Brits to finally admit US sovereignty (uh oh, there goes the neighborhood).
Okinawa - not only one of the most fierce and bloody battles in the Pacific War, I believe that it had a major influence on the use of atomic bombs.
-
As one poster pointed out, the original list of 15 decisive battles was decidedly Eurocentric. (Although by no means the fault of the composer of the original post, who pulled the list from a book.)
I would like to also point out that battles do not necessarily involve guns.
I think the post should better be titled “Fifteen decisive armed conflicts”.
Otherwise, I have some Super Bowls I could cite . . .
-
Oh yeah, I meant to come back to this thread. Thanks for reviving it NPB.
I was going to ask those that listed Pusan about their reasoning in that choice. I read some on the Korea War recently, and I’d have to list the landing at Inchon as being more pivotal than Pusan (for both good and bad reasons).
Unless you are talking about the Japanese Invasion of Korea in the 1500’s. Then I don’t know.
-
I may have missed it, but it doesn’t look like anyone cited the Battle of Lepanto - 1571. This should certainly rank among the top 2 or 3 naval battles in human history. The battle stopped the expansion of the Ottoman empire and kept Europe Christian - for those who think that kind of thing is important.
SS
-
It’s been brought up already but Saratoga is on the list while Yorktown has been omitted, and I believe that’s a huge mistake. While Saratoga had great implications for the American Revolution in bringing other European Powers into the conflict, the result of Yorktown was a huge blow to British prestige and forced them to accept their losses. It was the Tet Offensive of the 18th century, but it’s real impact is in the 225 years hence. Imagine just how radically different the 20th century and two world wars would have been if North America were still divided between European Powers.
-
@saburo:
I may have missed it, but it doesn’t look like anyone cited the Battle of Lepanto - 1571. This should certainly rank among the top 2 or 3 naval battles in human history. The battle stopped the expansion of the Ottoman empire and kept Europe Christian - for those who think that kind of thing is important.
SS
Dont forget about the Battle of Jutland! That was a very important naval battle in WWI. It stopped the Germans from gaining naval superiority and made them go back to the unrestricted submarine warfare policy (which eventually helped them lose instead of win.)
-
The battle of Zama. The defeat of Carthage that ensured Roman supremacy over the Mediterranean.
The battle of Sharpsburg. Kept the U.S. unified. (unfortunately) :-P
-
@Mechanized:
Dont forget about the Battle of Jutland! That was a very important naval battle in WWI. It stopped the Germans from gaining naval superiority and made them go back to the unrestricted submarine warfare policy (which eventually helped them lose instead of win.)
I don’t see much decisiveness, tactical or strategic, in Jutland. The only outcome that would have changed the outcome of the war would be the destruction of the British Fleet. Churchill said of Jellicoe, “He is the only man that can lose the war in an afternoon.” Even if the German High Seas Fleet is annihilated, the British have won nothing. The submarine campaign the Germans waged operated independently of what the High Seas Fleet did. They waged war on British shipping before and after Jutland, and what prompted a declaration of unrestricted warfare was the knowledge that Germany’s Army was going to run out of resources before the Entente forces did.
-
All Jutland may have done is foreshadow the end of the Battleships as the determining factor in Naval warfare… a lesson that was finally leanred for good at Midway.
And a point THAT minor does not warrant the top 15.
-
I would contest the idea that Jutland is a determining factor in the demise of the battleship. The first thing Britain demanded after the Armistice was the sinking of the German dreadnoughts. Hindsight might show us early warning signs, but remember that in the inter-war period all naval treaties concentrated on restricting battleship development. It was not until the start of hostilities in the Pacific that battleships were proven less effective. If there had been a significant incidence of some weapon being distinctly better than the battleship, navies after the First World War would have jumped on the new bandwagon.
Suggested Topics
