The turning point of World War II

[parentheses]

There are various opinions as to the turning point of WW II. Many believe the Soviet victory at Stalingrad was the turning point, some believe the turning point only came at the battle of Kursk in July 1943 and there are probably some who would argue the turning point came with the success of D-Day in 1944. This author believes the turning point of the war came when the Soviet forces launched the counterattacks to drive the Germans back from the approaches to Moscow in December 1941.

It was in front of Moscow, in December 1941, that the tide turned, because it was there that the Blitzkrieg failed and that Nazi Germany was consequently forced to fight, without sufficient resources, the kind of long, drawn-out war that Hitler and his generals knew they could not possibly win.

70 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II

[eoghanacht]

I'd argue Dunkirk

[firefly123]

Today in 1941. When they awoke the sleeping giant.

[owedtojoy]

There are various opinions as to the turning point of WW II. Many believe the Soviet victory at Stalingrad was the turning point, some believe the turning point only came at the battle of Kursk in July 1943 and there are probably some who would argue the turning point came with the success of D-Day in 1944. This author believes the turning point of the war came when the Soviet forces launched the counterattacks to drive the Germans back from the approaches to Moscow in December 1941.

70 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II

WWII was fought across three continents over a span of 6 years ... the search for a single turning point is probably simplistic. Even after Kursk, Germany could still have fought the Soviets to an Armistice.

In fact, if the Germans won the Battle of the Atlantic, they could probably have done so, or even defeated the Soviets.

I would argue that if you look at a single factor that determined the outcome of WWII, it was the sheer industrial power of the USA. The sheer quantity of material produced made the major difference ... there was no theatre of the war where the United States did not make a decisive contribution ... maybe not the only decisive contribution, but a massive one nonetheless.

[Dylan2010]

I'd argue Dunkirk

you didnt argue though, you stated . Seems early Battle of Britain hadnt happened yet. The invasion of Russia was badly flawed, as far as I understand it the generals wanted to take Moscow basic logic being countries lose wars when they lose their capitals. The plan being 3 pronged spread the germans too thin and then got bogged down in the Russian winter.

[birthday]

I'd argue Dunkirk

Was it not the replacement of Chamberlain by Winston or more realistically the entry of the USA.

The Soviets got much useless war material from the Western allies but the trucks and tinned beef probably made a big difference!

[The Field Marshal]

There are various opinions as to the turning point of WW II. Many believe the Soviet victory at Stalingrad was the turning point, some believe the turning point only came at the battle of Kursk in July 1943 and there are probably some who would argue the turning point came with the success of D-Day in 1944. This author believes the turning point of the war came when the Soviet forces launched the counterattacks to drive the Germans back from the approaches to Moscow in December 1941.

70 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II

That is a purely military analysis.

The second world war was an ideological conflict, instigated, fuelled and led by a small cabal of intrinsically evil politicians.

The principal culprits were Churchill,,Roosvelt & Stalin .

The turning point in the machinations of these evil men was the USA Lend lease programme signed by warmonger Roosveldt in 1941.
This programme boosted ailing USA industry,& set America on its current path of global domination.

Without American money and supplies their is absolutely no doubt but that the German army would have eventually prevailed over Russian Bolshevism.

[shutuplaura]

WWII was fought across three continents over a span of 6 years ... the search for a single turning point is probably simplistic. Even after Kursk, Germany could still have fought the Soviets to an Armistice.

In fact, if the Germans won the Battle of the Atlantic, they could probably have done so, or even defeated the Soviets.

I would argue that if you look at a single factor that determined the outcome of WWII, it was the sheer industrial power of the USA. The sheer quantity of material produced made the major difference ... there was no theatre of the war where the United States did not make a decisive contribution ... maybe not the only decisive contribution, but a massive one nonetheless.

This is true. If one were to even attepmt to isolate a single turning point my feeling is that it would be more valid to look at events that lead to an escalation of Germany's war - Barbarossa or the delaration of war against the USA

[Cassandra Syndrome]

Imagine if Sky News was around back then?

[Tom245]

the Battle of Britain because it was the first time German plans were foiled and they failed to advance. It proved they could be beaten though it mightn't have looked that way at the time