The Most Descisive Battle

The Most Descisive Battle is...

  • Zama (Rome>Carthaginians) 205

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Catalaunian Fields (Rome=Huns) 451

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Tours/Poitiers (Franks>Moslems) 732

    Votes: 7 14.0%
  • Hastings (Saxons<Normans) 1066

    Votes: 4 8.0%
  • Orleans (French>British) 1429

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Constantinople (Turks>Byzantines) 1453

    Votes: 3 6.0%
  • Lepanto (Christians>Turks) 1471

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Sekigahara (West<Tokugawa) 1600

    Votes: 2 4.0%
  • Poltava (Swedes<Russians) 1705

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Yorktown (Americans>British) 1781

    Votes: 5 10.0%
  • Trafalgar (British>French) 1805

    Votes: 3 6.0%
  • Waterloo (French<Allies) 1815

    Votes: 2 4.0%
  • Gettysburg (Union>Confederates) 1863

    Votes: 2 4.0%
  • 1st Marne (Allies>Germans) 1914

    Votes: 2 4.0%
  • 2nd Marne (Allies>Germans) 1918

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • El Alamein (Germans>British) 1942

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Stalingrad (Germans<USSR) 1942-43

    Votes: 10 20.0%
  • Midway (USA>Nihon) 1942

    Votes: 3 6.0%
  • Kursk (USSR>Germans) 1943

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 6.0%

  • Total voters
    50
Well, if I may, America as a world leader would be very different had the Confederacy won. Think about the World Wars and how their outcome might've changed...
 
Defensible point, but not THAT defensible.

Ultimately it would still have been the same North that held most of the industrial power, and likely the same North that would have eventually intervened in the World Wars in one way or another.
 
Why are Marathon, Salamis and Normandy not on the list? They're much more important then some battles on that list.
 
Originally posted by Sarevok
true, the war was pretty much already decided.

The Civil War? Are you joking me? It wasn't really decided until Atlanta was captured by Sherman, IMHO.

But I agree with Oda Nobunaga on this one, and that's why I didn't vote for Ghettysburg in the first place. :)
 
Originally posted by addiv
Why are Marathon, Salamis and Normandy not on the list? They're much more important then some battles on that list.

umm... right.
 
I strongly disagree with Tours/Poitiers in the list... True, it halted the muslim advance, but you could wonder why the don't try to advance the next year or so... and the answer was that there were resistence in Northen Spain and the supply lines were over-extended. In that sense, 'Las navas de Tolosa' could be even more importan than Poitiers.

But, as I'm sure Xen will highlight soon, Tours/Poitiers victory would have been worth nothing if Constantinople would have fallen into Arabs hands. The main arab army (much bigger than any arab army in Spain or France) was figthing against Byzantium... Arabs advance into Europe was halted mainly in Constantinople by Byzantium's people, more than Goths' heir, Franks or any other West Europe tribe.
 
Originally posted by yaroslav
I strongly disagree with Tours/Poitiers in the list... True, it halted the muslim advance, but you could wonder why the don't try to advance the next year or so... and the answer was that there were resistence in Northen Spain and the supply lines were over-extended. In that sense, 'Las navas de Tolosa' could be even more importan than Poitiers.

But, as I'm sure Xen will highlight soon, Tours/Poitiers victory would have been worth nothing if Constantinople would have fallen into Arabs hands. The main arab army (much bigger than any arab army in Spain or France) was figthing against Byzantium... Arabs advance into Europe was halted mainly in Constantinople by Byzantium's people, more than Goths' heir, Franks or any other West Europe tribe.

I disagree with you there, the muslims if haven beaten the franks could ahve taken europe.
 
Sarevok i think Saratoga should be on the list in stead of Yorktown. The reason is as stated earlier Yorktown was just the final nail in the coffin of a United Kingdom already debating whether continuing the conflict was worth it. But at Saratoga if the British had won they could have split the colonies and divided them for easier conquest. The American army was still in disarray further south. The Army war college did a staff study on the loss of Saratoga by the Americans, and the result was the eventual defeat of the colonies. Now imagine a world where North America was still owned by the British and the ripple effects. No French revolution and the confirmation of divine right in europe.
 
Originally posted by Sarevok


I disagree with you there, the muslims if haven beaten the franks could ahve taken europe.

Sorry to disagree, I don't want to be unpolite or polemic... but I don't think they would have take Europe (well, Western Europe ;)), because they're facing problems at home (Spain) and their army was small and far away from their supply lines. They entered in Spain because Spain was in a civil war and the Visigoth state was a ruin: however other European states were stronger that time. As I have written before, the big battle was fougth in Constantinople's doors.
 
Back
Top Bottom