If you have the time, check out my store:
Best Answer – Chosen by Asker
Stalingrad was only significant if the Germans lost, which they did. The Soviets destroyed the 6th Army, which, in turn, forced the other half of Army Group South (engaged in capturing the Caucasus and Baku oil fields) to withdraw to the north-west to regroup and form a new defensinve line. The failure to capture the oil fields cut off the Axis powers from any hope of finding a large enough fuel source to continue an effective war, essentially sealing their fate with that of the 6th Army.
If the Soviets lost, the war was not lost as they had plenty of room to retreat further into the hinterland. Their resources in manpower, tanks, war factories, etc., meant they would’ve enventually won the war by sheer weight of numbers.
From the defeat at Stalingrad onward the Germans lost the strategic offensive. The outcome of the war was still up for grabs after the defeat at the gates of Moscow in ‘41, but after Stalingrad , it was all but over. The localized battles at Kursk, D-Day and the Battle of the Bulge were fought when the outcome was no longer in doubt. The loss of the Sixth Army, men and material, was something the Wehrmact never recovered from.
In scope, the Battle of the Bulge did not compare to Stalingrad, not in the number of deaths (38,000 to 1.8 million) or significance. Prior to Stalingrad, the outcome of the war was still in doubt. Prior to the Bulge, there was no question as to the outcome, all it did was waste Germany’s last reserves that could’ve been used to stem the Red Army tide in the east; instead it accelerated their end.
Asker’s Rating:
ME/BF-109 - "Gustav" 5R2 at Frankling Mint: