STALINGRAD was the most important battle of WWII!

However, I still contend that the Battle of Kursk held more significance. I admit that the Battle of Stalingrad allowed the Soviet Union to save their oil (though not Maikop, which remained in German hands until early 1943) [1]. However, Germany's situation was not yet so desperate that it needed the oil. Following the battle of Stalingrad, the Red Army went on the offensive. However, it overextended itself and left Germany with a good position to counter-attack. Now, my opponent has conceded that the Battle of Kursk was the largest tank battle in World War II. This could hardly be the case if Germany was as weak as my opponent implied it was. In fact, there is substantial evidence demonstrating that Germany was stronger in 1943 than in 1942. Firstly, we encounter the problem of using Wikipedia as a source. The Germans did not suffer 850,000 casualties at Stalingrad. Total Axis losses, which includes Romanians, Italians, and Hungarians as well as Germans, numbered 800,000 [2]. In 1942, Germany produced 5,700 medium and light tanks. In 1943, this number soared to 11,900 [3]. Additionally, from 1942 to 1943, production of German planes doubled, and ammunition had increased three-fold [3]. Furthermore, the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe were also gaining power. The former received Tiger, King Tiger, and Panther tanks, as well as the new Ferdinand self-propelled gun, and the latter gained the Focke-Wolfe 190A Fighter and the Henschel 129 [3]. Lastly, with no second front in the West, Germany stationed more and more of its troops in Russia. By summer of 1943, it had 2/3 of its army there [3]. Clearly, in 1943, Germany was still at the height of its power. A German victory at Kursk would have meant several things. 1. Germany would have regained the offensive in the Eastern Front. It is entirely possible that Germany could have turned the tide back in their favour despite their defeat at Stalingrad. 2. The Russians would have been demoralised. It must be remembered that Russia was already upset with the Western Allies for not opening a second front in the West. Had Germany prevailed at Kursk, any relationship between the Soviet Union and the Western Allies would have shattered [2]. 3. The Germans, on the other hand, would have been reinvigorated. They would have won a significant victory, regained the offensive, and seen the collapse of an alliance between the West and the Soviet Union. Hitler himself stated that a victory at Kursk would "shine like a beacon to the world" [4]. 4. Germany's power would have remained supreme. The Battle of Kursk, aside from being the largest tank battle, was also the day that saw the single most casualties with regard to aerial combat [5]. Furthermore, as Dennis Showalter notes in his book, Armor and Blood: The Battle of Kursk: The Turning Point of World War II, the Soviets had neither "the Germans' sophisticated air-ground liason system nor the Luftwaffe's smoothly working maintenance capacities" [6]. 5. An often-overlooked point is that the Battle of Kursk convinced Hitler that his generals were incompetent [7]. As a result of Germany's defeat, Hitler began making more and more decisions (and, as history has shown, Hitler was not the greatest military general ever). Had Germany won, their generals and strategists would have continued planning rather than Hitler. 6. As a result of losing the Battle of Kursk, Germany alone suffered around 500,000 casualties (not counting tanks or planes) [3]. Though this is likely fewer than Stalingrad, it is still a significant force. Soviet casualties are unknown, but they are estimated to be higher than German ones. Had Germany triumphed, it likely would have lost fewer men and thus have had more manpower to resume an offensive on the Eastern Front. The Battle of Kursk was Germany's last major offensive on the Eastern Front. Had they triumphed, it is both possible and likely that they would have continued their rampage through Russia. Though Germany did not possess the resources to force Russia into a surrender in 1943, at the very least (the bare minimum), it would have delayed Russian operations for several months. After Kursk, Germany never again had an opportunity to triumph in the Eastern Front. I ask for evidence that the reason Turkey didn't enter the war was because of the German defeat at Stalingrad. I await my opponent's responses! [1] . http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...[2] . http://www.columbia.edu... [3] . http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...[4] . http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com...[5] . http://www.thedailybeast.com...; [6] Dennis Showalter. Armor and Blood: The Battle of Kursk: The Turning Point of World War II. New York. Random House. 2013. Print. [7] . http://www.battleofkursk.org...