but one could make a case for that occurring in many land battles as well. The U-boats were often engaged by destroyers, bombers, and even escort carriers during the war.Īnd now, yes, one can make the point that the Battle of the Atlantic was not a continuous line of engagements. Bismarck was sent out hunt convoys, sank the Hood and was then sunk under the fire of two British battleships, a pair of cruisers and taking torpedoes from at least two of the British warships (including Rodney). And in this, the Battle of the Atlantic did carry that of intent with the German intent being to starve Great Britain, and it DID include engagements between warships on both sides. But sea battles are still battles and will still have many of the same base ideas as used in land warfare. There were raids on opposing lines to maintain some intelligence and the Soviets launched offensives to try and push the Germans back or at least open a land route to Leningrad that wouldn't melt at the end of winter, and a lot of this continued on until 1944 when the Red Army was able to fully push the Germans away from the city.Īnd yes, the Battle of the Atlantic was a naval battle, and if you're looking only at land battles, that difference would stand. But this doesn't mean there was no fighting there. Thus, the Germans settled to try and starve the Soviets out there. At the same time, attention was starting to also shift back toward Moscow, and would soon mean that the strike forces Germany would need to storm Leningrad would soon be leaving. And by the time that German forces were finally approaching Leningrad from the south, and Finnish forces approaching the 1939 border from the north, the fighting in Kiev had occurred and German commanders were somewhat nervous about fighting IN a major city. This hurt their ability to advance the further east they moved. German logistics in WW2 were never great, and as their war expanded into the east, they became a nightmare. it's just different from one where a position is intended to be taken by storm, often because the defenses are either judged to be too strong or the attacking force has other things going on that changes their priorities regarding how a position is to be taken.Īnd that is sort of what happened with Leningrad. And in this, a siege is a type of battle. A battle is going to be any sort of conflict between military forces with each side having specific intents in those engagements. Sam Nary Ouais - Just because something is a 'siege,' that does not mean it wasn't a battle. Suggest a correction in the comments below.

Pendant que nous chantons la MarseillaiseĬontributed by Lincoln F.

Tombent sanglants c'est le dernier combat

Verdun on ne passe pas