WWII Combat Stalingrad [13+]

Tags:
WWII Combat Stalingrad Movie

Please wait while the video loads.

 
madhatter
  • Submitter:
    madhatter
  • Visits: 5,490
  • Subscribers: 13
  • Comments: 3
  • Updated: 24-Jul-07
  • Videos: 12
  • Earnings: $0
  • International International
  • Comments: 10
  • Views: 13,764
  • Added: 29-May-06

Clip from the 1993 movie "Stalingrad" (correct me if I'm wrong ). The Battle of Stalingrad was a major turning point in World War II and is arguably the bloodiest battle in recorded history. Total casualties for both sides are estimated to be over two More»

  1. Categories: Entertainment
10 Comments | Add Comment
  • i fought it was omaha

    i fought omaha was the bloodiest battle becuz they named it bloody omaha and the beach water was literally red unless dat was the worst d-day landings

    By proud2bebritish 1155397263 Reply Spam [+1] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • ...

      a little old to be educated in computers??

      By metacafe rules 1156583538 Reply Spam [+1] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • lol

      im only 13 but i know this because of museums ive visited in france and like grandads and stuff and they have told me these things

      By proud2bebritish 1156590217 Reply Spam [+1] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • Really?

      The numbers can be diputed and beaten to death. Yet, the fact remains omaha's casualties where in the 1000s, and that battle lasted "1 day". The battle of Stalingrad lasted over a year, and one casualties where in the 100,000s on the conservative spectrum. At many points the life expectancy of a russian private in Stalingrad dropped below 24 hours. Also you must remember, Stalingrad was a major soviet city filled with civilians, and the city was for the most part, completely destroyed. Omaho was a "bloody" battle, but pales in comparison to the loses suffered during the battle of Stalingrad. (especially those of the Soviets)

      By Dr.tsoda 1181407094 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • I'm from Canton

      Of course Omaha Beach was also the bloodiest area ( described by < Saving Private Ryan > )

      我系广州人

      By wintalker 1158140111 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • About 100,000

    died at Stalingrad, both sides, not 2 million.

    By Colonel Eric 1157557694 Reply Spam [-2] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_S...

      Then I guess Wikipedia has the wrong information?
      "Total casualties for both sides are estimated to be over two million."

      By -madhatter 1157568255 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • It's Wikipedia,

      Wikipedia is replete with wrong information, it is user based.
      Though more than 100,000 could have been killed, estimates go from 100,000 to 1 million, some even higher but there is no justification for that. Thousands of civillians died, and thousands of civilians and soldiers died from exposure or starvation, not from direct battle. Many soldiers went AWOL. On February 2, 1942, Field Marshal von Paulus surrendered, with 23 generals, 2500 other officers and 90,000 soldiers. His entire army only consisted of 300,000 men to begin with. Hard to add up to 2 million. It was a bloody encounter for sure, and definately a turning point.

      By Colonel Eric 1157573859 Reply Spam [-1] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • Interesting....

      Well, I (obviously) am not familiar with the facts from this battle, so thanks for the correction / information : )

      By -madhatter 1157671717 Reply Spam [+2] Moderate Up Moderate Down
    • I am amazed

      I remembered so much about it from a report I did in highschool over 25 years ago. If you see enemy at the gates you will get a good idea of what is whatlike in Stalnigrad, though much of that is fictionalized and dramatized, but it was certainly the old style of warfare. Very cruel and bloody, very crude.

      By Colonel Eric 1157714452 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
10 Comments | Add Comment