OPERATION OVERLORD A FAILURE

If "Overlord" had failed, the Allies would not have given up. There would have been a major reshuffle at the top of the ladder, Ike would go, and mybe a few others, but mainly as (unfortunately) scapegoats for the failure.

The failure would give the Germans time to fix any noticed shortcomings in their defences and probalby another year at least to do it in.

Chances are the Allies would go for southern France. The defences and troops were not that strong and once the landings had been achieved they could then swing round into northern Italy to break the deadlock there, while cutting up the centre of France towards Paris. This would cut off any German forces in western France from their supply lines.

It would take longer, and cost more men but ultimately the end result would be the same.

The US and Britain would certainly not give up bombing Germany or plans for another invasion.

If they did, quite possibly Stalin might opt for a ceasefire and eventual peace treaty, if things turned bad for the Russian Army due to the movement of additional German forces fromt he Atlantic Wall to the Eastern front.

Stalin was always asking about the "Second Front" and if it failed, well, he may have decided to go it alone, and look after himself.

_____________________

"I hope we may say thus,this fateful morning, came to an end all wars" David Lloyd George, 11th November 1918

 

Sniper is correct.

An invasion in Southern France would have been tried next as the main one then. But I would have happened very, very late. Because by this time the Red Army would have conquested half Germany already. Because the Western allies would have needed months of planning and supplying to launch the invasion and then a lot of time to reach the German border...

 

I think perhaps that Overlord would have failed if instead of repelling an Allied landing the German forces concentrated more on a concentrated thrust at the forces upon landing. The Germans spread their forces out along the coast of France thereby not being at full force at any one place. The superior numbers of the Allied landing force overmatched the thin German defenses.... Any thoughts...??

 

Hello Captain America,

yes, I think that could have made the difference, but Hitler was not convinced this was the actual landing so he did not let all the troops move in to throw them into the sea.Hitler was waiting for the "real thing" to happen at Calais in a few day´s time. So The allied had time to bring their troops and tanks to the main land.

Don´t know if this would have changed much in the end though if all the German reserves would have been brought to Normandy as soon as possible, as the allied planes gave the troop movements some hard times. Yet not as much as was thought, until the Falaise pocket as Germans were rushing in the roads and planes could see them clearly and make total waste of them. Maybe it was better to have some forces behind the lines and let the allied bomb "emptier" lines, though this was not planned by Hitler.

The were two lines of thinking here that I´ve read. One by von Rundstedt that the landing should be let happen and after a few days the allied forces destroyed by a massive attack of german troops. Rommel believed that the landing should be ended on the beaches, and not inland.There´s been talk that the different views of these two gentlemen might have puzzled Hitler and that´s why he could not make his mind up how to react when the D-day arrived or for some days afterwards. He also was convinced that it would be Calais where the real D-day would happen.

 

It was von Rundstedt's view to which i was referring. Its obvious that repelling the attack at the beach didn't work so would a large counter-attack a day or two after the intial landing have more success..?? Interesting question i believe...

Thanks for your informative posting Kai...

 

Who would you pick?: (ther has already been a thread about this)



-Strong mobile defences in the inland
-Weak defences on the beaches
-Encirclement and destruction of the invading forces in a German Kesselschlacht.



-Strong defence on the beaches
-Not so strong mobile units as close as possible to the beaches
-Immediate counterattack, to repell the invasion

Hitler obviosuly took the worst of both plans:

-Weak defences on the beaches
-Not so strong mobile forces, not close of the beach

I have always had the opinion that Von Runstedt's plan was far better than Rommel's. He was a better general, but a very conservative one. With an annihilation battle inland, fortification of beaches all over the place at a tremendous expense is not necessary, it doesn't matter where the invasion is going to be, you are going to destroy it inland i a battlefield chosen by yourself. Throwing them back at sea would be far cheaper for the ones who attack. Imagine five Omahas and a Panzer immediate counter attack. 10.000 Allied casualties and they could possibly try it again. But if you do what Von Runstedt said you give the Western Allies a Kiev. The master of annihilation battles could surround and destroy some 100.000 Allied troops or so. A price so bloody high that the Allies are not willing to afford.

But in the circumstances of summer 1944 Rommel's strategy was the one to use. All mobile forces available were needed desperately in the East, you can't afford the luxury of playing an enormous Blitzkrieg and a Kesselschlacht in the West when the menace is at the other front. It would be a waste of resources, needed elsewhere. Beside, you cannot surround the Allied Army because of two things: 1, total enemy-air-supperiority, you can't move and 2, your mobile forces are not that mobile. First, they are not enough forces, second, they are not mostly regular units, but 2nd class... The only thing to do is to repell the invasion at the very beaches with an immediate counterattack. If the conditions would have been more favourable for the Germans, then of course Von Runstedt could give Ike and Monty what the 70-year-old field marshall knew how to do as well as any other... Just remember those 750.000 men in Kiev and 350.000 in Dunkirk...