D-Day Question

Thirdly, the Belgians had their own formidable defence line, which the Germans first tackled with a first class glider assault!

Interesting site at:
http://www.wwiitechpubs.info/bunker/ft-bl/belgian-fortifications-ftr.html

No.9

 

framert, the plan to clear Italy and continue to Vienna and into Germany that route was Churchill’s proposal. This was also to have the effect of limiting the Soviet incursion into Europe and leave Germany nervous to the extent of paranoia about a further cross Channel invasion or through Norway. i.e. They would be fighting the Soviets in the east, a second front in the south, while having to maintain defence on the west and north west which might be attacked at any time.

However, US wanted to invade from the west.

No.9

 

*bump*

 

Hi,
I think that one of the questions was, Do you think that it would of saved lives? My own personnel thought on this is 'No' I think that it would of cost a lot more British lives as it would of eneded up as trench warfare again and everyone knows that the cost in lives of the Great War was way too many and for nothing. The war might not of taken so long to be over as none of the countries involved could afford the loss of so many men again. I don't know the actual figures for casualities on 'D Day' but i think that it is a lot lower than if it had stayed as a trench war in France and Belguim.

Mike

 

The total amount of casualties on June 6th 1944 in Normandy suffered by the Allies wasn't bigger than 5.000 men. Compared to 37.000 killed on July 1st 1916 at the Somme and taking into account the very different strategic results they both produced...

 

Hi Freddie,
Actually 19000 killed and 57000 total British casualties on 1st July 1916.
Still WAY too many though.

Regards,

Gordon

 

I dont Know if this the location correct of this post. I find this document by means The Library of Congress of EEUU.
This is the reproduction of the order of the D-Day, 6/June/1944

General Dwight D. Eisenhower's Order of the Day (1944)

 

Jan7,

You were so helpful in assisting me to post a document to the forum, and today I find that I missed that you had posted it back in August!

http://www.ww2f.com/attachments/wwi...ts-d-day-letter-frm-gen-eisenhower-100dpi.jpg

Thanks again.

Re the discussion. I agree that the alternative would have been trench warfare.

As to the French staving off the Germans inititally. The Allied countries had economic problems prior to World War II, their populace generally remembered the horrific losses of World War I and hoped to avoid war - so there had certainly not been the will to allocate funding towards the build up of armament or forces. There was the hope that appeasement would work, an attitude of we don't want war, and if we don't have the means, it won't happen. As Fredd said...generals are prepared to win the last war, and why change a winning strategy. Ironically, it was the improvement of the WWI innovation, the tank, that gave the Germans the edge at the beginning of the war. It was also their nemesis later, when their lack of ready access to oil supplies would restrict their ability to fully utilize the tank. It was the same supply problem that slowed down the Allied advance post D-Day when they didn't have full use of the port of Antwerp. Eisenhower was forced to make choices then between proposed actions based on who would be allocated the fuel available. Once the Scheldt Estuary was cleared, and supplies were able to be offloaded at a higher rate the Allies advance accelerated.

Michelle

 

France & Britan COULD have fended off the German attack in 1940 had the Germans stuck to their original invasion plan. The original plan called Fall Gelb had alot of same elements of the original 1914 Schlieffen plan. Fall Gelb called for the main weight of the attack to through Belgium and into Northern France but its objectives were even more modest than the Schlieffen plan. Had it not been for a Luftwaffe officer by the name of Reinberger, who was carrying the Fall Gelb plans with him when the plane he was in crashed on Belgian soil, the Germans would have executed Fall Gelb and maybe things would have been different. The plans now in the hands of the allies, Hitler asked for new plans to be drawn up and hence - the Manstein plan which led to the German victory.

 

I guess that just shows how fragile the Allied plan was. I have understood the Allied never went for the Offensive map/plan they caught, so on their side nothing was changed. Then again with decent bomber/fighter plane numbers the Axis attack could have been stopped by blowing up the ( german built ) bridges crossing the Meuser river?

 

Considering that the Allied planners completely anticipated the former German plan of attack and positioned their units accordingly, France would probably have beaten Germany if the French invasion hadn't been delayed.

Or, if that Allied officer hadn't been shot down carrying a map of Allied unit positioning...*sigh*. Hitler got so lucky.

Unfortunately, the Germans completely changed their plans after their delay.

 

thats a laugh, the French beating the Germans? no way. Maybe in WWI, not WWII.

 

If only there was bombers to destroy the German pontoon etc bridges over Meuse river the panzers would not get over to make the Sichelschnitt operation towards the coast. If that happened then there would only be the German forces attacking through Holland-Belgium and the campaign would be similar to WW1 battles.

RAF History - Bomber Command 60th Anniversary

 

France failed in WW 2 due to two primary causes:

1. Their military doctrine, and by extension, organization, training, leadership, etc., was extremely poor. This led Germany's initial success in their invasion of France in 1940.

2. The German advance rate was such that unlike WW 1 the French had no time to effectively adapt to German techinques and doctrine before they were defeated.

If you look a the French campaign after the Germans reached the coast and after Dunkirk when the Germans began to advance South into the heart of France the French army did adapt very effectively to German tactics. The problem was that by then the Germans had already defeated the bulk of the French army and what remained could do little more than delay the inevidable.

 

you know what if the Germans lauched bombers when D-Day occured? and they bombed the beaches where the Allies were?

 

On D-day itself, the vaulted Luftwaffe made a total of two (2) sorties over the beaches in the form of a pair of Me 109Gs that made a strafing pass down some of the British beaches.

 

POS, what exactly do you define as "bombed"?

 

carpet bombing, fly overhead dropping bombs.

 

The Luftwaffe didn't really have a carpet bombing capability and even if they did on an area the size of the invasion beaches they would probably hurt their own chaps.

 

true, unless they did it after the Allies had secured the beaches.