Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Overlord" Circa 1942/43

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    As most of us have come to the decision that invading in 43 would not be a good idea and I can assume that Allied command thought the same as they never tried it. Would they have gone somewhere else? How about Norway probably they had enough force to capture it is they really wanted. Could have put pressure on Denmark forced Germany to move troops to defend against future landing maybe even put in a few raids. Possible put pressure on Sweden to join the allies and stab Finland in the back. Were they still in the fight then?

    Could the allies have invaded Southern France as it did not seem to be as heavily defend though with Italy still occupied. I am assuming a summer offensive would it mean a quick withdrawal from Italy by the Germans or a quick retreat from southern France.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by freightshaker
      ...The Russians attained victories the Western Allies could only dream about, Operation Bagration for example. The Russians also did this without overwhelming air superiority. By late 44' the Russian military was a well oiled machine and by the end of the war was on par, if not better in some areas, than the Western Allies. The only thing Overlord really did was keep Western Europe on our side of the Iron Curtain.
      Quite true. In fact, one might even speculate that a failure of Overlord in 1943 would have only hastened the defeat of Germany. Landings in France would have forced the mass transfer of very large panzer and infantry reserves from the east and probably would have led to the cancellation of Citadelle. With the reduced strength in Russia, Manstein may not have been able to delay the Soviet offensives in the summer and a breakthrough may have occurred earlier, with the Russians advancing further. This would have put Russia in a better position for their 1944 summer offensive which, as events would show, was more than capable of shattering the German front. Red Army operational and strategic art was far more developed than either the western allies or Nazi Germany by the spring of 1944.
      The Purist

      Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by kme37158
        Could the allies have invaded Southern France as it did not seem to be as heavily defend though with Italy still occupied. I am assuming a summer offensive would it mean a quick withdrawal from Italy by the Germans or a quick retreat from southern France.
        Somewhere around here is a thread that covered this and other options for invasion. The biggest sticking points was the fact that the allies had no choice but to set their targets for invasion within range of their land based air support. A landing aimed at southern France in 1943 would have have been exposed to large and damaging raids by the Luftwaffe (Salerno showed some of the potential, even though it was oppossed by allied fighters). Any troops that got ashore would have been hemmed in by reserves until the Germans had driven off the fleet, then they could have destroyed the pocket at their leisure.
        The Purist

        Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Fattony
          I don't think Churchill and De Gaulle would have allowed the US to use nuclear bombs so close to their home countries. I doubt the US would have been able to keep the bombs a secrete until just before one of them was dropped. Niether leader cared about Japan, but the thought of a nuclear weapon going off in their backyard might shake 'em up a little.
          You must keep in mind that the effects of nuclear radiation etc were not really studied by that time. It was only clear that a fission bomb was extremely destructive. Only research well after the end of WW2 made the enourmous damage done by radiation clear.
          Thus at that time the use of the nuke would not have gotten more resistancethen the bombing of Dresden.
          "A platoon of Chinese tanks viciously attacked a Soviet harvester,
          which was peacefully working a field near the Soviet-Chinese border.
          The harvester returned fire and upon destroying the enemy
          returned to its home base."

          Comment


          • #50
            Personally, I think the most promising goal of invasion if Overlord would have failed would have been (as Churchill though) Yugoslavia. It was close enough to Italy for efficient air support and some beaches would have been suitable for the task. The only problem I see is in the fact that Yugoslavia was a preety mountaneous area. However, the Allies would have been able to count on great resistance assistance (for example, the partisan force counted over 800.000 people in 1945, allthough im not sure if this also counts doctors and such).
            "Beneath its gilded beauty, though, there lies a poorly designed game which rewards the greedy and violent, and punishes the hardworking and honest; and if you think about it, that's a good representation of capitalism" - Nightfreeze about Eve Online

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by mr_clark
              You must keep in mind that the effects of nuclear radiation etc were not really studied by that time. It was only clear that a fission bomb was extremely destructive. Only research well after the end of WW2 made the enourmous damage done by radiation clear.
              Thus at that time the use of the nuke would not have gotten more resistancethen the bombing of Dresden.
              I don't know too much about what the scientists of the Manhattan Project thought the after effects of a bomb like that would be. but i gotta think they would have had some idea about them being hazardous.
              I dare do all that may become a man; who dares more is none. - Macbeth

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Fattony
                I don't know too much about what the scientists of the Manhattan Project thought the after effects of a bomb like that would be. but i gotta think they would have had some idea about them being hazardous.
                Hmmm maybe. Whilst the dangers of radiation were well known, I'm not so sure whether the effect of fallout and the potential long-term contamination of targeted areas were realised.
                Signing out.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Full Monty
                  Hmmm maybe. Whilst the dangers of radiation were well known, I'm not so sure whether the effect of fallout and the potential long-term contamination of targeted areas were realised.
                  Considering some of the "questionable" experiments that took place with live troops during the late 40's and 50's, I'd have to agree.
                  If you can't set a good example, be a glaring warning.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by freightshaker
                    ... The Russians attained victories the Western Allies could only dream about, ....
                    ... numbers though is really where it was ...

                    You might rephrase the sentence to read: "The Russians attained victories the Western Allies would have nightmares about for years to come ..." in light of the casualties they suffered, that I doubt any other western nation would be willing to pay for.
                    [... I am trying to learn], in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. Phil.4:11

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Michael K
                      ... numbers though is really where it was ...

                      You might rephrase the sentence to read: "The Russians attained victories the Western Allies would have nightmares about for years to come ..." in light of the casualties they suffered, that I doubt any other western nation would be willing to pay for.
                      It's true of the Germans and Japanese too. Very generally the more democratic the nation, the less casualties are tolerated. For the British 'The Somme' still has resonance today because of the perceived excessive and unnecessary casualty rate.
                      Signing out.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        A lot of good points made here.

                        One of the reasons Overlord took place when it did was the availability of landing craft. Had the invasion taken place 1-2 years earlier, it would have had to be smaller and/or less well equipped due to the haul capability of the landing craft available.
                        Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
                        Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


                        "Never pet a burning dog."

                        RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
                        http://www.mormon.org
                        http://www.sca.org
                        http://www.scv.org/
                        http://www.scouting.org/

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X