Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why D-Day was the most ambitious military operation
The Times Online ^ | June 04 2004 | Michael Evans

Posted on 06/04/2004 9:30:51 AM PDT by knighthawk

No operation in the history of warfare has ever matched the sheer scale and achievement of Operation Overlord, the D-Day landings in Normandy on June 6 1944, according to historians and military specialists.

Had D-Day failed to achieve its objective, it could have taken two more years to plan a similar campaign, even if there was the political and military will to try again.

In the intervening period, the experts said, the Americans would have switched their efforts to the war with Japan, the Soviet Army would have taken on the main battle with the Germans on the ground in Europe and, if successful, would have advanced further west across the Continent, increasing Moscow’s influence, political muscle, and territorial occupation, once Germany was defeated.

Without the foothold in Europe, the Allies would not have overrun Hitler’s deadly V2 rocket bases, laying open the south of England to an increasing number of attacks.

"It is just possible that Hitler would have been left in possession of much of his conquered territory in Western Europe, Norway, France and the Benelux countries, and even have developed the atomic bomb," Major-General Julian Thompson said.

General Thompson, who 38 years after D-Day commanded the landings on the Falkland Islands in 1982 ("tiny by comparison"), said: "The landing at Normandy was an astonishing event not only in terms of its scale but also the huge planning involved. It was the most stupendous enterprise in the history of warfare."

Aryeh Nusbacher, senior lecturer on war studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, said: "It was an operation of staggering complexity. The invasion of Sicily [in 1943] was another major event, but it was not on the same scale, the opposition was slim and, unlike the Channel, the tides in the Mediterranean were predictable."

Looking back over history, he said that the battle of Marathon in 492 BC when 25,000 Persians landed on the Plain of Marathon in Greece and were defeated by an army from Athens about one third the size, was of huge significance.

But the combination of factors which made the D-Day landings successful, he said, placed the operation at the pinnacle of all military campaigns.

However, despite the lengthy planning behind Operation Overlord, begun by Lieutenant-General Frederick Morgan, Chief of Staff to the Supreme Allied Commander, in late 1942 and early 1943, both Winston Churchill and General Dwight Eisenhower, the Supreme Commander, had their doubts that it would work.

Eisenhower even scribbled in pencil on a scrap of paper the words he would use to announce the failure of Overlord. He wrote them on the evening of June 5 1944 (although in error he dated it July 5).

He wrote: "Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone."

Laurie Milner, historian at the Imperial War Museum, said: "The British and Americans had never tried anything on this scale before, but they had luck with them. Because of the extraordinary deception operation [mounted by MI5 and the Double Cross Committee], the Germans had been fooled into thinking the invasion would come at the Pas de Calais, the shortest journey across the Channel. The weather was also so bad that the Germans never considered the Allies would cross at that time."

As a result, he said, Hitler was asleep until noon on D-Day - none of his divisions could move without his personal approval; Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was back in Berlin celebrating his wife’s 50th birthday; and at some of the key landing beaches chosen for Overlord, the German 716th Infantry Division, consisting largely of captured Poles and Russians removed from prisoner-of-war camps to fight for Germany, had neither the fighting skills nor the motivation to take on the Allied expeditionary force. Mr Milner said they also ran out of guns and ammunition.

The airborne landings prior to the arrival of the armada of warships and landing craft also succeeded in confusing the Germans.

Mr Milner said that the troops who landed by parachute and gliders from the British 6th Airborne Division and the American 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions were "scattered like confetti", failing to land at many of the precise points outlined in the invasion plan.

"As a result it was a problem for the Allies, but it was also a problem for the Germans because they didn’t know what was going on, with paratroopers landing all over the place; they must have thought the airborne landings were on an even grander scale," Mr Milner said.

When Field Marshal Bernard "Monty" Montgomery, the overall land commander initially, had been shown the plan for Overlord, drawn up by General Morgan, he realised the proposed landings were too narrow.

He increased the number of beaches - Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword - and expanded the invasion force, proposing five seaborne divisions, two American, two British and one Canadian.

Omaha proved the bloodiest and the most disastrous landing. Mr Milner said Omaha was "a natural shooting gallery" for the German defenders who were also battle-seasoned troops and they raked the landing American soldiers with machinegun fire. There were more than 2,000 casualties at Omaha.

By the end of June 6, the Allies had suffered 10,200 casualties, 2,500 of which were fatal. But most of the objectives of the Allied commanders had been met, surpassing all expectations. Eisenhower forgot about the scrap of paper in his pocket with his "in case of failure" message.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dday

1 posted on 06/04/2004 9:30:51 AM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MizSterious; rebdov; Nix 2; green lantern; BeOSUser; Brad's Gramma; dreadme; Turk2; keri; ...

Ping


2 posted on 06/04/2004 9:31:09 AM PDT by knighthawk (Some people say that we'll get nowhere at all, let 'em tear down the world but we ain't gonna fall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

D-Day 60th-anniversary events in Normandy

(CP) - A look at some of the events planned to commemorate the 60th anniversary of D-Day on June 6.

Canadian services: The main services will be held at Juno Beach in Normandy, where Prime Minister Paul Martin is to pay tribute to Canadian soldiers who landed on the eight-kilometre stretch of sand. The Juno Beach Centre at Courseulles-Sur-Mer is the focus of the service, but other towns are also planning events. Neighbouring Bernieres-Sur-Mer is holding a ceremony at the Canadian monument at Place du Canada, and in the evening will hold a street dinner for returning veterans. On June 5, Anguerny will dedicate its square to Capt. Michel Gauvin, who was decorated for his service during the Battle of Normandy.

British services: A series of commemorative events are scheduled, including tentative plans for a reconstruction of the landings by the Royal Navy at Asnelles. In Caen, the Royal Marines will conduct a military parade at city hall square and Allied war ships will be docked in the harbour. The Queen and Prime Minister Tony Blair are scheduled to attend D-Day services.

American services: The official American ceremony will be held at Pointe-du-Hoc, with President George W. Bush scheduled to attend. Among the events planned over the weekend are a reconstruction of the 4th Infantry Division's military camp, where an open-air dinner will be held.

French services: The main D-Day service to recognize all the Allied landings on June 6 will be held in Arromanches-les-Bains, where French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder are scheduled to be in attendance. Russian President Vladimir Putin will also attend the main commemoration services, a significant move because it represents a changing view in Moscow of the importance of D-Day, something the Soviet Union had played down in the past because of its emphasis on the Red army's role in defeating the Nazis. An evening fireworks display is planned,one of several that will light up the night skies across Normandy over the weekend

More details: The official commemmoration website is at www.normandiememoire.com

http://www.canada.com/winnipeg/story.asp?id=F9653D46-7E9E-4F9E-8E0B-095724986167


3 posted on 06/04/2004 9:37:32 AM PDT by knighthawk (Some people say that we'll get nowhere at all, let 'em tear down the world but we ain't gonna fall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Indeed.

I would add the French Resistance movements that had been activated through coded messages would have been wiped out by the German forces, freed from fighting in the Allied beachheads, and these movements had taken as much as 4 years to build. A second invasion on 1945 or 1946 would probably not have benefited from surprise, and the guerrilla actions Eisenhower likened to the action of 15 infantry divisions would not have taken place.

And so many good men would have been lost...
4 posted on 06/04/2004 9:37:36 AM PDT by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Operation Barbarossa was pretty ambitious. Too ambitious, as it turned out...
5 posted on 06/04/2004 9:42:34 AM PDT by Seydlitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk

Have to say that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was more ambitious.
Overlord was riskier however. Had the Germans detected the invasion fleet from the air or on radar and brought up their reserve panzers we may have never gotten off the beach. The resulting disaster would have set the war effort back a year or two, giving Germany time to develop it's nuke and get more jet fighters in the air.


6 posted on 06/04/2004 9:42:53 AM PDT by ProudVet77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Hard to argue with the basic premise but The Inchon Invasion, September 1950 -- Overview and Selected Images was pretty impressive.
7 posted on 06/04/2004 10:00:52 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson