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

was it possible??
1 posted on 11/18/2004 11:54:01 AM PST by rang1995
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: rang1995

I have a question too.

How many out there would use spellcheck and/or Strunk & White?


2 posted on 11/18/2004 11:54:46 AM PST by RushCrush (I Heart Halliburton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

We got to vote about D-Day? I must of missed that in history class.


3 posted on 11/18/2004 11:55:53 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim (I wanna be like Squantos when I grow up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995; MeekOneGOP
Just a question.How many outhere, if we could do it over again, would vote for invading belgium or holland and cutting off france and their vichey govt(like island hopping)instead of losing all those men on D-day 1944-for France??would you?? could we have (tacticly?)given todays feeling re the french and france

¿¿¿¿¿¿

A moose bit my sister once...


5 posted on 11/18/2004 11:58:01 AM PST by TBarnett34 ("Unnngh!" -John F'n Kerry, 11/2/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

"How many outhere, if we could do it over again, would vote for invading belgium or holland and cutting off france and their vichey govt(like island hopping)instead of losing all those men on D-day 1944-for France??"


While your 'request for vote' has no historical basis, I do understand your question and request that you research Operation Market Garden to see how bloody such an invasion probably would've been.

A large part of the preparation for D-Day was to feign invasions elsewhere, including Belgium and the Netherlands. Actually invading those areas would've been disastrous for the Allies, as the Nazis had defense networks in place for such invasions.


7 posted on 11/18/2004 11:59:03 AM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

France wasn't the reason for WW II. However, they are the definition of ingratitude.


10 posted on 11/18/2004 12:00:21 PM PST by An Old Marine (Freedom isn't Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

Well, considering that my Uncle Richard Hargrove Thoos is still MIA from WWII having been shot down in a B 17 over France, and considering how ungrateful France and Germany are now....... I wonder if he would do it again. Sure he would. But they sure make me ANGRY~

Glenn Beck, God bless him, yesterday was talking about our marine who shot the terrorist the other day. Glenn asked "How many of our soldiers do you think were injured and lay bleeding without any kind of help or care in WWII?" I thought of Richard. It is hard to think of him laying there on the ground, or stuck up in a tree, or whatever happened to him, when his B 17 was shot down. Thank you Glenn Beck for remembering the heroes from WWII.


12 posted on 11/18/2004 12:01:40 PM PST by buffyt (SOB Clinton mocks impeachment blaming Republicans for engaging in politics of personal destruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

No, it was not possible. Not in my estimation. We needed the beaches. Further north in the Netherlands, the coastal areas could all be flooded. The path through Italy had the natural barrier of the Alps. Heavy lift capacity as we have today was non-existent. Uncle Joe was not going to let us use anything in the east.


13 posted on 11/18/2004 12:01:43 PM PST by Petronski (Okay, so today I *am* cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

I have replayed the D-Day invasion several times on my Battlefield 1944 PC game and have found much better ways to defeat the Germans. I find the more effective use of Cruise Missles, Apache Helicopters and A-10 Warthogs would have mad a big difference.


Ike was lame.


15 posted on 11/18/2004 12:03:14 PM PST by socal_parrot (Don't follow me, I'm lost!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

Invading France as a way to get to Germany and ultimately Berlin was a strategic decision. Coming through France allowed us to invade Germany along a broad front, rather than spearhead type invasions, an example of which was Market Garden.


16 posted on 11/18/2004 12:03:18 PM PST by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
It's not like we did it for them. Kicking German asses often involves fighting in France.
18 posted on 11/18/2004 12:04:25 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

In my opinion, it's the American thing to do. If we helped Japan and Germany rebuild after they attempted to destroy us, why wouldn't we liberate a known ally regardless of how unappreciative they might be?


21 posted on 11/18/2004 12:08:11 PM PST by Se7eN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
1. Belgium and Holland are too far from any of the English ports for a fleet to have sailed and landed an invasion force with any hope of surprise.

2. Belgium and Holland are too close to Germany and therefore would be too easy for the Germans to reinforce.

3. An invading force trying to fight their way into Belgium would have had massive German forces in the Pas de Calais region poised on their right flank -- not an appealing prospect.

4. And if that wasn't enough, the supply lines would have been impossibly long and highly vulnerable to being cut on sea and on land.

22 posted on 11/18/2004 12:09:00 PM PST by blau993 (Labs for love; .357 for Security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
Not possible with equipment then at hand.
- Too far from English ports, surprise less likely and support much harder.
- Beach heads could be flooded (many already were)
- Lines of attack would have been narrow and predictable once ashore. This went against the broad front (hit them everywhere) tactic that capitalized on our having more stuff (if not better).
- Too far from fighter bombers.
- German aircraft pulled back for the defense of the Reich would have been available to counter landings.
- The German forces in France and those in reserve in Germany would have both been able to hit us, while our ability to hit their transit lines with our attack aircraft would have been much reduced.
- The Frenchies probably would have attacked us in the back.
23 posted on 11/18/2004 12:11:15 PM PST by SampleMan ("Yes I am drunk, very drunk. But you madam are ugly, and tomorrow morning I shall be sober." WSC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

It is not D-Day that should have been different, but the post-war reconstruction and governmental structure of France that should have changed. I regret every dime spent on reconstruction in certain parts of Europe, although I understand why we had to do it.


24 posted on 11/18/2004 12:11:17 PM PST by Owl558 (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

In fact the tactics of war have changed so much that we would never do D-Day that way again. Even back then, we had the ability to insert special forces (if we had anything that could compare) and bomb our way ashore.

The numbers in which we squandered men in that era (not just us, but all armies) was disgracefull and sad.

At the time this route was thought best, because the Netherlands always ran the risk of getting large numbers of troops drowned if the Germand blew the dikes.


25 posted on 11/18/2004 12:12:43 PM PST by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
Normandy was chosen for tactical and strategic reasons.

Strategic Reason #1: The Germans expected the invasion at Pas de Calais, so they held their reserves in place too long, convinced Normandy was a feint.

Tactical Reason #1: The further west we invaded, the greater the comparative advantage in length of supply lines. Allied Air Supremacy made ground transport difficult for the Germans, so we could pour men and materiel in relatively faster. Invading further east would have given the Germans a definite advantage.
29 posted on 11/18/2004 12:22:03 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS", Fake But Accurate, Experts Say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
Ike and FDR both thought that D-Day was the ONLY way to win. It's called the "western way of war." Meet the enemy head-on and crush him; don't "nibble around the edges." That was Churchill's strategy because he lacked the army to defeat the Nazis.

Both Ike and FDR wanted to go sooner (i.e., 1943) but we lacked sufficient landing craft. Ike couldn't support both the Italian invasion and the D-Day invasion in terms of landing craft, so he settled for the former and lots of bombing.

If we had tried to "island hop" this, the war would have lasted 2 more years.

31 posted on 11/18/2004 12:41:46 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
I can't understand why we invaded France anyway. Weren't we at war with the Nazis in Germany? Why didn't we land on the German coast? Wasn't it the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time? </sarcasm>
32 posted on 11/18/2004 12:54:15 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995
was it possible??

U-Boats and minefields. An attack aimed at Holland would have had to cross the North Sea where losses in transit would have been much higher. The Germans also could have used S-boats and other surface craft against the invasion fleet as the covering force was strung out over a much longer distance.

Ports. The invasion fleet had the advantage of launching from the major ports of Plymouth, Southampton and Portsmouth as well as the smaller ports on the channel. For a move east, there were no comparable ports. Harwich is pretty much it.

The greater distance would have required daylight movement of the ships, with the armada likely seen by German aircraft.

Others have pointed out the difficulties of moving inland from the Dutch beaches. Most of Holland was under German control until after the general surrender at the end of the war.

34 posted on 11/18/2004 3:47:12 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rang1995

37 posted on 11/19/2004 5:32:31 AM PST by Jackknife (.......Land of the Free,because of the Brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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