Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 37

Thread: D-day

  1. #1
    Patriot Member IliaDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    772

    Default D-day

    So do you consider it a major battle in WW II which had mainly affected the result of the war, or just a smart tactical political move not to lose ( or gain ) more influence in Europe?
    If the sense of the question is not fully clear tell me for more details.
    Last edited by IliaDN; 07-31-2005 at 17:30.

  2. #2

    Default Re: D-day

    i think it was a important battle

  3. #3
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,546

    Default Re: D-day

    I would say that Landing at Normandy was a logigal move for the Western allies.If they would have tryed to punch through Northern Italy and the Alps,it could have turned into catastrophy.They needed more space to deploy their forces and landing in Normandy provided them that space to operate.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  4. #4

    Default Re: D-day

    that sounds true also that was our only choice if wanted to win the war.

  5. #5
    Patriot Member IliaDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    772

    Default Re: D-day

    What I want to know is:
    was that operation really a neccessity?

  6. #6
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,546

    Default Re: D-day

    What i know,Stalin demanded it.I believe that Western front was the secondary in Europe,but if there would been only Eastern front,i think Soviet Union would have been in trouble.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  7. #7
    Patriot Member IliaDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    772

    Default Re: D-day

    Well it was opened when the eastern front was trouble for Germany.
    IMHO that was done not to lose control over Germany after the war.

  8. #8
    agitated Member master of the puppets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    where destruction lay around me from a fight i could not win
    Posts
    1,224

    Talking Re: D-day

    it was not a true neccesity, we would not have lost without it but it was the smartest move at the time, like they said we already had italy and we could have moved through the alps but we would have encountered fierce resistance. in fact most of the german panzers were waiting for an attack on the alps led by general patton. what d-day did was for all intensive purposes was a very big flanking menuever to get around the brunt of the nazi's forces.
    A nation of sheep will beget a a government of wolves. Edward R. Murrow

    Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. —1 John 2:9

  9. #9
    Patriot Member IliaDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    772

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by master of the puppets
    it was not a true neccesity, we would not have lost without it but it was the smartest move at the time, like they said we already had italy and we could have moved through the alps but we would have encountered fierce resistance. in fact most of the german panzers were waiting for an attack on the alps led by general patton. what d-day did was for all intensive purposes was a very big flanking menuever to get around the brunt of the nazi's forces.
    But loses were terrible ... were they?

  10. #10
    Shadow Senior Member Kagemusha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Helsinki,Finland
    Posts
    9,546

    Default Re: D-day

    It was to support the main Russian summer offensive.To tie up German strategic reserves.It needed to be done.I cant really think what could have been a better alternative for western allies.About the casulties,It was very well co-ordinated ambhibious assault.Ofcourse first actual wawes that took the beaches had many casulties,but Allied airforces halted the German counter offensive effectively.
    Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.

  11. #11
    Humanist Senior Member Franconicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Trying to get to Utopia
    Posts
    3,482

    Default Re: D-day

    Sorry, double post!
    Last edited by Franconicus; 08-01-2005 at 08:08.

  12. #12
    Humanist Senior Member Franconicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Trying to get to Utopia
    Posts
    3,482

    Default Re: D-day

    It was not necessary. The threat of a landing would have been enough to keep German troops in France. Not landong in France would have given the chance to conquer Germany without fighting all its armies.
    Pushing through Italy was not the alternative. Plan B was to land in Yugoslavia and the march towards Poland. That was Churchill's idea. It would have met only weak German forces, taken the full strength of allied navies, cut off German Ostfront and liberated Middle Europe.

    The advantages of D Day was that France was liberated earlier and the England did not have to suffer from German attacks that much. Also the backbone of the German airforce was broken. German submarines did not matter much after the landing.

    Quote Originally Posted by IliaDN
    But loses were terrible ... were they?
    Losses were not high, ar least on the allied side. They lost a lot at the landinmg, but in total the losses were much less than at a comparable operation of the Red Army.
    German losses were desastrous, of course.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Senior Member Oaty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    2,863

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by IliaDN
    But loses were terrible ... were they?

    First of all there are no accurate statistic for d-day. ~2300 fatalities and 10,000 wounded on d-day. 1200 of the fatalities occurred at Omaha beach. Utah beach was in much better shape with only 200 fatalities.

    Most of the casualties and fatalities occurred at Omaha beach, due to it recieving the least amount of damage from the infiltration of paratroopers and the preceding bombing raids. Most or all of the big guns were still in tact when the troops were landing there. Also it was probabaly the most natural defensive position out of all the beaches hit.
    When a fox kills your chickens, do you kill the pigs for seeing what happened? No you go out and hunt the fox.
    Cry havoc and let slip the HOGS of war

  14. #14
    Amanuensis Member pezhetairoi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    South of Sabara
    Posts
    2,719

    Default Re: D-day

    D-Day was an operation done as much for political reasons (letting the Allies be seen as liberators instead of fortress-sitters) as for military considerations. It was, I believe, done through a genuine wish to help the Russians in the East. It was necessary from the political sense, and perhaps also from the military perspective as it divided the German forces, though it was less necessary from this point of view. Losses were not as great as feared, and definitely yes, I agree that losses on many Pacific islands were greater perhaps not numerically but at least in terms of proportion of invasion waves. Betio comes to mind as a good example.

    Just my two cents. Gelatinous Cube, Oppenheimer actually said 'I am become Death, shatterer of worlds.' His words... Just so your quote is more accurate. I like that quote, incidentally :)


    EB DEVOTEE SINCE 2004

  15. #15
    Senior Member Senior Member Oaty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    2,863

    Default Re: D-day

    Just imagine D-day if hitler allowed Rommel to take full control of the situation at d-day.
    When a fox kills your chickens, do you kill the pigs for seeing what happened? No you go out and hunt the fox.
    Cry havoc and let slip the HOGS of war

  16. #16
    Clan Takiyama Senior Member CBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,407

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by pezhetairoi
    Just my two cents. Gelatinous Cube, Oppenheimer actually said 'I am become Death, shatterer of worlds.' His words... Just so your quote is more accurate. I like that quote, incidentally :)
    GC's quote is actually correct. Here is a video clip: http://www.atomicarchive.com/Movies/Movie8.shtml and some info about it here: http://www.faktoider.nu/oppenheimer_eng.html

    D-Day itself was not that important as Germany would have fallen anyway. By 1944 it was a losing struggle and it was only a question of time. Germany's industry was being outproduced as well as disrupted by allied air raids and the fuel supply was reaching critical levels as the synthetic fuel production had been nearly wiped out by early summer '44.

    But D-day meant that Stalin didnt get western europe so in that sense it was very important.


    CBR

  17. #17
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    11,128

    Default Re: D-day

    D-Day was a important battle.

    Hitler had his country's economy working at max speed. But the problem was that fuel, necessary for tanks and airplanes, was at critical levels.
    At the end of the war, Hitler had the tanks and airplanes, but had no fuel.

    Romania, as some might realize, was a very important link in the defeat of Hitler.
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to:

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country.

  18. #18
    Lesbian Rebel Member Mikeus Caesar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Ostrayliah
    Posts
    3,590

    Default Re: D-day

    As well as all the other reasons stated here, it also prevented Uncle Stalin from rolling through Germany and into the rest of Western Europe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ranika
    I'm being assailed by a mental midget of ironically epic proportions. Quick as frozen molasses, this one. Sharp as a melted marble. It's disturbing. I've had conversations with a braying mule with more coherence.


  19. #19
    One of the Undutchables Member The Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Nowhere...
    Posts
    11,757

    Default Re: D-day

    d-day was important, becuz it would divert the attention of hitler. it now had to great treats to watch out for. it was also imrtant to free as much of europe before the russians did. cuz everybody knew that once they'd conquered it they sure werent going to hand it back as america did. Russia was a worthy ally for both sides, but even more a dangerous communist threat.

    if d-day wouldnt have taken place, the war would have taken much longer. i dont believe germany would have won. but whe were going to be in syberian death camps.
    after berlin had fallen hitler would have evecuated or commited suicide, but russian wouldnt have stopped fighting. maybe steamroling over switzerland as well.

    if D-day would have failed but did took place, it would have been even more catastropheus (sp?). it would boost the german morale and maybe crack that of stalin, wich i highly doubt. but atleast england wouldnt have been a threat anymore, and he would underestimate america.

    We do not sow.

  20. #20
    One of the Undutchables Member The Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Nowhere...
    Posts
    11,757

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by oaty
    Just imagine D-day if hitler allowed Rommel to take full control of the situation at d-day.
    it would have been an even bigger masacre, possible defeat. wasnt he in berlin celebrating his wife birthday. D-day was a succes mostly due english inteligence and french resistance, and ofcour germany's arrogance.

    We do not sow.

  21. #21
    One of the Undutchables Member The Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Nowhere...
    Posts
    11,757

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by oaty
    First of all there are no accurate statistic for d-day. ~2300 fatalities and 10,000 wounded on d-day. 1200 of the fatalities occurred at Omaha beach. Utah beach was in much better shape with only 200 fatalities.

    Most of the casualties and fatalities occurred at Omaha beach, due to it recieving the least amount of damage from the infiltration of paratroopers and the preceding bombing raids. Most or all of the big guns were still in tact when the troops were landing there. Also it was probabaly the most natural defensive position out of all the beaches hit.
    2300 american fatalities right.?.?

    We do not sow.

  22. #22
    Clan Takiyama Senior Member CBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,407

    Default Re: D-day

    Just so people know what happened on the Eastern front around the time of the fighting in Normandy Operation Bagration


    CBR

  23. #23
    Senior Member Senior Member Oaty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    2,863

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by Emperor Umeu 1
    2300 american fatalities right.?.?

    1400 U.S. fatalities. 1200 at Omaha and 200 at utah. The other 900 were between the Canadian and British forces.
    When a fox kills your chickens, do you kill the pigs for seeing what happened? No you go out and hunt the fox.
    Cry havoc and let slip the HOGS of war

  24. #24
    agitated Member master of the puppets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    where destruction lay around me from a fight i could not win
    Posts
    1,224

    Talking Re: D-day

    well rommel was awaiting a so called 'imminent' attack on the alps. and during D-day hitler was sleeping at the time of invasion and his general;s were afraid to wake him even as the beach was taken. the reason that the menuever worked was rommel was'nt there and hitler was to sleepy to dispach the fuhrers personal panzer division which only answered to him. had they rolled in then the invaders would probably never made it.

    "Losses were not as great as feared"
    what? the losses were greater than feared at the initial assault, the allies were supposed to have tanks to hunker behind but as we all probably know that was a fatal flop.
    A nation of sheep will beget a a government of wolves. Edward R. Murrow

    Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. —1 John 2:9

  25. #25

    Default Re: D-day

    From what I've heard, the first wave of American troops on Omaha suffered 90% casualties. Total German casualties in the Invasion of Normandy, no, the whole Western Front, were a drop in the ocean compared to German causalties in the East.

  26. #26
    One of the Undutchables Member The Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Nowhere...
    Posts
    11,757

    Default Re: D-day

    20 million russian casualties. they should have as much no more honour for ww2 than america. but hollywood claimed it all for itself.

    though to me all were heroes. americans russians british canadian australian, not to forget the polish. a captured country that delivered a million soldiers french marrocan and the rest. those who are to blaim of weaknesses were the goverments.

    all the soldiers are heroes in my eyes and i honour them wenever i can. nomatter ally or axis all exept ofcourse the true bastards (most didnt died in combat) get my sympathy

    We do not sow.

  27. #27
    Amanuensis Member pezhetairoi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    South of Sabara
    Posts
    2,719

    Default Re: D-day

    I stand corrected re: Oppenheimer. He must've misquoted the Bhagavad Gita, then :-P My version of the Gita says 'shatterer'. But that is irrelevant.

    I shudder to consider what might have happened had Rommel been given full control of the strategic armoured reserve. But even as it was, he could not have done much since the Allied air power was destroying systematically every single route Rommel's tanks could take to the front. As it was it arrived two days too late.

    D-day was actually, militarily quite insignificant if you deal purely in terms of strategy. It was important as it minimised the blood-loss of Russia (20 million dead, any slowdown in death rate would be appreciated). Politically it made all the difference, but yes. I would say D-day was not important in the sense that the military historians seem obliged to make it.


    EB DEVOTEE SINCE 2004

  28. #28
    Humanist Senior Member Franconicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Trying to get to Utopia
    Posts
    3,482

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by Grey_Fox
    From what I've heard, the first wave of American troops on Omaha suffered 90% casualties. Total German casualties in the Invasion of Normandy, no, the whole Western Front, were a drop in the ocean compared to German causalties in the East.
    Well, after all, Normandy was the grave for the German sumbarines and the German air force.

  29. #29

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by oaty
    1400 U.S. fatalities. 1200 at Omaha and 200 at utah. The other 900 were between the Canadian and British forces.
    Not bad. Pretty light losses for landing over 100,000 men. I'd take a 2.3% casualty rate in RTW anyday.

  30. #30
    One of the Undutchables Member The Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Nowhere...
    Posts
    11,757

    Default Re: D-day

    Quote Originally Posted by pezhetairoi
    I stand corrected re: Oppenheimer. He must've misquoted the Bhagavad Gita, then :-P My version of the Gita says 'shatterer'. But that is irrelevant.

    I shudder to consider what might have happened had Rommel been given full control of the strategic armoured reserve. But even as it was, he could not have done much since the Allied air power was destroying systematically every single route Rommel's tanks could take to the front. As it was it arrived two days too late.

    D-day was actually, militarily quite insignificant if you deal purely in terms of strategy. It was important as it minimised the blood-loss of Russia (20 million dead, any slowdown in death rate would be appreciated). Politically it made all the difference, but yes. I would say D-day was not important in the sense that the military historians seem obliged to make it.
    The mopst important reason was to stop russia from getting west europe i think.

    GC

    dont forget Tarawa.

    We do not sow.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO