header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: OT - D-Day, what if?

 (Read 9962 times)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71514
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #56 on: June 07, 2019, 08:23:24 AM »
The notion that Hitler had Jewish relatives way back was largely discounted over the years, as I recall.  I don't think there is support for it.

As for Monty, the British people had suffered defeat and bad news almost continuously since 1939.  They needed a hero, and Monty was annointed.  He was sacrosanct and he knew it.  There is an old saying that the British lose every battle except the last one, which is hyperbole with a grain of truth in it.

The loss of Singapore in 1942 was a huge hit for British morale along with the BB and BC sent to support it in December 1941.  Only Churchill could have held them together.


MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #57 on: June 07, 2019, 08:25:28 AM »
What if Hitler had won and had killed all the Jews.  Who would have been in the cross-hairs next? 
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
-Martin Niemoller


Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2019, 08:35:42 AM »
The loss of Singapore in 1942 was a huge hit for British morale along with the BB and BC sent to support it in December 1941.  Only Churchill could have held them together.


Churchill was indeed a great statesman but fired much better generals than that little lemur.Singapore was a huge hit.Percival surrender 81,000 men to 34,000 Japanese that were basically out of ammo.But at the time he couldn't know it.The IJF were poised to move on Australia it self until the Battles of the Coral Sea and Midway.Naval Intelligence had broke JN 25 - IJN code.The Dunkirk retreat left Britain with nothing but slingshots practically equipmant wise.Fortunately for the Crown the emerging wold power could keep them supplied.Lugging men,material,food,fuel,planes,provisions 4,255 miles to western England
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 09:00:04 AM by MrNubbz »
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #59 on: June 07, 2019, 09:00:19 AM »
About what German cities were left to bomb by spring of 1945, Dresden came up.  One of my colleagues at Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth was a civilian PhD-type named Michael Pearlman.  He died a couple of years ago.  He had been working on a book (I don't know if he finished it or not) about the final Soviet offensive and he came to the conclusion that the Dresden bombing was not just a demonstration of frightfulness, or of Western Air Power to intimidate Stalin, but a legitimate military operation to aid an ally.  Dresden was a transportation hub, and it was on the left flank of Marshal Konev's axis of advance from Breslau to Berlin.  Its transportation links needed to be destroyed, and they were.
A lot of the bad odor surrounding the Dresden bombing started the British historian John Irving, who would turn out eventually to be a Holocaust denier.  He took casualty figures from East German sources, who had taken them from Nazi propaganda sources.  The actual number was multiplied by something like 10.  Kurt Vonnegutt also played a role in this, by spouting the same numbers, and having "street cred" of having been an eyewitness.  The historian Stephen Sears used the same figures in his American Heritage Junior Library book Air War Against Hitler's Germany, which I probably read 10 times back in junior high and high school.

I can't find it right now, but I've read that the US/UK asked the Russians about Eastern German bombing targets that would be helpful and/or got an "ok" from the Russians to bomb Dresden. 

The Russians probably had more tanks than the whole rest of the world combined (and the T34 was WAY better than the Sherman) and they also had a massive tactical air force but they had nothing resembling a strategic air force and their Navy wouldn't have lasted an hour against even the UK's fleet which, by that time, was vastly smaller than the US fleet. 

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #60 on: June 07, 2019, 09:04:14 AM »
Hitler's views were somewhat clearly spelled out in his book (which I once tried to read, it's not readable).  Anyone who was not "Aryan" was in trouble with Hitler.  It's interesting that he was allied with the Japanese, but I suppose they were "over there" and welcome to it. 

The Nazi's declared the Japanese to be "honorary aryans" as their way to square this circle.  It should also be noted that the Japanese were just as racist as the Nazi's so this issue cut both ways. 

When Japan humiliated the Brits in Singapore the German Foreign Minister wanted to make a big propaganda deal out of it but Hitler wouldn't allow it.  For Hitler it was an embarrassment that the obviously non-aryan Japanese had dispatched the obviously aryan Brits. 

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71514
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #61 on: June 07, 2019, 09:16:27 AM »
 Maybe the most remarkable thing to me about WW II is how the Brits hung in there after Dunkquerque.  They were in serious trouble.  Hitler was going to offer very generous terms.  Churchill's refusal to even discuss anything infuriated Hitler and may have contributed to mistakes he made later in the war.

Imagine a lesser "normal" leader of GB at the time.  You keep everything you wanted, you eliminate the possibility of invasion and bombing (at least shorter term), you keep your colonies, you don't really lose anything but "face" and of course you'd be confronted with a potentially hostile Europe down the road.  Invasion would have seriously damaged the English countryside and cities.  They had very little armor, all their good heavy equipment had been left behind.  The Germans seemed as unstoppable as Napoleon a few decades back.  Your only assets were the Channel, the Navy, and an air arm that was hanging by a thread, and radar.  The US was more than two years out.

German submarines posed a real danger of actual starvation down the road.  I think most of us would have negotiated, I would have.


MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #62 on: June 07, 2019, 09:30:09 AM »
Had Goering kept to taking out military installations instead of responding to Bombers Harris's attacks on population centers who knows what would have happened.That reprieve gave the RAF time to refit,resupply and reinforce.Hitler turning the Heer East was a biggie for the British.The German Hierarchy wasn't as bright as the guys in the field,IMO
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #63 on: June 07, 2019, 09:39:58 AM »
The British basically were not engaged from Sept'39-May'40 save some raids.Then 20 days in May but 4 of those were withdrawals.Then just under 4 months during the B.O.B.So I don't buy the narative where the Brits boast how they were in it 6 long years.I like the Brits,specially the Tommies,but discussions on other boards has left a bad taste regarding them.Getting very creative and revisionist with the facts.
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71514
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #64 on: June 07, 2019, 09:46:03 AM »
The Brits were getting bombed, fairly heavily.  They were fighting in North Africa of course, and in the Far East (Burma in 1942) and the Med (naval).  They also had to deal with submarines and the occasional foray by German naval combatants and the threat from the Tirpitz (later).

They didn't have much in terms of ground forces to do anything 1939-1941 except hold on.  Our shipment of tanks (Grants) to them in Egypt was huge, they had been destined for our armored divisions and we diverted them to Egypt.  

They tried the Dieppe raid with Canadian troops, but that was 1942 I think.

But in terms of any large scale ground battles in 1940 or 1941, the Brits didn't have them.  


MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #65 on: June 07, 2019, 10:04:42 AM »
Ya that's what gets me Dieppe was a noble charge but Monty denied he planned which of course he did.The war in the desert was really lopsided but Monty wasn't the man to manipulate the numbers.Churchill made a big mistake dismissing Claude Auchinlech and Dorman-Smith after the Victory at 1st Alamain.Churchill wanted them to go on the offensive right away.But as afore mentioned needed time to refit,resupply and reinforce.Churchill sacked them both when things were just starting to turn the Allies way.Specially regarding ULTRA that put them right in Rommel's huddle.Men,material specially the tanks and artillary(105's) starting arriving from across the pond.The Allied Naval & Air Corps strangled the Afrika Corp.The Allies supply lines went 100 mile to Alexandria.The Germans went back over 1,000 miles to Tripoli.Montgomery didn't get moving until the 3rd week in October which was Auchinleck's time table to begin with.Might be noted that General Gott was supposed to take over 8th Army but died in transit when his plane crashed.Everything came together exactly right for an uber A-hole named Monty.
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #66 on: June 07, 2019, 10:09:49 AM »
As a general response to the initial question and a specific response to the recent post by @CWSooner about the "decisiveness" of D-Day and Midway, I think that ultimately neither were individually "decisive". 

I'll submit the chart near the top of this link:
http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm

Per the link, the total economic power of each country (as a percentage of the global total) as of 1937 was:
 - 41.7% USA
 - 14.4% Germany
 - 14.0% USSR
 - 10.2% UK
 - 4.2% France
 - 3.5% Japan
 - 2.5% Italy
 - 9.5% all other countries in the world combined

Pre-nuclear modern industrial warfare is, IMHO, generally a simple equation:
stuff you have + stuff you can make - stuff your enemy can destroy <=> stuff they have + stuff they can make - stuff of theirs that you can destroy

Meaning that if you can make 41.7% of the world's stuff you are awfully tough to beat.  Note also that the US/UK total is just over 50% meaning that even a global alliance of EVERYONE against the US/UK would be unlikely to win. 

I'll take Midway first (it was only mentioned in passing, but it is a major interest of mine):
We are getting way off topic here but I want to make this point first:  Most everyone with even a passing interest in WWII history is aware that Japanese Admiral Yamamoto was opposed to attacking the US and is credited with the quote about "awakening a sleeping giant" after Pearl Harbor (even though he probably didn't say it).  What a lot of people do NOT know is that Yamamoto was far from alone.  Nearly the entire Japanese naval high command was opposed to war with the US. 

The Japanese Admirals were not idiots.  They were smart enough to know that they simply couldn't sink ships as fast as American shipyards could launch them.  In 1940 Congress passed and FDR signed what is known as The Two-Ocean Navy Act.  The act authorized construction of:
 - 18 Aircraft carriers
 - 2 Iowa Class Battleships
 - 5 Montana Class Battleships
 - 6 Alaska Class cruisers (these were really Battlecruisers or even arguably small battleships)
 - 27 Cruisers
 - 115 Destroyers
 - 43 submarines
 - 15k aircraft
 - and a lot more

In short, the Two Ocean Navy Act authorized the construction of a collection of ships that alone would have been the most powerful navy in the world and arguably more powerful than all other navies (including the UK) combined.  This act was not secret.  It was a publicly debated and approved piece of US Congressional legislation.  The Japanese were aware of it and they KNEW that they couldn't possibly hope to face down this massive armada once it was constructed. 

Even ignoring the Brits, the French, the Dutch, the Chinese, the Australians, and all the other US allies in the Pacific, Japanese production was less than 10% of US production. 

That is why I believe that neither Midway nor any other Pacific Battle can be viewed as a "turning point".  There simply never was any plausible chance that the Japanese could win militarily.  Their only hope was to be part of a broader winning side. 

That brings us back to D-Day and the German war situation in general:
The Germans and the Soviets had roughly equivalent productive capacity.  If you add some of the areas captured by the Germans to their tally (France, Czechoslovakia, etc) then Germany held a slight productive advantage over the USSR.  This, however, was not enough to give the Nazi's an advantage over the USSR and UK combined. 

As a practical matter, if there had been some way to keep the US neutral (actually neutral, not the undeclared enemy that we actually were in 1940 and 1941) then Germany may have been able to hold off a UK/USSR alliance indefinitely due to other advantages like interior lines.  However, once the US entered the war with nearly half of global economic capacity it was not a question of if but rather when the Nazi's would lose. 

The US, UK, and USSR combined controlled around two-thirds of the total productive capacity in the World.  Even if everyone else in the world had rallied to the Nazi side they still would have been facing a 2:1 production disadvantage.  Superior strategy can make up for some deficiencies but not THAT big. 

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71514
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #67 on: June 07, 2019, 10:17:54 AM »
The other incredible factor in WW II was the speed with which the US economy shifted to making military stuff, companies like GM and Ford turned "on a dime".  


MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 17134
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #68 on: June 07, 2019, 10:21:18 AM »
Problem was MB that the USA's military was 17th in the World right behind Portugal at the beginning of the War *https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/jun/13/ken-paxton/us-army-was-smaller-army-portugal-world-war-ii/*Industry had to be completely retooled for production.That was a mad scramble.Yamamoto was phrophetic he said for the 1st 6 months of the war Japan would run all over the Pacific.He was hoping for quick US capitulation or neutrality.He guessed wrong there,but was educated in the USA so was aware of the countries production capabilities and knew Japan would have a problem if hostilities were protracted

Another thing in 1941-'42-'43 it certainly wasn't given that what we were producing would land in our Allies laps.Given the U-Boat Wofpacks ferocious appetite
Suburbia:Where they tear out the trees & then name streets after them.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71514
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - D-Day, what if?
« Reply #69 on: June 07, 2019, 10:26:06 AM »
I struggle to envision working at GM assembling Chevrolets or Cadillacs (both of which are French names).  I show up for work on Dec. 8, or whenever, and the boss says finish that lot and we're going to be making tanks now.  And by the way we don't have any plans for tanks really, the current ones all suck.

So, suddenly folks are making tank engines instead of car engines, and transmissions, and tracks, and road wheels and casting armored bodies that weight a LOT more than a car.  They have plans for everything but the turret come down so they make Grants without a turret, but at least the base is the same for the Shermans.

Amazing.  I find it hard to believe.  And consider how much steel we had to make suddenly, a LOT more steel, and of course that became a critical shortage for the US, as did copper, remember the steel pennies of the 1940s?

The country shifted on a dime somehow.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.