What If The Germans Successfully Repelled the ....

[hummel1981]

Allied invasions in Normandy and southern France? Do you think the allies would have gave up? maybe try again? Or maybe strengthen the air campaign? Or would they just put more effort in Italy?

[Owain Glyndwr]

Eisenhower would probably have been replaced after the failure. Churchills government would also be in danger. A failure at D-day may result in the Soviets liberating more of europe

[Andy H]

Hummel1981

Can you give us some scenario's as to how and why the invasions were repulsed?

Andy H

[hummel1981]

*puts on story scenerio voice*

well, lets say the axis thwarted the invasion with their Panzer Divisions, cause Hitler was awake and he authorized it. Basically never allowing the allies to establish an effective beach-head. If the allies did somehow make peace with Hitler from the failure i'm sure he would of shifted forces back east and maybe have a better chance against the Soviets.

But then there's always Italy. I believe the allies were near Rome during the Normandy Invasions if i remember correctly, so they already got a strong foothold down south.

[kelty90]

Well, the traditional version of what would have happened if the Allied invasion had failed, is that sometime in mid 1945 a B-29 would have appeared over Berlin (or wherever) and dropped an atomic bomb. And if need be another would be dropped untill the Germans surrendered. Why waste soldiers lives trying another invasion?.

[hauptmannn]

I've been noticing that it is always suggested that atomic bombs be dropped, and i ask myself is the US that desperate or is it that careless of human lives?

[Sam H.]

I've been noticing that it is always suggested that atomic bombs be dropped, and i ask myself is the US that desperate or is it that careless of human lives?

1944/45 was a diffrent time. The use of atomic weapons did not have the stigma it has today. Desperate? Perhaps, or perhaps just a way to end the war as quickly as possible. Careless? This goes back to the old questions, was the use of the atomic bombs justified. There have been several threads on this subject - to discuss it here would be too difficult.

Just the same, its my opinion that the allies would have tried again in the fall of 1944, or certainly in the spring of 1945. In any event, just because Normandy is a failure, I don't see the A-bomb being available any sooner than it was historically.

[Qvist]

Wouldn't weather conditions have more or less ruled out another attempt in 1944, if the first one had failed?

It's not easy imagining a very likely scenario for such a failure though.


cheers

[Caldric]

Southern France beach head would be almost impossible for the Germans to stop while fighting in Normandy also. It would still be a good place to carry out the invasion of France maybe take a small amount of time longer then historical. The fact is Normandy was using a sledgehammer to kill a fly, overwhelming force, I am not so sure the Germans ever had a chance to push the allies back even if Hitler gave Rommel control over all forces. Almost total air control, sea control I just do not see it failing.

[Petter]

Balkan, Finland and more (maybe all) of Germany would become communist. So the cold war would really be different.
The allies would of course invade again, but then the Soviets would have advanced much further and be in a better position when the war ends.

[James Patrick]

It depends on how heavy the losses are, especially the loss of landing craft and air transport. These were in short supply in every theatre of war and it took until '44 for the WA to get enough of them together for Overlord. Assault troops wouldn't be a problem. The WA had plenty of 2d and 3d wave divisions ready to deploy, some of whom had more experience and training in amphibious ops than the initial assault divisions. IMO the big loss would be to the specially trained commando/ranger, parachute, and glider units which play a very important role in any amphibious invasion. Unlike the first wave units, very few of these highly trained soldiers would escape Overlord and the WA would be hard pressed to find replacements. The UK had another airborne division and, if Dragoon doesn't kick off, the WA could press gang the ad-hoc 1st Airborne Task Force into service. The WA would still be one abn div short for an Overlord-sized invasion. Also if Dragoon doesn't go, the WA could maybe break up the 1st Special Service Force, which had many veterans of the 1st, 3d, and 4th Ranger Battlions for commando operations.
If Overlord failed, It would be a while before the Allies could launch a similarly large and complex operation. However, they could continue to invade the perhipery of Europe (Norway, Southern Europe, Balkans) and continue to drain the Axis. IMO, though, I don't see Overlord failing. A well planned and well supported amphibious invasion is all but impossible to beat off, and the WA were at top of their game at Normandy.

[maltesefalcon]

The Wehrmacht was unable to push the Allies back into the sea, even when they got far enough from the coast to make air/sea support less of a factor.

Point of the matter, if Germany had the air, naval and land resources to crush the Allies in Normandy, they could have used them to instead, land in Britain themselves and made the whole thing moot.

[Petter]

No. Germany obviously won easy in France (1940) but was unable to defeat the crumbling and at the moment weak Empire.

[Lord Gort]

After everything we have all read and now know about Hitler, does anybody seriously think that Atomic arms would have induced Hitler to surrender?




regards,

[hauptmannn]

I can see that people are saying the Germans cannot repel an allied amphibious invasion but this is a what if thread and i do believe the author wants to know what people think would happen if the allied invasion was repulsed