D-Day being decisive
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
D-Day being decisive
In the book Normandy Crucible: The Decisive Battle that Shaped World War II in Europe, authour John Prados makes the point D-Day being the decisive campaign of Europe is not a Hollywood myth.
He claims that in comparison with Bagration, the US and British fought many crack troops, including at least four SS panzer divisions and at least 4 other panzer divisions, while in Operation Bagration, there were only two German panzer divisions defending against the Russians. The Normandy invasion caused that and resulted in the lopsided victory of the Russians over the Germans in June, 1944 including total Russian air superiority. Without the Normandy Crucible, none of that would have happened.
What do you people think of this?
He claims that in comparison with Bagration, the US and British fought many crack troops, including at least four SS panzer divisions and at least 4 other panzer divisions, while in Operation Bagration, there were only two German panzer divisions defending against the Russians. The Normandy invasion caused that and resulted in the lopsided victory of the Russians over the Germans in June, 1944 including total Russian air superiority. Without the Normandy Crucible, none of that would have happened.
What do you people think of this?
Re: D-Day being decisive
This is due to the Germans having anticipated the Russian summer offensive further south, and thus redeployed the bulk of their armored reserves away from AG center.He claims that in comparison with Bagration, the US and British fought many crack troops, including at least four SS panzer divisions and at least 4 other panzer divisions, while in Operation Bagration, there were only two German panzer divisions defending against the Russians.
Edit: one other point worth considering: the majority of the German troops in NWE were either low grade static divisions or inexperienced field units in various stages of reconstruction. This is especially true with the panzer divisions, both Heer and SS. Yes, there were a few units that can be classified as 'crack', but they were the rare exception.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: 24 Mar 2012, 17:48
- Location: North Utica, IL
Re: D-Day being decisive
Dear J and Kf,Kingfish wrote:This is due to the Germans having anticipated the Russian summer offensive further south, and thus redeployed the bulk of their armored reserves away from AG center.He claims that in comparison with Bagration, the US and British fought many crack troops, including at least four SS panzer divisions and at least 4 other panzer divisions, while in Operation Bagration, there were only two German panzer divisions defending against the Russians.
Edit: one other point worth considering: the majority of the German troops in NWE were either low grade static divisions or inexperienced field units in various stages of reconstruction. This is especially true with the panzer divisions, both Heer and SS. Yes, there were a few units that can be classified as 'crack', but they were the rare exception.
I will not take anything away from the Red Army. I am however tired of rampant Russophilia. It took the entire Allied Force on all fronts to defeat the NAZIs. The Overlord landings and subsequent operations at Mortain and St. Lo were serious fights and did keep Wehrmacht troops and materiel in the West which could have become reserves to repel the Soviet's offensive.
Strike Swiftly,
TH-M2
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
I think this is not so simple. for example, while it's true that most casualities and commitment of the Heer were in the East, the Luftwaffe has at least a significant connection with all this. And after mid '43, most of the Luftwaffe fighter force was sent to the West, and the aero industry was now producing fighters instead of attack aircraft, the type most needed in the East. You cannot say one thing was not connected with the other, the Russian success in this case. This also includes the bombing, the Lend-Lease, the German submarine production, etc. Many people who claim the decisiveness of the conflict was in the East and the Soviets could have won the war alone, pass very away from such considerations.
While the conflict was a GLOBAL war, it's being quiet common in the Western historiography today to put the Western efforts as a mere sideshow. Even if D-Day specifically wasn't decisive.
While the conflict was a GLOBAL war, it's being quiet common in the Western historiography today to put the Western efforts as a mere sideshow. Even if D-Day specifically wasn't decisive.
Last edited by Marcelo Jenisch on 02 May 2012, 18:36, edited 1 time in total.
Re: D-Day being decisive
The landings in France sped things up, but in themselves they were not decisive in the sense that it was a turning point in the war. The Axis were on the retreat on literally all fronts already. The landings certainly contributed to a faster downfall and made sure that at least western Europe was returned to democracy.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: 24 Mar 2012, 17:48
- Location: North Utica, IL
Re: D-Day being decisive
Dear Big B,Baltasar wrote:The landings in France sped things up, but in themselves they were not decisive in the sense that it was a turning point in the war. The Axis were on the retreat on literally all fronts already. The landings certainly contributed to a faster downfall and made sure that at least western Europe was returned to democracy.
You make providing for Democracy in Western Europe at a significant cost a minimal thing. Why?
Strike Swiftly,
TH-M2
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
At the time the landings happened, they were unlikely to have been decisive. The Soviets were receiving vast quantities of Lend-Lease equipment by 1944, and they still had much manpower and were improving their own equipment and having better training in all areas. They would probably be capable of confront more German power to finish the Reich. Together with the air war the Allies were conducting over Europe, which could be farily be called a "second front", Germany was doomed.
So, I think the Eastern Front was in fact decisive, but many times people don't know the meaning of this term:
Colin Gray defined an operational decisive victory as "a victory which decides the outcome to a campaign, though not necessarily to the war as a whole".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decisive_victory
Many people (historians too) don't understand the difference this has, and so they think since the Soviet participation was "decisive", they would certainly have defeated Germany without the Anglo-American participation, desconsiderating the factors I mentioned in the other post. In my view, what authours like Prados and Jhon Mossier present in their works, is more a critic to the etymological misconception of such people than a new historical view properly.
So, I think the Eastern Front was in fact decisive, but many times people don't know the meaning of this term:
Colin Gray defined an operational decisive victory as "a victory which decides the outcome to a campaign, though not necessarily to the war as a whole".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decisive_victory
Many people (historians too) don't understand the difference this has, and so they think since the Soviet participation was "decisive", they would certainly have defeated Germany without the Anglo-American participation, desconsiderating the factors I mentioned in the other post. In my view, what authours like Prados and Jhon Mossier present in their works, is more a critic to the etymological misconception of such people than a new historical view properly.
- The_Enigma
- Member
- Posts: 2270
- Joined: 14 Oct 2007, 15:59
- Location: Cheshire, England
Re: D-Day being decisive
Using the definition above as posted by Jenisch. Was D-Day decisive? No, it did not decide the fate of the Normandy campaign No, it did not decide the outcome of the war
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
Confuse the way I wrote isn't?
Frankly, I think this is more subject of personal interpretation than anything else. If one wants to see the Soviet success as caused by the Western Allies, this is not incorrect, after all, it was the same Germany that had it's hability to conduct war signifcantly reduced by the Western Allies. It's impossible to separe one thing from other, and this is the problem of mention the massive casualities of the Germans in the East.
Frankly, I think this is more subject of personal interpretation than anything else. If one wants to see the Soviet success as caused by the Western Allies, this is not incorrect, after all, it was the same Germany that had it's hability to conduct war signifcantly reduced by the Western Allies. It's impossible to separe one thing from other, and this is the problem of mention the massive casualities of the Germans in the East.
- The_Enigma
- Member
- Posts: 2270
- Joined: 14 Oct 2007, 15:59
- Location: Cheshire, England
Re: D-Day being decisive
Oh don't get me wrong, i believe the war ended as it did because of a joint effort by all sides*. I was just being a smartass above
Re: D-Day being decisive
Don't forget the "D-Day Dodgers" FrontJenisch wrote:At the time the landings happened, they were unlikely to have been decisive. The Soviets were receiving vast quantities of Lend-Lease equipment by 1944, and they still had much manpower and were improving their own equipment and having better training in all areas. They would probably be capable of confront more German power to finish the Reich. Together with the air war the Allies were conducting over Europe, which could be farily be called a "second front", Germany was doomed.
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
Ok mate.The_Enigma wrote:Oh don't get me wrong, i believe the war ended as it did because of a joint effort by all sides*. I was just being a smartass above
I also have this view, the war is not called a WORLD War for nothing.
The Russians today, felt the West don't recognize their contributions. Of course, this totally ignores the hipocrisy of the Soviet propaganda, which openly claimed the country won the war practically alone.
I presented my points of the German situation without having to fight the West to David Glantz, here is his e-mail reply:
Dear Mr. Jenisch:
I will conceed your point that if the Soviet Union had to fight utterly alone, it would have been a far more difficult task to defeat Germany decisively. Hitler's rashness, however, would have likly placed German forces in awkward situations like December 1941 and November 1942. And who is to say how long Stalin's ruthless discipline would have held up in the face of such masive Red Army casualties. But since it is history, no-one will ever know.
All the best,
David
If Glantz is with me, then I think my idea is not so bad at all.
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
Really. My country also fought in that front.henryk wrote:Don't forget the "D-Day Dodgers" FrontJenisch wrote:At the time the landings happened, they were unlikely to have been decisive. The Soviets were receiving vast quantities of Lend-Lease equipment by 1944, and they still had much manpower and were improving their own equipment and having better training in all areas. They would probably be capable of confront more German power to finish the Reich. Together with the air war the Allies were conducting over Europe, which could be farily be called a "second front", Germany was doomed.
The question of the "second front" is not so only about the D-Day. Before the Normandy front, there was the already mentioned one in Italy, the one in Africa, the "air front" in Europe, and the Battle of Atlantic. While the Russians certainly would prefer a major front in France to end the war as quickly as possible, such fronts DID diverted significant Axis troops and resources away from the Eastern Front. Without them, the Russians could have been well defeated.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: 24 Mar 2012, 17:48
- Location: North Utica, IL
Re: D-Day being decisive
Dear Big J,Jenisch wrote:Really. My country also fought in that front.henryk wrote:Don't forget the "D-Day Dodgers" FrontJenisch wrote:At the time the landings happened, they were unlikely to have been decisive. The Soviets were receiving vast quantities of Lend-Lease equipment by 1944, and they still had much manpower and were improving their own equipment and having better training in all areas. They would probably be capable of confront more German power to finish the Reich. Together with the air war the Allies were conducting over Europe, which could be farily be called a "second front", Germany was doomed.
The question of the "second front" is not so only about the D-Day. Before the Normandy front, there was the already mentioned one in Italy, the one in Africa, the "air front" in Europe, and the Battle of Atlantic. While the Russians certainly would prefer a major front in France to end the war as quickly as possible, such fronts DID diverted significant Axis troops and resources away from the Eastern Front. Without them, the Russians could have been well defeated.
People forget Brazil's contribution via its Navy with hunting U-Boats in the South Atlantic. There was also a squadron of Figher Pilots sent to Europe along with a Brigade of Infantry. These units were equipped and unifomed in US pattern gear but they were Brazillian.
Strike Swiftly,
TH-M2
-
- Member
- Posts: 724
- Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
- Location: Porto Alegre
Re: D-Day being decisive
Brazil wanted to send 300,000 men. However there was only time to train 25,000. If necessary however, they would be there, and the vast resources of this country were avaliable to the Allied cause. A more significant Brazilian participation can enter in the equation for alternative scenarios for sure.Trackhead M2 wrote:Dear Big J,Jenisch wrote:Really. My country also fought in that front.henryk wrote:Don't forget the "D-Day Dodgers" FrontJenisch wrote:At the time the landings happened, they were unlikely to have been decisive. The Soviets were receiving vast quantities of Lend-Lease equipment by 1944, and they still had much manpower and were improving their own equipment and having better training in all areas. They would probably be capable of confront more German power to finish the Reich. Together with the air war the Allies were conducting over Europe, which could be farily be called a "second front", Germany was doomed.
The question of the "second front" is not so only about the D-Day. Before the Normandy front, there was the already mentioned one in Italy, the one in Africa, the "air front" in Europe, and the Battle of Atlantic. While the Russians certainly would prefer a major front in France to end the war as quickly as possible, such fronts DID diverted significant Axis troops and resources away from the Eastern Front. Without them, the Russians could have been well defeated.
People forget Brazil's contribution via its Navy with hunting U-Boats in the South Atlantic. There was also a squadron of Figher Pilots sent to Europe along with a Brigade of Infantry. These units were equipped and unifomed in US pattern gear but they were Brazillian.
Strike Swiftly,
TH-M2
Here's an American propaganda video of my country in the war:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg7lohLxUqo
Another video, showing the southern part of the country:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nZO8DdZ0L4
I really recommend that if some of you come here, know other places of Brazil other than Rio. The state of Rio Grande do Sul showed in the video (were I live), is beautiful, and very different from what many of you can expect. There was great European immigration and there's great influence here, and it's ironical to say that the German immigration and influence here before WWII was so great that Brazil had the largest Nazi Party in the world after Germany (of course, they would not mention this in the video, and the German people were unfornately interned in camps after the war started).
Ok, enough of patriotic promotion.