What if- 'Overlord'

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Mister X
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 May 2002 21:56
Location: Holland

What if- 'Overlord'

Post by Mister X » 15 May 2002 16:22

What if Overlord happend on June 6th 1942 or 43? I've got an 'Allied forces freak' in my neighborhood who claims that the outcome would still be the same. I declared him a complete and utter nutter.

What's your opinion?

Xanthro
Member
Posts: 2803
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 00:11
Location: Pasadena, CA

Post by Xanthro » 15 May 2002 17:23

Tell you friend he's a freak. The British tried a raid in 1942 at Dienipper (my god is that spelled wrong, but I'm sick and too tired to look it up). It was repelled in a horrible fashion.

This raid was meant to test German defenses as opposed to an invasion. It didn't go well.

In 1942 and 1943 the Luftwaffe is simply too strong to allow for an invasion. The American army is still to weak as it is still building up.

Remember, the Americans had a laughable army compared to most major nations in 1939. Even by 1941 after rebuilding and expansion, it was still very weak. It tooks years to build up the industry and forces that were available in 1944 and 1945.

Xanthro

Logan Hartke
Member
Posts: 1226
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:30
Location: Illinois, USA

Post by Logan Hartke » 15 May 2002 18:23

The Allies would've gotten mauled.

Logan Hartke

Mister X
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 May 2002 21:56
Location: Holland

Post by Mister X » 16 May 2002 20:09

I know about (here, let me help you, and get well soon) Dieppe, but he was talking about an all-out landing, same as June 1944, but only 2 years earlier... I called him 'fairly stoopid' as well.

Logan Hartke
Member
Posts: 1226
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:30
Location: Illinois, USA

Post by Logan Hartke » 16 May 2002 22:19

Mister X wrote:I know about (here, let me help you, and get well soon) Dieppe, but he was talking about an all-out landing, same as June 1944, but only 2 years earlier... I called him 'fairly stoopid' as well.
Just so that you know, it helps to know how to spell "stupid" if you don't want people calling you that.

Logan Hartke

Xanthro
Member
Posts: 2803
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 00:11
Location: Pasadena, CA

Post by Xanthro » 16 May 2002 22:45

The quotes around 'fairly stoopid' indicate its demasculated, therefore based on usage, it's quite likely the writer knew it's mispelled. It's a play on words, to draw out the oooo sound in stupid.

Xanthro

Logan Hartke
Member
Posts: 1226
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:30
Location: Illinois, USA

Post by Logan Hartke » 16 May 2002 22:52

I understand. I hope he knew it.

Logan Hartke

Mister X
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 May 2002 21:56
Location: Holland

Post by Mister X » 22 May 2002 23:04

I knew what I was doing. :D

b_c_ries
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 27 Mar 2002 04:25
Location: California USA

Post by b_c_ries » 02 Jun 2002 18:26

The event at Dieppe in 1942 were a raid and not an invasion. Only 6,000 troops were used. Not even the English would think that they could launch a full scale invasion of Europe with 6,000 men against the Germans. They needed over 30,000 men to beat 250,000 Italians in 1940 and take 130,000 prisoners. If the British ever thought that the Dieppe "RAID"could be a successful invasion they would have used more English troops instead of Canadians. btw I'm not trying to slander Canadians I'm trying to indicate that if a great victory was possible some English Field-Marshall (Monty) would have wanted the credit and glory.
If 70 grains of IMR 4064 in a 7.92x57 case behind a 197 gr. fmj is too much then 85 grains should be just right.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 02 Jun 2002 19:46

An invasion in '42 or 43 was unthinkable and was by no means a certain victory assured in '44, though the allies had better means to prosecute it then.

If the allies had been pushed back into the sea in '44, what would have been the next allied step, when and where and with what (The A-Bomb maybe).

:D Andy from the Shire

b_c_ries
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 27 Mar 2002 04:25
Location: California USA

Post by b_c_ries » 03 Jun 2002 22:09

An invasion of France in 1942 is out of the question though one in 1943 could have worked. The course chosen by the Allies, Sicily then Italy, was a better move though. Both Invasions could not have been conducted at the same time. Taking out Italy was a better strategic option. The Allies knew that Following the collapse in Africa, Mussolini was in trouble Politically and moved in to finish him off. If Mussolini had been given time to recover and prepare, The bulk of the Italian army may not have quit the war.
If 70 grains of IMR 4064 in a 7.92x57 case behind a 197 gr. fmj is too much then 85 grains should be just right.

Mister_X-2
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 01:21
Location: Mill, a nice little village in Holland.

The A-bomb in Europe?? Not a chance, if you ask me.

Post by Mister_X-2 » 04 Jun 2002 01:34

France would never allow it. And I think that Russia could get quite pissed off as well.

Sheds a whole new light on the 'what if', though. I think that if the Americans (it's all kinda 'their thing' if you catch my drift) would have dropped 'the bomb' on Berlin, I think that Europe would have a whole different view on the US after that....
War belongs in a museum... that's what my Granny says.

Mister_X-2
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 04 Jun 2002 01:21
Location: Mill, a nice little village in Holland.

The A-bomb in Europe?? Not a chance, if you ask me.

Post by Mister_X-2 » 04 Jun 2002 01:34

France would never allow it. And I think that Russia could get quite pissed off as well.

Sheds a whole new light on the 'what if', though. I think that if the Americans (it's all kinda 'their thing' if you catch my drift) would have dropped 'the bomb' on Berlin, I think that Europe would have a whole different view on the US after that....

Phaethon
Member
Posts: 935
Joined: 07 Apr 2002 21:14

Re: The A-bomb in Europe?? Not a chance, if you ask me.

Post by Phaethon » 04 Jun 2002 09:39

Mister_X-2 wrote:France would never allow it. And I think that Russia could get quite pissed off as well.

Sheds a whole new light on the 'what if', though. I think that if the Americans (it's all kinda 'their thing' if you catch my drift) would have dropped 'the bomb' on Berlin, I think that Europe would have a whole different view on the US after that....
Just a gut feeling, but I suspect use of the A-bomb in Europe would not have been likely given the proximity of so many allied/occupied/neutral countries, In contrast the Japanese homeland was an island isolated from it's neighbours who, anyway, had little political clout with the US high command. Also the Japanese 'looked different', were mostly non-christian and contributed few influential immigrants to the US - What would Einstein have said about bombing Germany: Would the way the Nazis treated him and his peers outweigh the thought of unleashing this horror on his homeland.

However, if The Bomb had been used it wouldn't have been loosed on Berlin for the same reasons that it wasn't dropped on Tokyo - use of such a weapon is less indefensible is some effort is made to maximize the ratio of military to civillian casualties. Also if you decapitate the government the army fights on longer than if the government is intact to order a surrender.

I suspect an industrial or military target would have been chosen. There were two reasons for choosing Hiroshima: It was relatively intact - not having been a major bombing target and thus the effects of the bomb could be more clearly studied (this is a rather cold and chilling reason) and it had a concentration of military facitlities.

The question is which German cities were relatively untouched by bombing but had concentrations of military facilities?

North Sea/Baltic Ports? - too close to allied/occupied territories?
Munich - Home of Nazism?
Nurnberg - Another Nazi spiritual centre?
Haigerloch - Germany's Los Alamos? But close too France/Switzerland?

I wouldn't like to make the choice.

Finally, given Hitler's frequently displayed attituded to "fight to the last man", "never surender" and the destructive orders given against his own lands in the final months of the war, would just one or two Bombs be enough to a) convince Hitler to surrender or (more likely?) b) bring about a coup by the High Command?

Hitler said the German people would not desrve to exist if the war was lost - doesn't bode well for him surrendering at all. Pehaps the Wolf's Lair or Obersaltzberg, after all, would be 'better' target,


K.

Ken Cocker
London

User avatar
Albert
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 01 Oct 2002 16:56
Location: VLAANDEREN

Post by Albert » 26 Jan 2003 14:41

An attack on the mainland in '42 or '43 would have been a slaughter among the Britisha and the Canadians.

In '44 especially the American suppremacy - in tanks, planes and boats - made the landing work. Also the Germans had still a lot of airpower then.

Return to “What if”