General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: davidpt40 on December 10, 2019, 04:25:34 PM
Title: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: davidpt40 on December 10, 2019, 04:25:34 PM
See the attached map: https://i2.wp.com/www.military-history.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Plan-of-operations-on-d-day.jpg
With so many successful beaches attacked and breached, would it have mattered much if Omaha Beach had been abandoned? Ike contemplated it when the beach had filled up with destroyed vehicles and dead troops. In fact, would it have not been better to actually flank Omaha beach with the troops from Utah beach who received very light casualties? We really don't hear much about the other beach attacks because Omaha was a near disaster and only barely managed to gain a foothold later in the day.
For some reason, U.S bombers would not bomb the beaches parallel. They insisted on attacking perpendicular. This caused all the bombs to fall far inland of the targets. The 8th repeated this debacle in Operation Cobra (the breakout of Normandy), but this time the bombs fell short. 800 Americans were killed (not counting wounded), along with a General. If you count the wounded, this might actually be more casualties than occurred at Omaha Beach (2000 killed, wounded, and missing).
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Oldman731 on December 10, 2019, 06:09:35 PM
The worry was that the Germans would have been able to isolate both bridgeheads - Utah and the British/Canadian - and destroy them separately. The 12th SS Panzer tried to separate the Canadians from the British on June 7, so the Germans might be expected to try the same thing with the bigger opportunity of No Omaha. The Allies made every effort, post 6/6, to link the bridgeheads together. And in hindsight, having Omaha available, after the June 19-21 storm destroyed the Mulberries, was crucial to supplying all of the forces.
No one can know, of course. Naval gunfire saved the American beachheads in the Sicily, Salerno and Anzio landings, and it might have done the same in Normandy. But it would have been ugly.
- oldman
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: zack1234 on December 11, 2019, 06:54:41 AM
If the landings had failed it would have been Berlin, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in that order.
So the Kruats got of lightly.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Meatwad on December 11, 2019, 08:21:16 AM
All of Britan would be wearing lederhosen, eating schnitzel, and driving Trabants or Messerschmitt KR200's
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: perdue3 on December 11, 2019, 08:57:30 AM
All of Britan would be wearing lederhosen, eating schnitzel, and driving Trabants or Messerschmitt KR200's
I disagree. Dragoon was successful and Italy was basically won. It was a matter of time. If Omaha was unsuccessful, a counter landing would have been in order farther to the north or south. Not to mention the Soviets were really pushing at this time as well.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: snugar109 on December 11, 2019, 09:28:34 AM
If the landings had failed it would have been Berlin, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in that order.
So the Krauts got off lightly.
Yup. I don't think most people think about that - it probably would be Cologne and Berlin in a one-two punch or whatever city they thought Hitler would of been staying. Though I suspect given Hitler's fanatical movement and devotion to fascism, it might have taken a half-dozen bombings before they capitulated.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: davidpt40 on December 11, 2019, 06:50:35 PM
The uranium bomb turned out to be a dead end. It wasn't until plutonium was tested that atomic bombs became viable. This was in 1945. That being said. I fully feel that the Soviets would have made it all the way to the coast of France. They were an unstoppable juggernaut.
Were their enough paratroopers for another drop behind Omaha Beach if it had failed? A flanking maneuver would have been in order if Omaha Beach couldn't be captured from a head-on attack.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Vraciu on December 11, 2019, 07:22:19 PM
Yup the USA had and endless supply of nuclear material. They only used two bombs because that's all they had. The use of another was just a threat.
semp
The U.S spent the majority of the war refining enough uranium for just one bomb. It was only a fluke that they discovered that plutonium was a viable option. For the invasion of Japan, a total of 8 smaller tactical bombs were hoped to be produced. Only a quarter of that amount would have likely came to fruition.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Arlo on December 11, 2019, 09:12:13 PM
Besides, the U.S. had no desire to irradiate any part of Europe. There was still money to be made there post-war. Japanese innovation of technology and global marketing wasn't envisioned yet.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Volron on December 12, 2019, 05:47:59 AM
Besides, the U.S. had no desire to irradiate any part of Europe. There was still money to be made there post-war. Japanese innovation of technology and global marketing wasn't envisioned yet.
They did have a "clean slate" to work from after the war, seeing as we pretty much bombed all the things.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: zack1234 on December 12, 2019, 07:11:50 AM
Carpet bombing of factories had little effect on heavy plant.
Infrastructure and the transportation of materials and products was disrupted.
Both in Germany and Japan the Allies found vast amounts of war materials.
And oil production was reduced by bombing which was a major headache for the Bosch.
For you men who wear dresses, to destroy a Industrial press or a lathe you need to drop a bomb directly on top it. (Blowing roofs of factories only make it drafty)
Various books written about economics of said conflict.
Basically the Krauts and Japs infrastructure was rebuilt and the industrial output used for peace time products.
And it was nothing to do with technological and industrial prowess, the Allies knew that these two countries needed to be kept busy or they would start acting like savages again.
Italy was not given as much Marshall Aid because they were bone idle and were too busy drinking wine and producing Sofia Loren types.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: 63tb on December 12, 2019, 07:14:43 AM
Wasn’t there a rumor that Dresden was being “saved” for the first atom bomb? They wanted a large, eastern, undamaged city.
63tb
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Arlo on December 12, 2019, 09:08:25 AM
Dresden wasn't 'saved' at all.
But it wasn't irradiated.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: 63tb on December 12, 2019, 10:56:49 AM
Yeah, only when they realized Germany was finished and the bomb wasn’t necessary there. Odd that one large German City was left untouched until 45, when the rest were being pounded to dust.
63tb
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Arlo on December 12, 2019, 11:59:59 AM
Are you basing your claim on actual scholarly sources or a feeling you have?
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: 63tb on December 12, 2019, 01:38:03 PM
Reread my post. I’m asking if anyone had heard of that rumor. But never mind, I found it myself -
I kindda doubt that the german minister of propaganda would have let an article like this published. in the usa it was top secret and for germany to have an article like this published would have indicated they had sources in america. and that would be not a good idea. I mean it's possible but I kind of doubt it.
semp
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: whiteman on December 15, 2019, 10:05:10 AM
Basically the Krauts and Japs infrastructure was rebuilt and the industrial output used for peace time products.
And it was nothing to do with technological and industrial prowess, the Allies knew that these two countries needed to be kept busy or they would start acting like savages again.
MacArthur needed those radios built to communicate and Demming was the man and reason the Japanese quality took off. To bad stupid Americans couldn’t see what he was preaching.
The American Civil War seems to have been taught different since I got out of school.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: zack1234 on December 16, 2019, 01:52:11 AM
How dare you!
I am triggered! :O
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: FESS67 on December 16, 2019, 06:17:02 AM
D Day is militarily irrelevant. Without D Day Germany would still have lost the war. D Day was more political than tactical. It was about appeasing the Russians and securing a stake at the table for the Allies. The race to Berlin was not about Patton and Montgomery, it was about West V East.
Most Americans like to think they were the difference in WW2. America won the war!! ooooraaah.
Truth is Russia won the war and even without American intervention they would have defeated Germany. Weight of numbers. Simple mathematics.
The forces defending Normandy and subsequent Western theatre actions were but a fraction of those engaged with the Russians. The West deludes itself that it won WW2 but in reality Russia carried the burden and the victory belongs to them. Check this out
https://youtu.be/DwKPFT-RioU
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: zack1234 on December 16, 2019, 06:50:20 AM
Bomber command did their bit in fracturing the infra structure.
Do you think the Jerries will start another war?
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 22, 2019, 08:30:56 AM
I'll abandon the nuclear notion in favor of the original question posted. Interesting notion. But as someone pointed out. Had Omaha not been maintained its possible it may have made it easier for the Germans to defense and move forces to other fronts. As was pointed out in the Abrose books "Citizen Soldiers" and "D-Day". The high command already knew before the landings from the secret surveys that were being done of the beach heads that Omaha was likely to be as tough as it was. Im thinking we should remember the doctrine of the time of fire and movement with Omaha being a holding force as much as anything. Remember. This was a time when the common doctrine was in order to find out where the enemy likely was to send a scout party out and see if they came back.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 22, 2019, 08:35:13 AM
D Day is militarily irrelevant. Without D Day Germany would still have lost the war. D Day was more political than tactical. It was about appeasing the Russians and securing a stake at the table for the Allies. The race to Berlin was not about Patton and Montgomery, it was about West V East.
Most Americans like to think they were the difference in WW2. America won the war!! ooooraaah.
Truth is Russia won the war and even without American intervention they would have defeated Germany. Weight of numbers. Simple mathematics.
The forces defending Normandy and subsequent Western theatre actions were but a fraction of those engaged with the Russians. The West deludes itself that it won WW2 but in reality Russia carried the burden and the victory belongs to them. Check this out
https://youtu.be/DwKPFT-RioU
For a myriad of reasons including over a hundred thousands of tons of reasons. I couldnt possibly disagree with this statement more. If not for America. Russia could not have won or accomplished what it did. As on Russian General put it
""Now they say that the allies never helped us, but it can't be denied that the Americans gave us so many goods without which we wouldn't have been able to form our reserves and continue the war," Soviet General Georgy Zhukov said after the end of WWII.
"We didn’t have explosives, gunpowder. We didn’t have anything to charge our rifle cartridges with. The Americans really saved us with their gunpowder and explosives. And how much sheet steel they gave us! How could we have produced our tanks without American steel? But now they make it seem as if we had an abundance of all that. Without American trucks we wouldn’t have had anything to pull our artillery with."
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Oldman731 on December 22, 2019, 09:16:22 AM
If not for America. Russia could not have won or accomplished what it did.
True. 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 1.75 million tons of food, in addition to planes, steel, and all the other things Zhukov mentioned. Lend-lease didn't really start to get to the Bolsheviks in quantity until after Stalingrad, so contributed little to the critical defense period of 1941-42. But it's hard to see how the 1943-45 counter-offensives could have occurred in the absence of US aid.
That said, on the eastern front we paid in dollars, while the Russians paid in blood.
- oldman
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Mister Fork on December 22, 2019, 11:18:48 AM
True. 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 1.75 million tons of food, in addition to planes, steel, and all the other things Zhukov mentioned. Lend-lease didn't really start to get to the Bolsheviks in quantity until after Stalingrad, so contributed little to the critical defense period of 1941-42. But it's hard to see how the 1943-45 counter-offensives could have occurred in the absence of US aid.
That said, on the eastern front we paid in dollars, while the Russians paid in blood.
- oldman
To that point, the war was already over when Allied forces landed in France and forced Germany into a two front war. I suspect that if it wasn’t for D-Day including Omaha landings going well, Germany would of simply pounded the Russians until they had nothing left but rocks to throw at the Germans.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: Shuffler on December 22, 2019, 11:37:24 PM
To that point, the war was already over when Allied forces landed in France and forced Germany into a two front war. I suspect that if it wasn’t for D-Day including Omaha landings going well, Germany would of simply pounded the Russians until they had nothing left but rocks to throw at the Germans.
Hitler made the war a two front war. Before that there was only a war against the allies. The russians had an agreement with germany and even assisted germany before things turned on them. The russians paid dearly for their earlier mistakes.
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: guncrasher on December 23, 2019, 01:45:01 AM
Hitler made the war a two front war. Before that there was only a war against the allies. The russians had an agreement with germany and even assisted germany before things turned on them. The russians paid dearly for their earlier mistakes.
I dont think the russians really trusted germany. they knew they were gonna be attacked. yes they killed those that retreated and held the line at Stalingrad on a couple of other cities. but that is because they knew that they german resupply was at their limit. it's the same reason why japan never planned an invasion of mainland usa. the common lie is they would find a gun behind every blade of grass is bs. they knew they couldn't resupply the invasion, they couldnt even resupply Hawaii, if they had attempted an invasion, it would have been a suicide mission which is what happened to the germans.
semp
Title: Re: Would D-Day still have been a success had Omaha Beach been abandoned?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 24, 2019, 12:48:33 AM
To that point, the war was already over when Allied forces landed in France and forced Germany into a two front war. I suspect that if it wasn’t for D-Day including Omaha landings going well, Germany would of simply pounded the Russians until they had nothing left but rocks to throw at the Germans.
The "two front war" Began with the war in North Africa, Sicily and t hen Italy. D-Day only was the beginning of a second front in Northern Europe. but by then the Germans were already fighting the allies on two fronts. In north Africa alone the Germans lost almost a million troops killed and captured (about 620K killed and wounded and over 250K captured) In Sicily the Germans suffered about 30K killed or wounded and another 100K captured, German suffered over 300K more casualties in Italy not including those captured. All those took away much needed forces that could have been used against the Russian forces. Not to mention hundreds of tonnes of fuel, food,medical supplies, aircraft,tanks,aircraft, and untold amounts of other war material that was not able to be used against the Russians