What if D-Day had failed?

[Wing Nut]

Here's an interesting article about what might have happened...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3732417.stm

and an also interesting one about how it might have been covered in the press...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... ng_d_day_1


Personally, I don't think all of Europe would have been Communist, but it sure would have been a tougher fight.

[WebbPA]

It certainly would have been a tougher fight.

Allied forces already owned the Mediterranian and would have continued to march through Italy.  Ground advances may have been slowed or stopped at the Alps but we would have valuable air bases in northern Italy.  Hitler would still have to fight his dreaded 2 front war

Allied bombers from English bases supported Soviet ground advances by bombing eastern Germany and we poured tons (literally) of supplies into the Soviet Union.  If we ever felt the Soviet advance was proceeding too efficiently we could have cut their supplies.

"Patton" was just on for Memorial Day weekend.  He had the (right) idea that postwar boundaries were more political than military.  Even if D-Day had been delayed by a year we could have insisted that the Soviet Union hold its borders at Poland.

[Iroquois]

They say it's not good to speculate in history but here's another one. What would have happened if the allies had failed completely? Would there have been an all out battle royal between Germany and Japan? Who would have won? There's something to think about.

[Craig.]

Well, had it failed, a new plan would have been devised. However its also safe to say Hitler might have made another attempt at invading England again. Then again looking at another angle the battle of britain was over giving our troops and commanders time to regroup, and go in a differant way. An all out beach invasion was a 1 shot deal though i believe, once Hitler and his generals knew the game plan he would have had time to reinforce every beach along the french coast.

[Smoke2much]

To have acheived the possibility of a succesful invasion the Allies had gained air superiority along the channel coast.  A German counter invasion would have been impossible. Had the invasion failed we would have lost many thousands of men, tons of hardware and received a massive set back but I think that by this time it was already to late for the Germans.  The battle for the Atlantic was all but over and the Wehrmact was in retreat in the East.  The capture of Rome was overshadowed by the success of the landings and Germany was in deep trouble whether D-Day succeeded or not.

The Big Three had decided that there would be no seperate peace so a failed D-Day would have not given Hitler bargaining chips.  I think that worst case scenario is that Hitler would have gained an immeasurable political boost from his farsighted success in Normandy.  Stalin would have continued baying for the opening of a second European front.  Churchill would have lost his job and become a second rate telephone car insurance salesman.  The troops massed in Southern England would have gone to Italy and we would have finished the war in 1945 when Nuke's would have been dropped on Hamburg and Frankfurt in addition to the Japanese cities.

Will

[Wing Nut]

I don't think that Hitler would have been able to invade England under any circumstances.  By this time he was already fighting on two different fronts, and invading England with America in the fray and his navy gone probably would have been impossible.  

I think that it would have been harder, but the troops coming up through Italy would have driven a wedge through all of the low countries and cut off Hitlers armies in France.  Having divided him, the troops in the west could have been taken care of at leisure, while those in the east would have been the main objective.  Russia would have gotten more, maybe all, of Germany, but it would have stopped there.

[Hagar]

I think that once Hitler declared war on the US it was only a matter of time. I haven't given much thought to what would have happened if the D-Day invasion had failed. It would have been far more difficult & taken much longer but Nazi Germany would have been defeated in the end. The V weapons were just coming into play & who is to say what damage the V2 in particular might have caused to British towns & cities if the launch sites had not been knocked out by the invasion forces. Apart from destroying the factories & launch sites the Allies had no answer or defence to this weapon at the time.

It's quite possible that the Soviet troops would have overrun Germany by this time & the history of mainland Europe might have been somewhat different. With the homeland under Soviet control & the leadership gone the way would then be clear to the other occupied countries. The opportunity might have been too much to resist. Stalin was not known for keeping treaties any more than Hitler.

[Hagar]

and an also interesting one about how it might have been covered in the press...

Things have changed a lot both with media coverage & the attitude of the general public. Everyone realised the need for secrecy during WWII & knew their lives & those of their loved ones depended on it. They were well aware of being fed a certain amount of propaganda but weren't too bothered about it. Two well-known posters plastered everywhere at the time were "Be Like Dad - Keep Mum.....!" (maybe not PC now but effective) & "Walls Have Ears.....!".

Although 10,000 people from all walks of life worked at the top secret code-breaking establishment at Bletchley Park by the latter part of WWII, not one revealed what they did there even to their close families. (I can't imagine that happening today without some newshound finding out about it & broadcasting it to everyone.) This must have been one of the most closely guarded secrets of the whole war although there are many similar examples. Many took their secrets to the grave & the truth is still coming out now.

It's very different now with even top intelligence staff writing their memoirs immediately they leave the service. With the constant news coverage from both sides in a conflict I have often wondered how it's possible to fight a conventional war these days. Somehow I don't think that the date or location of the Normandy landing beaches would have remained secret too long.

[eno]

Just as a side note...
Heres one for Dread the film buff to look out ...... I remember a film during the 80's where a guy intercepted a message from 1943 (He lived in the 80's)... it was from an american or british ship which was sunk later on the day that the message was transmitted he managed to get a message to the ship and it didn't sail thus it wasnt destroyed .... The outcome ... europe and america were overrun by the Nazi's.

One interesting thing I heard during the D-Day coverage was of a husband and wife,  who met just after the war. Some 40 years after they met they both got invited ... unbeknown to eachother, to a reunion on the same weekend in London. They told eachother that they had school reunions on the same weekend... They traveled down seperately only to meet up again at the reunion which was for people that had worked at Bletchley Park during WW2. The different huts only ever communicated through runners or telephones no one knew what happened in the other huts and they very rarely met .... Such was the level of secrecy and the feeling of responsibility that everyone had to contributing to the war effort, that even after the war was over ...... no one really talked about what they had done at the time.

[Wing Nut]

I'm not familiar with that one.  Can you remember anyone who was in it or even one word of the title?  I could probably figure it out from there...  :P  :)

[Woodlouse2002]

Lets look at things this way. If D-Day had failed then the threat from the west would have vanished in a day. Hitler would then have been free to move those troops into Italy and the eastern front. Remember that Italy was an easy country to defend. The Gustav line alone had the Allies stuck for months with out advancing. So a few more defensive positions like that and it would have slowed the advance to nothing. After this, the extra troops on the eastern front would have dramatically slowed the Russian advance, hereby buying Germany more time.

By the wars end Germany was only a year or so off developing an atomic weapon. Also in this time such weapons as the V2 and even the V3 would have been developed and perfected and used against the allies. To further this there would have been more jet fighters avaliable to Germany. On top of this the chances are that the Amerika bomber program would be nearing completion here by enabling the east coast of the united states to come within range of Germanys new terror and nuclear weapons. And few missiles on New York and Washington would reduce America's moral to almost nothing and probably force her to pull out of the war.

After America backs out then it would take very little to make England bow out. Say a couple of atom bombs on Birmingham and Glasgow.

After the threat from the west was entirely removed then Germany would have been able to concentrate solely on Russia. With nuclear weapons, jet aircraft and other technology even Russia would have had a fight on its hands.

So there you go. A potential German Victory to WWII all from the failiure of D-Day.

[Hagar]

So there you go. A potential German Victory to WWII all from the failiure of D-Day.

Interesting theory Woody. Of course, the Allied invasion could not have been contemplated without total air superiority. A recon flight could not have failed to notice the huge build up of troops & equipment all over the south of England for weeks beforehand, let alone the ships in the Solent & the caissons for Mulberry Harbours dotted all along the south coast. It always amazed me that they got away with it.

From what I've read recently, the German atom bomb was not sufficiently advanced to be used for several years. I don't think it was ever more than a threat which started serious research by the Allies. It's possible that the V2 could have used bacteriological or chemical warheads instead of high explosive. I don't believe these would have been used first for fear of retaliation.

I think the Amerika Bomber project had been cancelled by this time & if not it would have taken several years to develop. Germany was also desperately short of raw materials & oil. There was a severe shortage of high octane fuel for the conventional fighters. The jet engines had a very short service life, something like 10 hours before they packed up. As I mentioned before I think it was only a matter of time.

[eno]

[quote]I'm not familiar with that one.

[Professor Brensec]

Sorry Woody, but I have to agree with Hagar on the German Atomic bomb business. I have read, and seen on many docos, that the German bomb program, in so far as it existed, was well behind the US program. I've constantly heard figures of at least 2 years off at wars end.
(All their 'heavy water' was destroyed in Norway, ala the Movie - I think that episode alone put the program back a couple of years. as the HW was essential to the research and production of the weapon)

But apart from that, the Yanks would certainly have still been bombing the 'living crap' out of cities such as Hamburg, Dresden etc.
I think it would have taken the Russians at least another 6 months to a year to get to Berlin. As it was, with D-day successful and the second front a reality, they took almost another year. By that time of course, Berlin would have been a smouldering ruin. As would virtually every other city in Germany. Not to mention the Industrial infrastructure, which was well below the required capacity to supply even the Eastern Front alone, with the required equipment and supplies.

Imagine the additional destruction that would have been unleashed on Germany if the US and Brits had not had the French front to worry about. Remember also, that Ike had given Bomber command over to the Normandy Invasion and subsequent campaign months prior to D-Day (to the chagrin of Lee Mallory).

So all this, I think would have culminated in a very, very wrecked Germany. Not to mention her Armies, due to the lack of supplies and equipment (which was already stetched very thinly) due to a more concentrated bombing campaign than the one we now know.

Consider the result of 500 or so B29's in Europe. they could have been bombing (20,000lbs each) the Eastern Front!!  US industry would have had no problem with turning out the extra planes etc for an extended European War.

D-Day's failure would certainly have been a dreadful drawback, but I think, through Italy and the continued bombing, Germany would not have been in any position to mount any invasions (if indeed the original invasion of Britain was really intended, which I think not - she never had the landing craft! - let alone the completye lack of any Western Airforce to speak of at that stage).

Also, with the troops and equipment that the Yanks had  in Britain, Germany would have been very hard pressed to have made any kind of headway had an invasion resulted anyway.

Further, I just thought, had D-day failed, I think that the US and Brits sending troops via the Baltic and/or Dardenelles to the Eastern front would have been a consideration, at least in as much as it would have given the US more control over what actually happened from that side.

puff....puff.....puff (all out of steam............. )

As Goering put it later: "When I saw Mustangs over Berlin (early '44), I knew the jig was up"...........

[Woodlouse2002]

Well, it was only a theoretical outcome. But I must point out, that in January 1945 the output of weapons in German factories was more than four times that in 1940. So bombing was not ruining their industry.