D-Day Help

there is the fact that There could of been temporary peace treaty between Allies and Axis

Also an invasion from the Mediteranian
if that helps any
-jake

hey, i tried to research more on that for you but i couldn't find anything to back that up...i think jake just knew it..right jake?

I just registered and noticed your question. What about Germany being able to complete work on atomic weapons and jet aircraft and committing more men to the Russian Front to stall the Russian offensive. There may have been an Allied invasion on southern France however that would have been about a year or so after Normandy.

How about the possibility of troops being transferred from the Pacific in order to hasten another invasion of France therby lengthing the war in the Pacific?

There really are endless possibiliteis when you think it through.

Quote:
-Germany would have overthrown Great Britain.
-Spain would have joined the axis.
-France would still be under German control.
-Russia's casualty rate would have increased faster.

1.) No. Winston Churchill would not have given up. Hitler screwed himself when he opened a war on two fronts, one with Britain and one with USSR. Hitler had not the manpower or the time to successfully invade the USSR. When he attacked he had a monstrous Russian force to overtake in a short couple of months before the Russian winter. An invading army can not survive in during a Russian winter, simply because it stops supplies. It happened for Napoleon and it happened to Hitler.

2.) Spain was already marginally under German control, which was why they were not invaded. Spain traded exclusively with the Nazi’s and opened banks for stolen relics from museums and concentration camp internees. Spain would not have officially joined the axis because they didn’t need to. They were already a fascist government.

3.) Absolutely not. Like I said with number one, Hitler screwed himself with two fronts. With Gen. Patton coming through Africa and up Italy, and the Russian winter approaching, Hitler could not win, or last another sixty years.

4.) I don't really think USSR's casualties could have increased any faster. If you look at any chart with casualties during the war, USSR nearly triples everyone else’s. They would have more casualties certainly, however, they would not have increased the rate of casualties.

Quote:
There is the fact that there could have been temporary peace treaty between Allies and Axis

I absolutely disagree with this statement (sorry Jake). Stalin was too angry at Hitler for stabbing him in the back, Churchill just had half of England leveled, and Roosevelt just had Pearl Harbor bombed by another axis power. The citizens of all the allied countries would not have let a peace begin.

Quote:
What if D-day had failed? (D-day at Normandy)

Ok my predictions:
-General Dwight Eisenhower would have been removed from command. If you think about the number of soldiers involved on D-Day, a failure would have disgraced him.
-The allies would have elected a new supreme commander, Most likely General Montgomery, And proceeded with Operation Market Garden. Monty always disagreed with Ike's planned invasion and designed OP. MG instead. It was a massive parachute assault that would have basically done the same thing as D-Day, just closer to Germany.
-Gen Patton would be moved back to Africa and push up Italy After his disgrace and transfer to England to begin the D-Day Hoax, a D-Day failure would have moved him back with his tank corps. I believe he would have moved up through the Siegfried Line and into Germany.
-Hitler would have taken the skies back. the ME-262 (the first jet fighter) was close to completion a year after D-Day, had it been placed into mass production, it would have dominated the allied planes.
-The war would have lasted much longer. If Op. MG failed, Hitler still would have eventually lost, he was just too confident. All countries that get overconfident eventually try to take something they cannot take, and lose. Granted the war would not have ended too quickly, but the Nazi's would have been defeated eventually, USSR had too many people, and the USA had too good of production.
-Quote:committing more men to the Russian Front to stall the Russian offensive. I do agree with this but I don’t think the USSR could really have been totally stopped, they just had too many soldiers. Plus if you add in the Russian winter, Germany would have lost again.

Anyway that’s my general thought on the question.:D

They had more men in WW I as well but still suffered the most casaulties of the war. If Germany had committed more men and equipment to the Eastern Front I believe they would have stalled the Russian Offensive, maybe not start a German Offensive, but hold on long enough to develop the jet and atomic weapons and then, winter or no winter, Russia would have been whipped.:D

QUOTE=Slider0917]1.) No. Winston Churchill would not have given up. Hitler screwed himself when he opened a war on two fronts, one with Britain and one with USSR. Hitler had not the manpower or the time to successfully invade the USSR. When he attacked he had a monstrous Russian force to overtake in a short couple of months before the Russian winter. An invading army can not survive in during a Russian winter, simply because it stops supplies. It happened for Napoleon and it happened to Hitler.

2.) Spain was already marginally under German control, which was why they were not invaded. Spain traded exclusively with the Nazi’s and opened banks for stolen relics from museums and concentration camp internees. Spain would not have officially joined the axis because they didn’t need to. They were already a fascist government.

3.) Absolutely not. Like I said with number one, Hitler screwed himself with two fronts. With Gen. Patton coming through Africa and up Italy, and the Russian winter approaching, Hitler could not win, or last another sixty years.

4.) I don't really think USSR's casualties could have increased any faster. If you look at any chart with casualties during the war, USSR nearly triples everyone else’s. They would have more casualties certainly, however, they would not have increased the rate of casualties.

I absolutely disagree with this statement (sorry Jake). Stalin was too angry at Hitler for stabbing him in the back, Churchill just had half of England leveled, and Roosevelt just had Pearl Harbor bombed by another axis power. The citizens of all the allied countries would not have let a peace begin.

Ok my predictions:
-General Dwight Eisenhower would have been removed from command. If you think about the number of soldiers involved on D-Day, a failure would have disgraced him.
-The allies would have elected a new supreme commander, Most likely General Montgomery, And proceeded with Operation Market Garden. Monty always disagreed with Ike's planned invasion and designed OP. MG instead. It was a massive parachute assault that would have basically done the same thing as D-Day, just closer to Germany.
-Gen Patton would be moved back to Africa and push up Italy After his disgrace and transfer to England to begin the D-Day Hoax, a D-Day failure would have moved him back with his tank corps. I believe he would have moved up through the Siegfried Line and into Germany.
-Hitler would have taken the skies back. the ME-262 (the first jet fighter) was close to completion a year after D-Day, had it been placed into mass production, it would have dominated the allied planes.
-The war would have lasted much longer. If Op. MG failed, Hitler still would have eventually lost, he was just too confident. All countries that get overconfident eventually try to take something they cannot take, and lose. Granted the war would not have ended too quickly, but the Nazi's would have been defeated eventually, USSR had too many people, and the USA had too good of production.
- I do agree with this but I don’t think the USSR could really have been totally stopped, they just had too many soldiers. Plus if you add in the Russian winter, Germany would have lost again.

Anyway that’s my general thought on the question.:D

Quote:
but hold on long enough to develop the jet and atomic weapons and then, winter or no winter, Russia would have been whipped.

I have to disagree with you again man. Documents found that were written by Hitler, including his journal, stated that he did not like the atomic weapon when it was presented to him. He scrapped the project believing that it was "wondrous" and "impossible". A few of his Generals disagreed with him and continued the project in secret. The same happened for the Sturmgewher, the worlds first assault rifle.

As for the ME-262, the Russian winter would again have been its downfall. The ME-262 was notoriously unreliable, the engines would fail, engines explode during flight, the mounting brackets of the engines would sheer of, just to state a few. If you try to fly that thing through a climate of subzero temperatures and blistering ice and snow, it’s not going to work.

Finally again with the A-bomb project. If completed and placed into production (the same happened with the Sturmgewher), you have to consider the delivery system available at the time. The V-2 was not designed to launch a rocket of the size required for the A-bomb. The V-3, which was under design, was not even close to production, and would have taken another 5-10 years. The other available delivery method, the BF-109 bomber, might not have worked either. The BF-109 was not designed as a long-range bomber; it flew from France to England. The trip required to bomb a city as far away as Moscow is much longer. Even if you consider if the Germans built a close airfield, you have to remember the payload the BF-109 would be carrying. The atomic bomb was, and still is, massive and incredibly heavy. The sheer weight of the bomb would increase the fuel consumption, leading too failure. Again there is the winter. You have to normal winter related mechanical failures related to climate. The same happened with American Apache's, and Cobra gunships in Desert Storm.

Even if you still don't believe me about the winter, consider the fact that ten times more soldiers throughout history have died because of disease brought about by harsh weathers (Washington at Valley Forge, Napoleon in Russia, American's in Vietnam, Russians in Afghanistan, Germans in Russia, Spanish in Peru and Mexico, British in Beirut) there’s more but I don't care to remember them now.

and what would desperation do to a madman? Would it change his mind about using it?

Do you think that German tecnology would have worked out the kinks with the ME-262? How far ahead of the rest of the world were they? Who else had developed the V1 and V2s?

delivery systems? How did we deliver the atomic bomb? Didn't Germany have bombers with enough range to reach Moscow, London? Not the U.S., at least not yet.