Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 68

Thread: What if D day had failed

  1. #41
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Fair enough and my perception of Rundstedt is very likely coloured by his first two campaigns. Not sure about him "following a script" though, the so called Manstein plan was prepared on Runstedt's orders as a reaction to Fall Gelb. of course everyone claimed responsibility for the plan after it had succeeded and I accept the argument that German tactical capability plus French morale problems may have meant the original plan (if it had ot fallen into WAllied hands) might have worked too.
    Rundstedt approved of Mansteins suggestions. But the actual war plan was largely put together on OKW's initiative and by the OKH and its officers as the workers. Largely the decision to carry out an Ardennes attack and to draw the plans which are based on Manstein's suggestions was due to a series of war games which were organized. The German team won by a landslide and then every officer supported it. But the final plan was based on the Manstein Plan. I guess this speaks favorably of Rundstedt for recognizing that the original plans were insufficient. Rundstedt's real credit goes towards carrying out the final plan but it is worth considering that when the operations were actually carried out, French deployments prevented the Allies from actually doing anything about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    I do think Runstedt's classic Prussian (OK he was a Saxon by Prussian style) leadership allowed the feisty subordinates in Guderian Rommel etc to burst through and, disobeying orders, exploit around the rear of the WAllied forces.
    I am assuming you are referring to the events after Sedan had already fallen? If I recall Rundstedt actually ordered all Panzer units to halt (and this is also around the events of Dunkirk). The plan was to take Sedan and move up the rivers towards the coast. I don't think Rundstedt was in support of their later actions, which were insubordinate. Rommel and Guderian are often glorified in the historiography but in my opinion it can be debated how necessary their independent actions really were.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    In 1941 Rundstedt methodically tackled the enormous concentration of Soviet forces in Ukraine, driving them back and setting them up for the horrifying kesselschlact at Kiev ( albeit aided by Guderians fateful wheel to the right. Yes Stalins orders crippled the Soviets but it was Hitler's orders that drove the Werhmacht beyond sensible and fensible positions for the crippling Winter counterattack. I thought Runstedt's Barabarossa campaign was textbook and thorough, which annoyed Hitler who was expecting unrealistic results.

    [edit] Just a comment about my PoV, I've tried a few table top games (Columbia, TK and TK2, bunch of others) so i definitely have a western bias. The Eastern Front is a nightmare to represent and to conduct. My particular perception is the narrow front south of the Pripyet marshes where Rundstedt faced the largest concentration of armoured and mechanised forces in the world in 1941 is a very tough nut to crack. Yes Stalin's stupid "no aggro" orders mean there's a rapid push back in the first month but it develops into relatively open country with a terrible supply net for the Germans and a great supply net (into the huge hub at Kiev) for the Soviets. The advances into Ukraine may not have occurred at the same pace as the northern blitz but it faced more opposition in greater depth.
    ah, If you mean operationally then sure. Rundstedt did well enough at Kiev but in large part the success was due to orders issued from above. At the time Rundstedt was asking for immediate reinforcements and support. Something which Hitler was willing to do, but which went against the desires of people like Guderian, von Bock etc. Yet later Rundstedt seems to have joined the "attack Moscow" clique. In his memoires he also claims to have supported and strongly urged an attack on Moscow. His later performance on the Don was by no means exceptional. Was he correct about not being able to take Rostov? Yeah maybe. But I think above all his removal was actually about Hitler's desire to remove the more traditional Wehrmacht "Prussians" after the debacle of Operation Typhoon. Despite Rundstedt's nay saying the campaign in the Don was necessary and this is demonstrated by Stalin's fervent defense of the region simultaneous to Typhoon.

    Minor side note but I always found it interesting that Rundstedt was given command of the main attack in 1939 and 1940 but in 1941 he was given the secondary Army Group South and von Bock was given the main thrust instead of playing support.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  2. #42
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    French deployments prevented the Allies from actually doing anything about it.
    Good point in the sense that the Germans had a good novel plan but in many ways the the French and UK took steps to optimize the results of it. Had they stayed in there original positions and had the French air force been fully engaged and deployed things would not have been so easy for Germany.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  3. #43
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    At the very least they could have put a sizable reserve force to plug any gaps if they needed to. No they had to divert those to the flanks as well.

    This is really on the French for carrying out a soft purge on all their generals prior to the war. They could have kept Maxime Weygand instead of sending him off to Syria. I am instantly reminded of the anime Legends of the Galactic Heroes, if anyone understands what I mean. It seems to be the case that civilian authorities never have good relations with the army.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  4. #44
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    At the very least they could have put a sizable reserve force to plug any gaps if they needed to. No they had to divert those to the flanks as well.

    This is really on the French for carrying out a soft purge on all their generals prior to the war. They could have kept Maxime Weygand instead of sending him off to Syria. I am instantly reminded of the anime Legends of the Galactic Heroes, if anyone understands what I mean. It seems to be the case that civilian authorities never have good relations with the army.
    Also I would say Reynaud needed a spine as well France should and could have fought on out of Algeria with a US LL life line. The UK and France could at minimum swept Italy out of the Africa. And Japan would have faced a much more difficult task if it wanted a Pacific war. Having to fight for every in inch of France would have cost the Germans a lot treasure. In fact Hitler would almost assuredly had to have placated Stalin more because he would not be able to afford a war with the USSR.
    Last edited by conon394; July 13, 2019 at 11:33 PM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  5. #45

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    The ironic part is that Paul Reynaud was considered as a more determined leader, at least in comparison to his predecesssor, Édouard Daladier. His mistress, Hélène de Portes, who was essentially the stereotype of a reactionary aristocrat infatuated with fascism, was sometimes blamed for her lover's unwillingness to continue the war effort, but I doubt she played an influential role. The crux of the matter is that many members of the French elite, political, commercial, industrial and military, were prepared to accept German domination and the dissolution of the Third Republic, as a necessary measure, in order to elimintate the threat posed by Communism and guarantee France's prosperity, in a future presumably controlled by the Third Reich and marked by Nazism and its various offshoots. The fact that the vast majority of the National Assembly approved of the Vichy regime and the appointment of Marshal Pétain as its head with dictatorial powers shows that the responsibility for the controversial surrender of France is not limited to certain politicians and officers.

    It's not a coincidence that almost the entirety of the Vichy 80 was composed of leftist parliamentarians. Suspicion directed towards Great Britain, the vanity of the Navy or even the opportunism of ruthless generals and political leaders also contributed significantly, but we should not underestimate the importance of the fact that a large portion of the establishment viewed the ceasefire and the subsequent satellite status of France to Germany as a necessary measure to save a bit of France's geopolitical capital, to protect its interests and privileges and finally to maintain the current social and financial structure of the country. Although the client-state was mainly ruled by radical right-wingers, such as Pétain or Pierre Laval, including ultra-conservatives, clerical fascists and royalists, more moderate and mainstream elements tolerated the new regime and supported, at least silently, its function and initiatives. The situation changed, rather slowly, as the prospects of a German victory gradually shrank, with the entry of the Soviet Union and America to the war. Then, many former ''collaborators'' played a double game, until they changed sides completely, once the collapse of Hitler's empire became inevitable.

  6. #46
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    The ironic part is that Paul Reynaud was considered as a more determined leader, at least in comparison to his predecesssor, Édouard Daladier. His mistress, Hélène de Portes, who was essentially the stereotype of a reactionary aristocrat infatuated with fascism, was sometimes blamed for her lover's unwillingness to continue the war effort, but I doubt she played an influential role. The crux of the matter is that many members of the French elite, political, commercial, industrial and military, were prepared to accept German domination and the dissolution of the Third Republic, as a necessary measure, in order to elimintate the threat posed by Communism and guarantee France's prosperity, in a future presumably controlled by the Third Reich and marked by Nazism and its various offshoots. The fact that the vast majority of the National Assembly approved of the Vichy regime and the appointment of Marshal Pétain as its head with dictatorial powers shows that the responsibility for the controversial surrender of France is not limited to certain politicians and officers.

    It's not a coincidence that almost the entirety of the Vichy 80 was composed of leftist parliamentarians. Suspicion directed towards Great Britain, the vanity of the Navy or even the opportunism of ruthless generals and political leaders also contributed significantly, but we should not underestimate the importance of the fact that a large portion of the establishment viewed the ceasefire and the subsequent satellite status of France to Germany as a necessary measure to save a bit of France's geopolitical capital, to protect its interests and privileges and finally to maintain the current social and financial structure of the country. Although the client-state was mainly ruled by radical right-wingers, such as Pétain or Pierre Laval, including ultra-conservatives, clerical fascists and royalists, more moderate and mainstream elements tolerated the new regime and supported, at least silently, its function and initiatives. The situation changed, rather slowly, as the prospects of a German victory gradually shrank, with the entry of the Soviet Union and America to the war. Then, many former ''collaborators'' played a double game, until they changed sides completely, once the collapse of Hitler's empire became inevitable.
    Nice summary, and you are right I was actually a bit unfair to Reynaud. I did sorta make it look like it was his fault. Realistically you are spot on too many of the elites wanted the 3rd republic sweep away. Not even had he channeled Demosthenes, Lincoln and Churchill together could have likely rallied France.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  7. #47
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,355

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Very sensible points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    ...
    But when 1939 broke out into a war Hitler did the unthinkable and signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, even making concessions to Stalin, which was interpreted as a sign that Germany had finally chosen a side, the Soviet side of all things...
    I don't think we can overstate how staggering this was at the time. In his "Sword of Honour" trilogy Waugh's hero expresses this shock: "The enemy at last was plain in view, huge and hateful, all disguise cast off." Any hope that Communism and the Nazis would cancel each other out was shattered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    ... Who is to say that there wouldn't be a war in 1942 to 1944 when an actual war had been projected. ...
    I agree completely. Stalin was shaping up for a war of annihilation against the Nazis, but he was likely to have expanded his Empire aggressively in any case (as he was historically). The aftermath of WWI ensured future wars IMHO.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  8. #48
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    I agree completely. Stalin was shaping up for a war of annihilation against the Nazis, but he was likely to have expanded his Empire aggressively in any case (as he was historically). The aftermath of WWI ensured future wars IMHO
    Cautiously however. Stalin wanted more than he had, but I assume he worried that to big a bit would unite the all Capitalist/Imperial/Western powers against him. Say Hitler did not attack Stalin and slugged it out against the UK. So Stalin invades when? Hitler would desperately need the MR pact even more and would likely have had to accede to Soviet demands (what as I recall German technical products and assistance, joint control over the black sea, and Baltic, more bits of Finland and I think Romania maybe Bulgarian adjustments as well). Stalin gets what he wants with the risk of war.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  9. #49
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,355

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Cautiously however. ...
    Yes very good points.

    I think Stalin wants to rope a dope, not as catastrophically as happened but the classic Russian play is lure a foe over scorched earth to the battleground of your choosing.

    If he lashes out in any direction (China, central Asia, Caucasus, eastern Europe, Baltic or Scandinavia) he's going to have a bad time.

    That said Stalin was gagging to invade somewhere. His army was an utter shambles after the 1937 purges and years off being refitted, but he pulled the trigger on Poland, Baltic States, Finland and Roumnania in rapid sequence when the WAllies declared war on Germany. Stalin used classic Nazi salami tactics, a reasonable pretext here, a little extra there, a bit of escalation and oh...we took the whole place!

    I think once the Red Army was refitted and retrained in 1942 he'd be prepared to go to war in less favourable circumstances.

    I'd add Hitler was able to use salami tactics because Stalin was perceived to be the main threat: all the guns were pointed at Moscow which gave Hitler pretexts and wiggle room. Hitler used that wiggle room from the Rhineland to Spain to Austria and only ran out of wiggles in Czechoslovakia.

    Stalin had no such wiggle room but he did have a much stronger fifth column. His agents succesfully dominated the legitimate Spanish government once that awful civil war began, they paralysed France from the mid 1930's onwards (essentially preventing an anti-Soviet crusade) and even infiltrated the UK's top echelons (curiously enough not so much through the labour Party as Cambridge). Stalin enjoyed almost complete intelligence transparency (even greater than the WAllies despite ULTRA), the chief failure of Soviet intel in WWII was Stalin's initial unwillingness to listen to reliable sources like Sorge.

    I suspect Stalin had a "Spanish Civil War" template for France, a state deeply divided against itself. The opportunity of the German alliance was too god to pass up though. had it failed to materialise either a Franco German war or a french civil war would be his next agenda item.

    The massive and effective French Military crumbled in no time in WWII, probably the greatest shock in a war full of amazing plot twists: thats as much because of communist destabilisation and bickering with the French Right (that prevented effective French support for either side in Spain, or against Hitler in the beginning). Maybe Stalin's influence was too effective? Stalin didn't want Hitler victorious, I think he wanted another ghastly stalemate so he could choose the winner.

    OTOH in a French Civil War Germany is likely to be involved, and Britain at least distracted so the Soviets could pull of their border war program as they did IRL. War with Hitler was inevitable, I think Stalin knew that all along, but if we go AH and he's facing Weimar then its German Civil War next.

    After the war he continued stoking war in China, and drew the US into a pointless war in Korea. he was very skilled and embroiling enemies and even friends in squabbles so they did not have time to attack him.

    Stalin's conduct was relentless and coherent. He could shift policy of the situation required it (adopting nationalism and even relenting on religious persecution to bolster his troops, embracing the M/R pact) and was only occasionally caught flat footed (he didn't count on Hitler's suicidal attack in 1941, and paid for it).

    His purge of the Red Army was actually well timed: the West was increasingly ambivalent about Hitler but the moment for the anti-Soviet crusade was past, and there was no way Germany could be economically ready for full scale war until the mid 1940's. A five year military plan meant the Red Army was ready to roll into Central Europe in 1942. In RL it happened in 1944, after losing its ration strength (3-4 million men) about three times over (ten million casualties). Thats sound planning, for the mission to succeed despite so much going wrong.

    Hitler had a dream, Stalin had a plan, France and Britain had problems. The only opponent with the same depth of vision as Stalin was Roosevelt, and he died before the war was over.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  10. #50
    Senator
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,121

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Great points as always!
    Some humble additions: The French government after ww1 always feared a coup from right wing generals, therefore they misstrusted their armed forces and tried to keep them under civilian control.

  11. #51
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,355

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Morifea View Post
    Great points as always!
    Some humble additions: The French government after ww1 always feared a coup from right wing generals, therefore they misstrusted their armed forces and tried to keep them under civilian control.
    I did not know this, French politics (aside from the obvious division between Ultras and reds) is opaque to me. Were names named? Was Petain suspected?
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  12. #52
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    I did not know this, French politics (aside from the obvious division between Ultras and reds) is opaque to me. Were names named? Was Petain suspected?
    I alluded to it in my previous post. Petain sort of, mostly Maxime Weygand and he was actually sent to Syria although not in charge of the armed forces for some time. Petain hadn't been in charge of the army since like 1925 and didn't have active commands. The fear was more Petain's popularity rather than his political ability. Where as with Weygand there was a fear that he and others would stage a coup at a time when France was politically unstable, some even expected a Spanish Civil War type of scenario or an Italy and Germany type of thing.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  13. #53
    Senator
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,121

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Don`t want to open another thread for it, therefore I´m askin here:
    Why weren´t the american Marines used in Normandy? Landing Operations are their prime objective, those troops would be my first pick if I would have to attack a fortified Coast.

    Possible Answer in my head:
    - All Marine Divisions tied down in the Pacific and it would take to long to relocate them to Europe.

    Or am I missing something?

  14. #54
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Morifea View Post
    Don`t want to open another thread for it, therefore I´m askin here:
    Why weren´t the american Marines used in Normandy? Landing Operations are their prime objective, those troops would be my first pick if I would have to attack a fortified Coast.

    Possible Answer in my head:
    - All Marine Divisions tied down in the Pacific and it would take to long to relocate them to Europe.

    Or am I missing something?
    More or less logistics. Moving them would have been prohibitively expensive in terms of capacity. No doubt service rivalry played a part. It certainly did in the more inexcusable failure to use long range navy and or marine fighter models to escort bombers and ignoring advice and equipment from the UK and or USMC for more armored landing craft. More subtly the USMC was experienced fighting the Japanese in the Pacific while the US and UK units used in the ETO (at least many of them) were experienced landing against Germans and fighting them. Theoretically the US and UK could have massed their 'landing' veterans and equipment from the Pacific for D-day but assuming the allies absorbed the logistical cost you would also disrupt all offensives in the Pacific...
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  15. #55
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    I think UMC losses play a role too:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tarawa

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilber...ttle_of_Majuro

    I think fresh filled up UMC units wouldn't perform much better than Army units to justity the delay in operations and the costs.

    And additionally the tides in Atlantic and Pacific are different, so i see no big experience gain.

    Finally i think Mac Arthur would have run politically amok if "his" war in the Pacific would have been delayed by taking away "his" UMC.
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; September 19, 2019 at 08:47 AM.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  16. #56
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Finally i think Mac Arthur would have run politically amok if "his" war in the Pacific would have been delayed by taking away "his" UMC.
    His war in the Pacific was largely pointless particularly the Philippines end game. Nimitz should have been the only one running a US war there. Mac after presiding over the worst US defeat of the war - self inflicted by himself should have been planning nothing but the checkers game in Leavenworth if not shot out of hand as a Japanese agent when he fled.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  17. #57

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    His war in the Pacific was largely pointless particularly the Philippines end game. Nimitz should have been the only one running a US war there. Mac after presiding over the worst US defeat of the war - self inflicted by himself should have been planning nothing but the checkers game in Leavenworth if not shot out of hand as a Japanese agent when he fled.
    American owed the Philippines, and while it was not necessary to the ultimate defeat of Japan, it didn't really really matters that much in my opinion. The Philippines campaign effectively destroyed rhe Japanese feelt as a fighting force making it easier to invade Okinawa and Iojima. The Japanese ships lost in at the Philippines might of been used to defend those islands.

    But Instead with your sentiments about McArthur. He was a vainglorious prick, and his mistakes at the Philippines should have had him removed from any command.

  18. #58
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    American owed the Philippines, and while it was not necessary to the ultimate defeat of Japan, it didn't really really matters that much in my opinion. The Philippines campaign effectively destroyed rhe Japanese feelt as a fighting force making it easier to invade Okinawa and Iojima. The Japanese ships lost in at the Philippines might of been used to defend those islands.

    But Instead with your sentiments about McArthur. He was a vainglorious prick, and his mistakes at the Philippines should have had him removed from any command.
    On the first yes I suppose it a fair argument for two diffrent vectors of advance on Japan...

    But you are correct I was mostly alluding to MacArthur's massive mismanagement of defending the Philippines. That should have been a nasty resource bleeding sore for a lot longer for the IJA/IJN.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  19. #59

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Mac after presiding over the worst US defeat of the war - self inflicted by himself should have been planning nothing but the checkers game in Leavenworth if not shot out of hand as a Japanese agent when he fled.
    Mac fleeing the Philippines was never going to do anything to him. He did that under orders from Roosevelt. The day following orders from the president sends you to jail is the day falls apart in the chain of command.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  20. #60
    Senator
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,121

    Default Re: What if D day had failed

    Thanks for the input!

    @conon394: I could read your venting about Mac the whole day long, I demand more!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •