![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , gme6
@cornell.edu says... (ArtKramr) wrote in : What then? The war in central Europe (ETO) could have gotten our full resouces, D Day would have been a year earlier and the war would have been over a lot sooner, German troops in No. Africa and the MTO would have simply been isolated and would died on the vine. Why not? To just list what I see as some reasons (In no particular order): Lack of experience: The invasions of North Africa, Sicily, Salerno, and Anzio were learning experiences for the Allies. There would have likely been a lot of mistakes made without them. Perhaps a better plan might have been rather then fight a war in North Africa do a direct invasion of Sicily from Egypt. As it was North Africa costs the Axis dearly. IIRC about 25% of axis strength. U-boats: The U-boat menace wasn't really under control until mid 1943. This would have added extra difficulties in supplying a large army in mainland Europe (this is one of the reasons that the destruction of the German airforce didn't really get started till 1944). Aircraft: In 1943 the German airforce was more intact than in 1944. The Allies would have been dealing with a significantly stronger Luftwaffe while at the same time lacking some of their better aircraft. Italy (and MTO operations in general): Knocking Italy out of the war was worth a lot to the Allies, both on land and at sea. Germany was forced to devote units to Italy that could have been used elsewhere (like repelling an allied landing), and British navel assets were able to devote their energies to tasks other than trying to counter Italian and German ships (a task which tied up several British capital ships for most of the early war). Isolating the Germans in North Africa would have taken a lot of material, and would have been very difficult. An in-the-war Italy and the need to contest the Germans in the MTO would have still been a big equipment sink (definitely bigger than the Italian sideshow in 1944 was). As it was in 1944, Italy diverted almost a million German troops from more important fronts. It cost the Allies almost as much but they could afford it. Lack of specialized equipment: The Allies had a lot of specialized equipment that played an important part in the D-Day operations. An invasion in 1943 would have most likely lacked things like enough specialized landing craft, the more interesting supply solutions, and specialized tanks. Not as much as you would think. The invasion of Sicily involved more landing crafts then D-Day. -- Intelligence does not imply reason or purpose 17th saying of Bernard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|