![]() |
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 16:07:18 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote: Because there is no way the invasion could have been successfully launched in 1943. I disagree. The troops, There were as many divisions available as they were used between June 6th 1944 and August 1st 1944 on the Normandy bridgehead. landing craft Allies had enough landing craft to perform Husky in summer 1943 and Torch in autumn 1942. There were certainly enough craft to land the five divisions of the first wave and immediate support. and aircraft were simply not available Allies had in ETO and MTO at least twice as much aircraft (without counting strategic bombers) than Luftwaffe had in total. Throughout 1943, Luftwaffe was incapable of preventing Allied air, naval and ground operations in the Mediterranean. In case of 1943 invasion, Allied assets that couldn't have been used in the Mediterranean (Air Defense of Great Britain) would have been utilised. Some 5000 ships and landing craft, 600,000 tons of supplies and 200,000 vehicles had to be assembled These were the forces needed to arrive to German border within three months of D-day, but such requirement would not be necessary condition for the success of 1943 invasion. in addition to the armies and then there's the little matter of winning air superiority over the landing beaches. Without the decimation of the Luftwaffe in late 1943 and early 1944 and lacking long range escort fighters any attempted invasion would have been exceptionally risky. Luftwaffe was incapable of defeating Allied air forces in the Mediterranean. By mid 1943, Allies had twice as much fighters available as Luftwaffe had. Allied did not need long range escorts for air superiority over La Manche and bridgehead. As for the MTO it was simply not possible to isolate the German and Italian armies and ignore them. Operation Torch was not necessary. If it was skipped, Allies would have had the resources to establish a second front in north-western France in 1943. Had they been able to seize the Suez canal and middle east It's long way from El Agheila to Iraq. they would have had access to virtually unlimited oil supplies from Iraq The wells that would have been thoroughly wrecked by retreating British. It would have taken at least six months to repair the damages. In addition, Italy lacked enough tankers to carry the oil. As it was the forces captured when Tunisia fell were greater than those captured at Stalingrad and not only was Italy knocked out of the war but the Germans had to garrison that country as well thus diverting troops who could have been used to defend Northern France. Italian troops were disarmed and sent to work in Germany thus freeing Germans to man the garrison divisions deployed to replace Italian divisions. Italians were more efficient working in German war economy than in Italian one. Drax |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|