Was it possible or not to invade in 1943?

__________________
Regards, Richard

I guess they could have but definitely the lessons learnt in Italy helped to make the invasion in 1944 a successful one.

If I recall correctly the US side wanted to invade France already in 1943?

__________________

If the aftermath of Kursk was what it was with the influence of the Sicily invasion, I can't imagine the sudden sound of silence if there was an Overlord in 1943!

__________________

I'm not sure the allies were prepared to. Stalin certainly wanted them to invade so a second front could be opened, but he was always too hasty...

__________________
"Et tu Brute? Then fall Caesar."

Are the defences at the atlantic wall completed by 1943 ? if not, the allies could have more options open for them, especially with the landing sites.

but as said, the allies probably wont as ready as they were in 1944.

__________________
The Two World Wars

The Atlantic defences seem to have been in rather poor shape until Rommel was put in charge in late 1943. The Calais sector of course was top shape but that was expectable.

__________________

With Mother Russia crawling with Germans it's no wonder he felt 'hasty'

__________________

Actually Norway was the most defended. For some reason Hitler thought they would invade Norway first.

__________________

Facta non verba. "Deeds, not words"

Actually Norway was the most defended. For some reason Hitler thought they would invade Norway first. </font>[/quote]Ya, I still dont understand why he thinks the Norway would be a target? Even if the allies were to take over Norway (and he would lose the iron), it would take another invasion attempt to reach Germany.

__________________
The Two World Wars

Also Denmark was considered a place of invasion and I think there were lots of troops to defend the beaches.

Then again if you look for wierd places to invade first wasn´t Churchill interested in landing in the Balkans? Maybe somthing to do with getting "somewhere" before the Red Army?
ANyway, Hitler had lots of troops on those Med islands as well, and like we saw, the decisive battles were fought on those tiny islands.

__________________

I have read from another forum that the invasion of Normandy could have taken place in 1943 and shorten the war. I am not to sure about this situation could it be possible.

So here’s the situation North Africa and Scilly have been liberated next step Normandy, Italy would be a slugging match and progress would be slow unlike Normandy so could D-Day 1943 been more of a success?

__________________
Regards, Richard

Hands

Nicking Norway would not take the iron away from Hitler completely. The iron was from Sweden, they shipped it through Norway when Bottenviken was frozen up during the winter.

Hitlers theory of Norway as a destiny area came from the raids by commandoes and sabotage made by the Linge groups early in the war.

Hitler ended up garrisoning Norway with some 380000 men at the most. Surely a waste but U-boat bases and Luftwaffe bases made the convois to Russia more costly.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

I cannot remember now who had control of Iceland during 1943. Control of Iceland and the weather stations there is one of the key factors in Operation Overlord. The prediction of weather was much more difficult during WWII than it is today. I kind of take it for granted that I can look at satellite photos and see global weather at a moment's notice. In 1944 the key decision Eisenhower made for invading Normandy on the sixth of June was based on the weather predictions from his meteorologists. This data was primarily from the weather station in Iceland. It really came down to one thing though, whatever the weather was in Iceland, that was what the weather was going to be in the English Channel area three days later.

__________________
PEOPLE SLEEP PEACEABLY IN THEIR BEDS AT NIGHT ONLY BECAUSE ROUGH MEN STAND READY TO DO VIOLENCE ON THEIR BEHALF. GEORGE ORWELL

I believe U.S.A. had control over Iceland, or at least protected it.

__________________

Facta non verba. "Deeds, not words"

It was possible,but I think the western allies were waiting for the last German offensive on the SU to take place before invading.During the end of the offensive when the Germans were retreating the western allies could of invaded then that would cause max chaos for the Germans.But more likely the western allies were waiting for the SU to do the dirty job of finishing off what was left of the German army.

Well in the real events I believed the Americans wanted to invade Western Europe. But they went with Churchill to invade Southern Europe first. After the Kursk offensive the Germans had their hands full when the SU went over to the offensive. So back to the what if there dose seem to be a case for an invasion of Western Europe. Could it had worked and shorten the war?

__________________
Regards, Richard

Yes it could of but in 1943 the Germans still had Romania an important oil supply for the germans.If the allies invaded France in 1943 I think the Germans would of put up a bigger fight than in 1944.The allies would eventually form a secure bridgehead and take france but it would of been much more costly in terms of lives.Also in 1943 the allied forces in the uk were not fully up to full strengh for the dday landings.

This implies a common misconception. Surely Swedish ore made up a sizable part of iron ore available to the German economy, but there were other sources like mines in Germany itself and occupied countries, and Germany could also rely on large existing stockpiles of ore, refined and scrap metal in occupied countries all over Europe.

Later in the war problems appeared with the exhausting of stocks of steel making metals, and cutting off of supplies from the Iberian neutral countries due to Allied diplomatic pressure. This caused a decrease in quality in armour (includind reports of Tiger IIs having soft steel side armour!!) and armour piercing metals, priority being given to machine tools production.

This Hitler's obsession with raw materials was totally unjustified as alternative sources could and did be found. Even his capers with the famous Donbass manganese mines and the heartburn he gave Army Group South for them were completely unwarranted as during Germany's hold of them only a miserly amount could be extracted, and I don't know if this was simply not scrapping the rest of the stockpile.

__________________

Hmm, Iceland was mainly important as an anti-Uboot base and as a stepping stone for transatlantic flights, as it stands smack in the Newfoundland-UK great circle. As for weather, the navies had a number of weather observation ships spread on the North Atlantic for the purpose. Not as good as sattelites today, but the best they could manage at the time. Germany relied on weather reports from their U-Boats and Condor flights, which tended to decrease as the war wore on.

__________________

For an operation at the same scale as Overlord there simply was not enough shipping assets at the time yet, and what there was was tied up in the Med. Also there were not enough men and materials concentrated in sufficient numbers in the UK.

__________________

I agree with you Za. It was to big of an operation to risk thankfully the allies got it right.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Za I did not imply that Germany got ALL it's iron from Sweden, I replied to the bloke who mused that taking Norway would block iron going to germany.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942