does anyone think the western allies,after overlord,could have won the european war in 1944?,if so,how.would be interested in your thoughts.cheers..
Hello 4th wilts, I sure do. Monty's OMG was a brilliant idea, but badly executed and changes in regards to the situation arrogantly ignored. As I already mentioned in another thread, I do not undrstand why the XXX Corps did not continue towards Arnheim. The existing German troops would have not stood a chance. The main reason IMO why the allies were not able "willing" to end the war in 1944, was: a) Stalin was still to far away and the Western allies were (understandably) not willing to take the cassulties on their behalf. b) The Western allies were taking consideration (Unlike Hitler) on behalf of their troops and as such avoided a stronger push that would automatically have raised cassulties. c) The Italy campaign after Sicily should have been replaced by a Balkan Campaign such as Churchill initially suggested. Regards Kruska
Could you clarify what you mean by asking why XXX corps did not continue towards Arnhem? As I understand it they were initially delayed by losses of the first bridge, then there was trouble taking the Nijmegen bridge, and at that point they reached a section which really had to be cleared out by infantry and not tanks, plus the single road was proving inadequate for supplies. I suspect that everything would have easily been a success anyway except that the Germans got lucky and had their panzer divisions regrouping at Arnhem already. The battle at Arnhem was in some sense a moral victory for the Red Devils: they held off the far better equipped and far more numerous panzer troops for days. Especially impressive is the performance of the troops under Col. Frost and Capt. (or was it Major?) Mackay. In my opinion their performance was quite probably the greatest example of British valour in the war (outside of some Commando ops). Of course the performance of XXX Corps is one of the less-impressive things, but I think the problem was really that Monty refused to consider two things: the Dutch intelligence about the terrain and its unsuitability, and the aerial photograhps indicating the presence of unexpected units near the bridge. Monty's performance outside of Africa is unimpressive and smacks of a certain disconnect from reality (perhaps I am biased a little ). In any case the Western Allies would certainly have won. Total air superiority negated any advantage that the Germans had from their superior armor (and as I am sure has been discussed here, the Mk III and Mk IV were actually comparable to late-war Shermans, and there weren't many of the MK V and MK VI to go around). A Balkan invasion would probably have gotten a number of Eastern nations to turn on Germany. The Polish underground would have been exploited instead of being destroyed as the Soviets did.
kruska,let us suppose that the western allies surrounded and cut the rhur off.do you think the german high command and armed forces would or could have continued the fight. were there any other operations,not just o.m.g.that were considered by the allies?.cheers.
Hello 4th wilts, That’s a good question or intake of alternative scenarios. One of two operation plans I am aware would be Churchill’s proposal to invade through the Balkans. Besides stopping Stalin’s expanding policy I would believe that due to the total backup by Tito, and the very close proximity to Austria and over the border reflections towards Greece and Bulgaria/Rumania it would indeed have had a significant impact on a shortening of the war. The resistance in moving towards Austria in regards to the Italian Fascists till 1944 would not have existed. And German troops would still have been tied to Italy in order to prevent an invasion and to keep Italy under control. As such an additional spreading of German forces would have occurred by setting up a 4th front in the Balkans. There was also a “revised” eddition of invading Norway in 1943, which would have had a disastrous result on the German industry and I would see no feasible risk for an Allied landing in Norway in autumn 1943. Therefore I would conclude that if the Allies would have invaded through Yugoslavia after the Sicily campaign and a 4-5 Divisions encompassing invasion of Norway at the same time would have resulted together with the initial Normandy invasion into collapse of Germany before Christmas 1944 and the losses for the Western Allies might also have been less. As for a successful or carried on OMG resulting into an occupation of the Ruhr in September/October 1944 IMO would have shortened the war due to the fact that about 40% of Germany’s industry and Power supply would have been gone and the population density in the Ruhr accounted for about 20-25% of the total German population. The Western allies could have advanced into Germany without meeting much of a resistance since Hitler would still have emphasized on the eastern front and the time span needed for raising the Volkssturm and pressing HJ boys into the Wehrmacht wouldn’t have existed in most of the Western part of Germany. Regards Kruska
thanks kruska,i have never considered jugoslavia before.cheers.. dear madphysicist,do you consider xxx corps as a whole or just the guards armd div.cheers..
In order for the allies to win, Berlin would have to be taken. As long as Hitler was alive, there would be no surrender and there were enough Germans that still believed in and obeyed him. Berlin could not be taken in 44' so I would say the answer is no
Good point but would the German troops fight as hard against the Western Allies as they did against the Russians for Berlin?
Hello PzJgr, Not quite remember those July 44 guys? true they weren't very sucessfull but in face of a Ruhr occupation in Sept/Oct 44 and Allied troops advancing through Austria and Bavaria - mhh.. who knows Regards Kruska
Hi 4th wilts, I had the following as the answer I was looking for on a question on the Quiz back last year that sort of answers your first question. Particularly since it was about XXX Corps. Eisenhower was in a remote French villa on the west coast of the Cherbourg Peninsula, his new headquarters were 650 km behind the front lines in a French fishing village of Jollouville. On Sept 5 he was confined to bed rest with a plastered knee after severely wrenching it following his return from one of his personal visits by airplane or jeep to the advanced headquarters of his commanders. These personal visits had been necessitated following the rush to set up headquarters in Normandy, but the location meant he did not have radio or telephone linkups with either his military fronts or his SHAEF headquarters in London. "Most Immediate" signals, sent to and from Eisenhower by wireless code, were being delayed for as long as 3 or 4 days. Churchill was on the Queen Mary and he was also not immediately in communication with what was happening on Sept 5. He too was ill. The significance suggested in various reading was that communication with major players was broken down at a time when communication could have made a difference in the length of the war. The British 11th Armoured had driven to the banks of the Albert Canal in Antwerp. They still had 100 litres of petrol per vehicle, with a futher day's supply within reach. General Horrocks was not advised that the highest level of British Intelligence knew that the German 15th Army was trapped in Flanders and was escaping across the Scheldt and then the Beveland Penninsula. If the 11th Armoured had bypassed the city of Antwerp or fought across the bridges to block the Beveland Isthmus they would have cut the main German escape route. The German army would not have been able to reconsolidate on the north side of the Albert Canal and kept the Allied Armies from taking control of the Scheldt Estuary which was key to using the port of Antwerp which was vital as an ongoing major supply point for the Allied Armies. Sept 5 Eisenhower wrote four paragraphs to Montgomery. Poor lines of communication caused the last half of the letter to reach command headquarters in Brussels first and two days later the beginning paragraph arrived: "While agreeing with your conception of a powerful and full-blooded thrust toward Berlin I do not agree that it should be initiated at this moment to the exclusion of all other manoeuvres...." it's final point being "While we are advancing we will be opening the ports of Havre and Antwerp, which are essential to sustain a powerful thrust deep into Germany." It has been suggested that by the time the actual shipping needs of Antwerp were back in everyone's radar following the euphoric attitudes of Dolle Dinstag, it was already too late and over 12,000 Canadian casualties amongst others would pay the price during the attritional battle of the next 2 months battling to regain the Scheldt Estuary and the Beveland Penninsula.
thankyou michell,i believe the guards armd div,was the only brit armd div not trained by gen hobart?.i would imo suggest that perhaps the 11th armd div,may have performed better in o.m.g. i have never understood why the armd welsh guards,the recon regt of the g.a.d were not up front.this is of course all conjecture on my part,but worth a thought.cheers.
Because as a Recce unit it was not equipped to lead a major advance, which has been explained to you at length in another place I seem to remember...
thankyou webmaster paul,but i understood it was an armd...cromwells..regt.british armoured divs in n/w europe all used armoured recon regts,although i do not know about the 79th armd div?,for example,the 15/19th kings hussars were the armd recon regt of the 11th armd div?.were recon regts ever used to lead an advance?.i dont know?.what about u.s armd divs?. thanks for the input webmaster paul.
i also read that the g.a.d usually fought as 4 battlegroups,one being the welsh guards battlegroup.cheers.
I think it would have depend on the progress of the red army. And without the offensive in the ardennes, the germans might have try a deep defence on the Rhine and it would have been long and difficult to break through it. Even with the success of market-garden, the germans wouldn't had been decisively defeated and could have defend northern germany... In the south, the 6th US army group (7th US army and 1st french army) still were in southern France at this time (they liberated Lyon in September). And I don't think only advance on the north of the front would have been very smart.
Hello clems, with what if I may ask, should the Germans have defended North Germany? The available troops would still be in parts of France slowing down the US/FFF advance. A withdrawl would have made it very easy for these two to follow up and enter into Southern Germany. It was the hilly and forrest areas of the Ardennes and Hurtgen right down to the Swiss border that enabled the weakened Wehrmacht to put up a certain defense, which IMO would have been impossible in North Germany. Everything north of Dortmund, Paderborn and Kassel is flat as a pancake all the way to Berlin. Due to the prevailing dominance of allied airpower the Wehrmacht wouldn't have stood a chance in the north. If Hitler would have deployed the "Ardennes Force" in north Germany in September/October (which he couldn't have done at that time due to the heavy engagements in the East at that period), their losses would have been far greater then those suffered in the Ardennes. Even the buildup of these forces could not have been disguised or covered up as in the Ardennes case. As a result of this the Wehrmacht could not have put up any significant resistance with the remaining forces along the Belgium, French - German borderline - in consequence the Allied advance in both - north and middle/south would have been even swifter with less resistance then as it was in history. Regards Kruska
speed,imo was what was needed to cross the rhine in 44,but only in the north could this be done.only the 1st u.s army,or 2nd brit army were close enough imo,to cross said river.were there any plans made by bradley or hodges?.but hey,im crazy.cheers.
dear webmaster paul,with the greatest rspect,imho the 2nd welsh guards armored recce regt,was equipped to lead an advance.it was their job,as i understand.yours 4th wilts..
Seems to me the allies outran there supply line and then everything was shunted to Market-Garden. And if that was not enough there would be politics involved
