It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

D Day, most overrated day in history?

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Ok, so this is a question
Was D Day overrated
The Russians were tearing up the Nazis in the east and had been in conflict since 1941, pushing them back towards Germany in mid 43, Hitlers didn't help, didn't regroup his armies and they were left to die or surrender in the east

1944 was nearing the end of the war when DDay was launched, Germany had wasted so many of their best soldiers on the eastern front, those soldiers in the West could at least surrender and live. Russians were not known for taking prisoners
Many Germans chose to surrender than fight, they could see the war was over

I guess what bothers me is that if the Russian front wasn't so detrimental to Germany, d day would have never happened. The allies waited till Russia had a good deal of control before invading
Sure there were some casualties, but not as many as in other theatres.

Considering many think the Nazis were overhyped, obviously that would mean DDay was a picnic, and it was for many . If it didn't happen, Russia would have wiped out Germany on its own, probably?

and just to clarify, this is a question with assumptions, not a statement




posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman
Stalin wanted D-Day, and complained incessantly because it wasn't happening at least twelve months earlier. That should tell you something.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Actually your point is completely true, the Russians could be argued to have played the most important part in the war against the NAZI's and they certainly lost more men than any other nation in the war but still they too would not have won without our help even if later in the war we took our sweet time waiting for the German's to waste there strength against the Russian's and it did actually work but though we saved so many lives by not fighting a stronger German army in the west it cost so very many Russians lives whom the west has forgotten and to whom we most certainly do owe a debt of honor because there sacrifice also saved us.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:29 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Yeah Stalin did want it, no question and I expect the Brits and Yanks wanted to see both Germany and Russia waste as many lives as possible in the east



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to: DISRAELI

Considering Russia's scorched earth nonsense and 2 soldiers 1 rifle and/or retreat and die style it's no surprise russia wanted d-day.


+31 more 
posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Many people died that day. Calling it overrated is remarkably catatonic as to the events.




posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Well there was North Africa for the Brits



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Yes but 3daysgone does make a very good point as well, it was not unimportant to the guy's on the ground or those that were in Britain and Western Europe and without it more of Europe would have fallen under the iron curtain as the area of soviet control came to be called, it is just a terrible shame that those forces though ideologically opposed whom had fought Hitlers war machine ended the war at such opposition with one another that it nearly led to another war and ended up with both sides standing guard over the carcass of there old enemy having divided it between them.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

People just like the way it sounds.

Isn't that why they named it that to begin with??


+11 more 
posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Not sure how you can even begin to think "overrated" in regards to the importance of D-Day.

It lead directly to the liberation of western Europe--France, Belgium, the Low Countries, etc... It also aided greatly the Soviet reconquest of their own lands, and then added eastern Europe to the Eastern Bloc.

Without D-day the Germans may have ultimately stopped the Soviet army short of Berlin, probably well short.

But we'll never know.

Over rated? No.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

There is no particular reason. It's called D-day, or H-hour, because things of this nature seldom go off on a set schedule. D-day was postponed a number of times before finally happening.

It's a catchy alliteration, too.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
reply to: DISRAELI

Considering Russia's scorched earth nonsense and 2 soldiers 1 rifle and/or retreat and die style it's no surprise russia wanted d-day.



Much of this is silly.

Everyone had a scorched earth policy. It's common sense. No reason to leave things for the enemy.

2 soldiers 1 rifle is a ridiculous Hollywood myth. The Soviets always had plenty of rifles. They did suffer manpower shortages though, which is remarkable considering they had a 13 million man Army at the time.

Where would they retreat too, exactly? Simply retreating would mean defeat. Considering how the Nazis stated intention was the total extermination of the Soviet People, not an acceptable outcome for anyone as far as the politburo are concerned.

But in any case...

The Soviets wanted D-Day to open a third European Front (Italy was invaded by this time) in the hope that additional resources would not be sent to the east and were actually diverted westwards to contain the allied invasion. Which is ultimately what happened.

By the time of D-Day the war was already long lost for the Germans, what it acomplished was speeding up to an already decided outcome.

The allies wanted D-Day so they would actually have some cards in their hand when it came to the postwar agreements over Europe...

The real Western Allied contribution to the war in Europe was the bombing campaigns. The Soviets had no real strategic bombing capabilities. By the time the Nazis actually decided to implement total war economics, after much political infighting, their industry was devastated so the effects of total war mobilisation were fairly marginal when it came to production compared to what could've been possible.
edit on -050002am7kam by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
Not sure how you can even begin to think "overrated" in regards to the importance of D-Day.

It lead directly to the liberation of western Europe--France, Belgium, the Low Countries, etc... It also aided greatly the Soviet reconquest of their own lands, and then added eastern Europe to the Eastern Bloc.

Without D-day the Germans may have ultimately stopped the Soviet army short of Berlin, probably well short.

But we'll never know.

Over rated? No.


Wow, Germany may have stopped the Russians, do you think?

D day was always going to happen but when it did, the war was over for the Nazis, they had lost the momentum, their manufacturing and countless men.

I am not saying it was over rated at all, just don't think it was as pivotal to defeating the Nazis as people think.
Stopping the USSR and Stalinism, that's a different question, obvious answer though



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Without pressure from the West by the western Allies? Possibly. Likely...? Tough call. Being totally on the defensive as they were, could they have inflicted enough casualties to blunt even the Soviets? No idea what so ever, really. But without D-day, the job certainly would have been easier...



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:50 AM
link   
No D-day was vital.....not in stopping the NAZIs, there defeat had been a forgone conclusion since 1943 if not 1941!

No it was vital in that it stopped Stalin, a equal monster to Hitler in taking all of Europe.

Allies needed to liberate as much as Europe as possible before it became part of the USSR.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Raggedyman

Without pressure from the West by the western Allies? Possibly. Likely...? Tough call. Being totally on the defensive as they were, could they have inflicted enough casualties to blunt even the Soviets? No idea what so ever, really. But without D-day, the job certainly would have been easier...


Even if they had blunted the Soviet offensive , all it would have not is delay the inevitable.

They would of depleted there reserves of strategic resources withing a few years and there entire war economy would have folded.

All the UK and US had to do was pump resources into Russia.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 03:25 AM
link   
At the end of the 39-45 war, there were on million people still in private service in Germany, (cooks, butlers etc.) so not much of a war economy at all.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: pikestaff
At the end of the 39-45 war, there were on million people still in private service in Germany, (cooks, butlers etc.) so not much of a war economy at all.


The NAZI high command where delusional to the severity of the situation.

It was not a case of Nero playing the fiddle while rome burned.

It was Hitler conducting a entire orchestra of the NAZI cabnient while Germany burned.



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Overhyped? No.. D-Day was significant for many reasons. It was the largest seaborne invasion in history. The scale of the operation was massive. America isn't in western Europe, in case you forgot.. yet as seagull pointed out, it led to the liberation if western Europe. It was an operation pivotal in ending the war. It didn't necessarily lay the ground work, but like I said, the US isn't in western Europe. I want that to really sink in. Troops can't just appear behind enemy lines through some physical internet-like series of tubes. So again, no... Not overhyped. But without the resistance of European fighters it'd have amounted to nothing, of course, but why would that be surprising to anyone?



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 04:09 AM
link   
More than 2.8 million German soldiers surrendered on the Western Front between D-Day and the end of April 1945.

In his book Crusade in Europe, Eisenhower wrote ‘We owed much to Hitler’,[27] because he prevented his generals from pulling back the defending forces to the east of the Rhine, probably no later than early January, thus handing the western allies 300,000 prisoners on a plate.[27]

The loss of these battle-hardened soldiers irretrievably weakened the German armies left to defend the great natural barrier of the Rhine, and the disintegration of the German armies in the west is shown in their more and more rapid rate of surrender as April progressed.

In the first five days of April, 146,000 German soldiers were taken prisoner[28] [at a rate of 29,000 a day]. In the next nine days, 402,000[29] prisoners were taken [44,000 a day]. Between April 15 and 21, over 450,000 Germans surrendered[30] [over 60,000 a day]; in the last ten days of the month over 500,000[31] waved the white flag [over 50,000 a day].

For the month as a whole the average rate of Germans surrendering was 50,000 a day.[2] From D-Day onwards the numbers of German soldiers who surrendered in north-west Europe were as follows: 200,000 in Normandy; 610,000 up to October 17, 1944; 1.3 million up to the end of March 1945 and 2.8 million up to the end of April 1945, when Hitler died.


German prisoners of war in northwest Europe

D-Day caused Hitler to loose more soldiers. Like Eisenhower wrote ‘We owed much to Hitler,’ for handing the western allies prisoners on a plate.

edit on 9-7-2017 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join