70th Anniversary of D-Day

[Godscreated]

There was far more to when D-day was started, the US had to bring all it's supplies by ship to England, including tanks and other large military transportation. Also the large guns and the enormous amount of ammo. The soldiers, food and all those things it takes to put a man into action. Those ships were targeted by the German U-boats constantly. The war machine that hit the beaches of France had to be built in England including a port. As far as the mistake of the tide only rumor, the mines on the poles would have done much damage to the incoming landing craft, low tide was a decision. The US and England were not idle during the time leading up to the invasion, they were flying bombing raids daily into Germany destroying the factories building the German war machine and railroads that supplied the fronts. They also took out as many fuel depots as they could find, the English also destroyed dams to cut the vitally needed electricity. If it were not for the allied forces working out of England Russia might have very well been taken by Germany, the western front occupied a lot of the German resources allowing the Russians to make their push. It was a co-operation that ended a great terror, the US was also fighting on two fronts and on the Pacific front we had to rebuild a navy that was badly damages. The greatest mistake made in WWII was the Japanese leaving 4 aircraft carriers afloat, that had been their primary target.
We were also fighting the Germans in Africa and coming up through Italy putting even greater pressure on the German war machine, D-day was in actuality a faster way to Germany.

GC

[Nine]

---

Yeah, but you also have to consider the following:

1. Outside the MG42, most German infantrymen are equipped with Mauser 98K bolt action carbines, and thus possess much less firepower than the ordinary American infantrymen with semi-automatic M1s, and somewhat less firepower than the British infantrymen with Lee Enfields. So while the German squad automatic weapon the MG-42 puts out a lot more firepower than American squad automatic weapoin the BAR, the American squad can put significantly more firepower from secondary directions than the German squad. And MG42 is more powerful than British Bren gun, but not nearly by as big a margin as over American BAR.

So while the MG42 makes a German squad a strong defensive strong point, the heavy focus on a single weapon makes the German sqaud much less flexible in attack, because firepower in American squads is more distributed.

2. There is no German equivalent to American company heavy weapons like the 50 caliber M2. So American companies can better engage enemy hiding under cover, or from much longer range, than German company.

3. America had overwhelming superiority in artillery, and American artillery were of higher quality both in fire direction, and in coordination with infantry. So MG42 is fearsome, but not as fearsome as a battery of 105mm howiters firing over a range of hills.

---

I don't disagree I just think being ambushed by something that can shoot up to 1500 rounds a minute is absolutely terrifying. It certainly couldn't compete with the american weapons with their range and power, those are terrifying too. To me the idea of something like the MG42 is scary just by the fact it can reduce you and all your friends to red mist in less than the time it takes to react to the sound of its first shot. With the M2 and BAR the fire rate is just low enough for a few to scatter to cover and fight back with some luck. Not that cover is a lot of good VS the 50cal.

[Minimalist]

Oh so basically we let Russia do all the heavy work. Conservation of energy.

---

Still though what the fuck was Hitler thinking attacking Russia in any case? What a delusional fuck.

It isn't as if they had a choice. The Germans invaded them.

[Jackalope]

I don't disagree I just think being ambushed by something that can shoot up to 1500 rounds a minute is absolutely terrifying. It certainly couldn't compete with the american weapons with their range and power, those are terrifying too. To me the idea of something like the MG42 is scary just by the fact it can reduce you and all your friends to red mist in less than the time it takes to react to the sound of its first shot. With the M2 and BAR the fire rate is just low enough for a few to scatter to cover and fight back with some luck. Not that cover is a lot of good VS the 50cal.

I see where you're coming from - even under training conditions, I've seen men who I would not describe as cowards piss themselves when exposed to machine gun fire (when intellectually, you know that the bullets are flying feet over your head, or blanks are being fired). Even with that bit of knowledge, its a fairly surreal experience. I don't recommend it.

[DeistPaladin]

Germany really fucked up attacking Russia. I think they would have been fine if they had stopped at Europe. They also could have gotten lots of Africa too. But, as morbid as it sounds, their greed did them in and we are all better off because they simply went too far.

I wonder if Hitler thought it would go the same as it did for WWI.

Germany and Russia clashed in WWI as well and the Germans virtually overran Russia (the Brusiliov Offensive being the only time Russia got in a good punch) and Germany did this while fighting France and Italy on other fronts. Maybe Hitler thought, "hey, France is down, Britain is isolated, the Italians are on my side, and Stalin has weakened his own military with his purges. Why wouldn't this work?"

Before anyone says, "yeah, but the Russian Revolution..." that didn't happen until after the Russians had lost their war. While I'm not an expert in the details of the Russian Revolution, from what I've studied of the first world war, it seems like the revolution happened because of the Tzar's defeat, not the other way around.

Just goes to show you that past wars are not necessarily an indication of how future wars are going to go.

[Chas]

One thing I still have yet to understand about the war itself in it's entirety. Japan sucker punched us into it with Peril Harbor in 41, but D-Day didn't happen until 44 and the war ended just several months later? So if we were fighting both prior to D-Day why did it take so long when D-Day seemed to make it so quick? Someone's going to say strategy I am sure.

The Allies mortally damaged the manufacturing capacity of the Axis powers with strategic bombing, while the U.S. had 2½ years to crank up manufacturing capacity undisturbed on a continent with huge reserves of natural resources.

[Anomalocaris]

Germany really fucked up attacking Russia. I think they would have been fine if they had stopped at Europe. They also could have gotten lots of Africa too. But, as morbid as it sounds, their greed did them in and we are all better off because they simply went too far.

I wonder if Hitler thought it would go the same as it did for WWI.

Germany and Russia clashed in WWI as well and the Germans virtually overran Russia (the Brusiliov Offensive being the only time Russia got in a good punch) and Germany did this while fighting France and Italy on other fronts. Maybe Hitler thought, "hey, France is down, Britain is isolated, the Italians are on my side, and Stalin has weakened his own military with his purges. Why wouldn't this work?"

Before anyone says, "yeah, but the Russian Revolution..." that didn't happen until after the Russians had lost their war. While I'm not an expert in the details of the Russian Revolution, from what I've studied of the first world war, it seems like the revolution happened because of the Tzar's defeat, not the other way around.

Just goes to show you that past wars are not necessarily an indication of how future wars are going to go.

You have to understand when Hitler invaded Russia, German intelligence thought the entire Russian army was only half as large as it actually was on the day the Germans invaded. The German army was skille, experienced, and confident it could destroy the Russia army as it thought to exist in a quick 2 month campaign.

Initially the Germans confidence seem well justified because everything was going according to plan and Russia divisions, corps, and armies were being brought to battle and destroyed as fast as the plans called for.

It was only 3 month into the attack that the confidence began to ebb. By september the German army had already brought to action and destroyed as many Russian divisions as the Germans had thought Russia possessed, and yet still photo reconnaisance show as many additional Russia divisions were being moved to and deployed to block German adavnce on Moscow.

When the Germans began their attack on Moscow, 3 month of campaign had reduced the actual fighting strength of German army in Russia to 30% of where it was on the day it invaded Russia. Yet the Russian army before Moscow blocking them was almost exactly as strong as the what the Germans thought the entire russian army had been on the day it invaded.

So it was in september the German senior leaders began to understand just how much bigger a task defeating Russia was, compared to what they had imagined.

[A Theist]

Oh so basically we let Russia do all the heavy work. Conservation of energy.

---

Still though what the fuck was Hitler thinking attacking Russia in any case? What a delusional fuck.

Hitler made it clear very early on when he wrote Mein Kampf that he intended to invade Russia. To paraphrase, Hitler wrote that the "German people needed living space and raw materials". The German army had great success with the Blitzkrieg conquering other European countries. In Hitler's mind he thought Germany could also easily defeat the Russians in a short campaign as well. Russia is far more expansive than any other country Germany previously invaded. They had early success against Russia but the more territory the Germans conquered the more their forces were thinned out. Hitler had also prepared for a Summer victory, and the German army was equipped for such. But as the campaign wore on the Germans got caught and became bogged down by the harsh Russian Winter. The Russian army launched a massive counter attack and drove back the exhausted German troops. It was Germany's first major defeat.

[Minimalist]

In that sense, The Battle of Moscow was the decisive battle of WWII as it condemned Germany to a war of attrition it could never have hoped to win.

[DeistPaladin]

In that sense, The Battle of Moscow was the decisive battle of WWII as it condemned Germany to a war of attrition it could never have hoped to win.

Has anyone seen the movie "Stalingrad". My friends and I when we saw it said it pretty much encapsulated the war. The German super sniper was indisputably better than the Russian super sniper. What made the difference is the Russian super sniper had lots of friends.