Political Crossfire Forums

[VogonFord]

Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

[micfranklin]

I can't answer all of these questions, but I can say that the reason Germany couldn't hold the beach may be due to their arrogance and probably also to their lack of knowledge of American warfare.

[The Comrade]

VogonFord wrote: Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

1. they were responsible for taking out the huge shore guns and other various defences so that the troops storming the beaches had some sort of chance. without the paratroopers you can be assured the death count would have been higher.

2. they knew something was wrong. the higher ups weren't willing to commit tank corps and reinforcments to the beaches until it was too late.

3.what equipment would have been useful? all that comes to mind is a mirror.

4. the ports were needed to more easily unload men and supplies on the beaches and the pipeline was needed to releive dependence on oil tankers.

5. on which side?

[Wizard From Oz]

1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

As much as the risks werre, the Allies had to throw some unconventional elements into the plan. Yes it was a high risk play. Failure would not have affected the overall out come greatly. Success would have improved the Allieds chances signifcantly.

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

Hitler had already decided what was going to happen on D day- He would not listten to his staff. The British decpetion basically told him what he wanted to hear

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

There is a computer game called Close Combat 5 that is set among the hedgerow country. The terrain so advantages the defender, you have no choice but to take casualties breaking through

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

After the battle of Dieppe, it became obvious that the allies would not be able to take a port fast enough to establish and hold a beachhead around such a facility. As far as Pluto is concerned. How exactly would you propose to get that amount of fuel across the channel safely?

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

The Germans were still a very effective fighting force, with good equipment, well led, and at that point still a fair amount of quality in its troops. They didn't throw down their guns and run.

It is fair to say the Allies where a little cautious leading up to the initial break out. But once the beachhead was established, they could afford to catch their breath a little and get the job done properly.

[/quote]

[Spider]

I think a lot of the wierdness of Operation Overlord was a direct result of how multinational it was. When nations colaberate, a bunch of little things will always get lost in translation.

[The Comrade]

Spider wrote: I think a lot of the wierdness of Operation Overlord was a direct result of how multinational it was. When nations colaberate, a bunch of little things will always get lost in translation.


all the nations involved spoke english.

[Spider]

The Comrade wrote: Spider wrote: I think a lot of the wierdness of Operation Overlord was a direct result of how multinational it was. When nations colaberate, a bunch of little things will always get lost in translation.


all the nations involved spoke english.

I don't mean that literally. It's an expression. :gdgf:

[IronBrigadeMike (IBM)]

VogonFord wrote: Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

1. Because they were confident they could pull it off and that they had enough men to do the job. They were also betting on the fact that the drop would have the Germans so disorganzied they wouldn't know what hit them.

2. Not sure, but I know that false information was being fed to German spies, and double agents were also feeding false info.

3. Because in the aerial views they had, they could see the hedgerows, but they were unsure of the height or how hard they were to get through. Yes, they should've had better intel, but oh well.

4. Who knows if they were necessary. It certainly helped draw the Panzer divisions away.

5. Because it was difficult offensive terrain to advance in, the Germans were very well trained (especially in defense), and the hedgerows were a major problem. Really, it was just that it was a bottleneck and the Germans were very good, tough defenders. Especially the paratroopers.

Hope I answered them :-D

[DSwain]

IronBrigadeMike (IBM) wrote: VogonFord wrote: Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

1. Because they were confident they could pull it off and that they had enough men to do the job. They were also betting on the fact that the drop would have the Germans so disorganzied they wouldn't know what hit them.

2. Not sure, but I know that false information was being fed to German spies, and double agents were also feeding false info.

3. Because in the aerial views they had, they could see the hedgerows, but they were unsure of the height or how hard they were to get through. Yes, they should've had better intel, but oh well.

4. Who knows if they were necessary. It certainly helped draw the Panzer divisions away.

5. Because it was difficult offensive terrain to advance in, the Germans were very well trained (especially in defense), and the hedgerows were a major problem. Really, it was just that it was a bottleneck and the Germans were very good, tough defenders. Especially the paratroopers.

Hope I answered them :-D

Re Number 2, one of the greatest accomplishments of the UK during WW2 was our impressive counter-intelligence operation. Every German agent was picked up within days of reaching the UK; each of these spies was turned and fed exactly what the Allies wanted the Abwehr to hear.

[superskippy]

1. It wasnt unusual it was in fact a better use of their airborne troops then had previously been used, such as the assault on Crete by Hitler that took the objective but virtually whiped out the German Airborne Corps. The use of regimental airborne troops to seize the smaller strategic objectives and aid the acutal invasion was a novel and brilliant idea.

2. Because of British and American deception plans, and they fully knew that a large Allied force had landed, however they believed that it was a secondary front and that the main thrust was to come at Calais and the beaches there. They were certain that the Allies would need a port, they did not expect ports to be brought with them.

3. What pray tell would you have given them? Tunneling gear to go under the hedgerows? They were a mix of well trained a veteran British and American troops who were well armed with the equipment of the day and well supported from the air and armor. There was nothing more that could be done, in war there is sometimes nothing to do but grind through.

4. Of course, they were the most essential pieces. The entire point of the German deployments was centered upon the idea that the Allies had to have a port to supply their forces effectivly and create a bridgehead. And that was the truth the Allies did need a port to supply their forces effectivly and expand the bridgehead. However they brought their own ports with them which allowed them to attack a weaker area of German defences with less troops to be deployed in proximity and to surprise the Germans.

5. You make it sound so easy, there were still tens of thousands of German troops and hundreds of German tanks and armored vehicles and artillary. Make no mistake they still had a firm and solid veteran army in the field. The Allies fought very hard to break the German lines and force major breakout, but they had to fight long and heavy battles and bury many soldiers before that was attained.

Your questions have the air of a deep criticism of the allied plans for the Invasion of France but you have asked and seemingly criticised things which were carried out well or completely unavoidable.

[IronBrigadeMike (IBM)]

DSwain wrote: IronBrigadeMike (IBM) wrote: VogonFord wrote: Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

1. Because they were confident they could pull it off and that they had enough men to do the job. They were also betting on the fact that the drop would have the Germans so disorganzied they wouldn't know what hit them.

2. Not sure, but I know that false information was being fed to German spies, and double agents were also feeding false info.

3. Because in the aerial views they had, they could see the hedgerows, but they were unsure of the height or how hard they were to get through. Yes, they should've had better intel, but oh well.

4. Who knows if they were necessary. It certainly helped draw the Panzer divisions away.

5. Because it was difficult offensive terrain to advance in, the Germans were very well trained (especially in defense), and the hedgerows were a major problem. Really, it was just that it was a bottleneck and the Germans were very good, tough defenders. Especially the paratroopers.

Hope I answered them :-D

Re Number 2, one of the greatest accomplishments of the UK during WW2 was our impressive counter-intelligence operation. Every German agent was picked up within days of reaching the UK; each of these spies was turned and fed exactly what the Allies wanted the Abwehr to hear.

Yup, that's what I was talking about. The Brits had some amazing intelligence work, and it can be argued that it won the war.

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: Yup, that's what I was talking about. The Brits had some amazing intelligence work, and it can be argued that it won the war

For mine, one of the most impressive was the photo maps then British made of the landing areas. The main part of the map was a traditiional top down image. But along the long edge of the map was a horizion guide with any land marks at all shown.

So no matter where the soilders ended up on the beach. They could figure out where they were, where they needed to be. And more importantly, how to get there

[Demonic Spoon]

VogonFord wrote: Questions to Ponder- Operation OVERLORD



1. Why were so many objectives layed upon the airborne's hands, when it was known that paratroops are rarely dropped in unison (especially in flak)?

2. How did the Germans not suspect something wrong from GARBO or similar agents?

3. Why was there no training, specialized equipment or essentially anything given to troops for the war in the hedgerows?

4. Were the massive Operations MULBERRY and PLUTO neccessary? Could there have been an alternative? (Besides capturing a port)

and finally

5. Why were competent commanders inable to come up with a decisive plan to break out of Normandy for so long?

1) As said before, the objectives they were tasked with were critical

2) They did. Hitler was a **** though and refused to commit troops. Plus, Allied double agents convinced them that the invasion was going to happen 20 miles north of where it actually did.

3) No idea

4) no idea

5) Hedgerows were perfect ambush spots.