ok, D-day was very risky, not only germany could stop the invasion, but weather could had turned it into a disaster, if by any means it had failed, would nazi germany had survived the war? thanks to the comming of extremely new technologies such as rockets, jet engine, and developing of incredible new tanks such as teh tigerking (not sure) would had any good? hitlers health was deteriorating, and a new leader would had been posted who was not as stupid..........and had some idea of waht was happening, or would the allies had won anyways from an invasion throug italy? and teh red advance?
What if D-day had failed?
- Thread starter stalin006
- Start date
magic-monkey
dazed and confused
i would assume that there would have been another attempted landing. The war would have been extended, however i have a feeling the superiority in production of the US means that only Nazi development of nuclear weapons prior to the allies could have enabled their regime to survive. The United States would probably have put into practice their plans to use nuclear weapons on Germany, therefore winning the war, prior toanything like that occurring. I don't know how radically this would alter the present situation in Europe.
Richard III
Duke of Gloucester
Since there was serious talk of the potential for a negotiated peace when the V-1/V-2 bombardment was underway, I would think it would be equally likely that there would be talk of a negotiated peace in the event of a failed D-Day as well.
That landing was not the sort of thing you just "try again....", so I didn't vote, because "we'd 've all bin fook*d" was not an option.
R.III
That landing was not the sort of thing you just "try again....", so I didn't vote, because "we'd 've all bin fook*d" was not an option.
R.III
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
The Soviets would have taken more of Europe, possibly all, it's as simple as that.
Hitro, you're right - there is no correct answer.
Actually, All Hitler's forces were concentrated on the eastern front;
Well , the right answer is: USSR invaded all the Europe Except England, then there would have been the liberation wars, then USSR desintegrates in early 1960-s. Every country takes a zone of control in Russia: that means colonization of former USSR, and in 1990-s The liberation wars will make a variety of new states with no national majority. In 2010-s the Siberia, and Far East join the USA. 2030- USA Invades China, Afganistan, Centeral asia, Mid Asia, Mongolia, sout-East Asia.
2040 - total collapse of American Empire.
Actually, All Hitler's forces were concentrated on the eastern front;
Well , the right answer is: USSR invaded all the Europe Except England, then there would have been the liberation wars, then USSR desintegrates in early 1960-s. Every country takes a zone of control in Russia: that means colonization of former USSR, and in 1990-s The liberation wars will make a variety of new states with no national majority. In 2010-s the Siberia, and Far East join the USA. 2030- USA Invades China, Afganistan, Centeral asia, Mid Asia, Mongolia, sout-East Asia.
2040 - total collapse of American Empire.
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
Why do you think there would have been liberation wars? There weren't any in Eastern Europe, why should that have been different in Western Europe (which actually had strong Socialist/Communist movements)?
I think it is not said that the USSR would have disintegrated at all if they would have taken over Western Europe. That was most likely also the main reason for the second front. Germany was already defeated in the summer of 1944.
There were no revolts in Eastern Europe because the majority of population supported Communists, and I dont Think USSR could Control such a large territory as Europe+Asia, anyway whether USSR became the only country in the world, it won't be so bad...
Fraternite,Liberte,Egalite
Fraternite,Liberte,Egalite
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
Agreed on the last part, but I'm not convinced that more people in Eastern Europe liked Communism than in the west. I'd rather think the opposite, but anyway, generally I agree. 
dannyevilcat
DESTROYER OF FURNITURE
I agree with the second sentiment, but I've never heard of the serious talk of negotiated peace because of V1/V2's. Do you know where I could learn about it?
Panda
Metal head
Like R.III said, there wouldn't be another D-Day attempt anywhere near. It took almost a year to assemble the force, and the public opinion influenced by heavy US losses could even force TDR to sign a peace treaty with Hitler. And there would be no way Britain could attempt an invasion by itself.
I see a slight chance for the 3rd Reich to achieve a stalement on the Eastern front, IF another attempt on Hitler's life was succesful and somebody with brains and a semi-acceptable political reputation would take over (Rommel springs into mind). It would, of course, require the Wehrmacht first beating the Red Army and hold the line in Poland.
I don't see how The Reich could develop the A-Bomb before the US, though. By 08/44 The Manhattan Project was well underway, but nuclear research in Nazi Germany was outlawed because it was considered 'jewish science'.
I see a slight chance for the 3rd Reich to achieve a stalement on the Eastern front, IF another attempt on Hitler's life was succesful and somebody with brains and a semi-acceptable political reputation would take over (Rommel springs into mind). It would, of course, require the Wehrmacht first beating the Red Army and hold the line in Poland.
I don't see how The Reich could develop the A-Bomb before the US, though. By 08/44 The Manhattan Project was well underway, but nuclear research in Nazi Germany was outlawed because it was considered 'jewish science'.
Rodgers
Following YOUR child home
By 1944 Hitler was loking for a negotiated peace and possible alliance with the western allies to combat his real foe, the Russians.
Prior to D-Day the Germans were thinking along the lines of "stop the invasion on the beaches and start the negotiations for peace or watch the allies bicker and eventually fall out leaving the western front peaceful if not fully settled". But the Allies were thinking of a total end to the Nazi regime - this had already been agreed between Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill - there was no way they would have allowed a negotiated peace to be made and the public outcry would have been too much for either of the Democracies to stand if they settled with Hitler.
I think a second attempt would have been made about a year or two later (possibly backed by use of nuclear weapons to guaranteee success) and in the meantime an increase in the air campaign. At the worst alternative landings in places such as the French Riviera may have been considered as part of an expansion of the Italian campaign (I am aware that this was done anyway) if the north French coast couldn't be attempted again, with this becoming the main focus of attack (not that that would have been too successful in the short term given the terrain) .
Prior to D-Day the Germans were thinking along the lines of "stop the invasion on the beaches and start the negotiations for peace or watch the allies bicker and eventually fall out leaving the western front peaceful if not fully settled". But the Allies were thinking of a total end to the Nazi regime - this had already been agreed between Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill - there was no way they would have allowed a negotiated peace to be made and the public outcry would have been too much for either of the Democracies to stand if they settled with Hitler.
I think a second attempt would have been made about a year or two later (possibly backed by use of nuclear weapons to guaranteee success) and in the meantime an increase in the air campaign. At the worst alternative landings in places such as the French Riviera may have been considered as part of an expansion of the Italian campaign (I am aware that this was done anyway) if the north French coast couldn't be attempted again, with this becoming the main focus of attack (not that that would have been too successful in the short term given the terrain) .
mordhiem
Quantum Physicist
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2002
- Messages
- 633
V-1's were almost useless within 3 months of thier firs use, the RAF worked out a technique where Spitfires could shoot/bring them down of empty fields where the Spit' flies at top speed straight at the V-1 and veers away at the last moment. I'm not sure exactly how it worked, but it was something along the lines of air resistance destabilizing the gyroscope inside so the crashed. V-2's were mighty pieces of technology (the NASA program was entirely based on German research fundamentals, equipment and scientists) but in reality were never going to mass produced enough to have an effect. Most Londoners quickly got used to them, just as they did the night raids during the blitz.
What I think would have happened was the RAF and USAAF greatly step up the bombing program (they were mostly being targeted at transportain/communication sites on the coastline for the 3-4 months leading up to D-Day) and as soon as they were developed US would use nuclear weapons against Germany. In Trumans eyes they would have to in order to stop the USSR overruning Europe, and I am sure he would see an A-Bombed German better than a communist Germany.
What I think would have happened was the RAF and USAAF greatly step up the bombing program (they were mostly being targeted at transportain/communication sites on the coastline for the 3-4 months leading up to D-Day) and as soon as they were developed US would use nuclear weapons against Germany. In Trumans eyes they would have to in order to stop the USSR overruning Europe, and I am sure he would see an A-Bombed German better than a communist Germany.
magic-monkey
dazed and confused
nuke cities in Germany. You can't fight without a capacity for production.
marshal zhukov
good economist wannabe
If D-Day had failed, The Soviets would have still won the war in 1945.
This topic has already been discussed once.
If anyone looks at the number of the soviets forces in 1944 will notice that those were far superior to the Germans.
I have no doubt on this matter.
This topic has already been discussed once.
If anyone looks at the number of the soviets forces in 1944 will notice that those were far superior to the Germans.
I have no doubt on this matter.
