D-Day - 75th Anniversary

[conVINCEd 21469]

48 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Almost verbatim with my Grandfather.  It wasn't until after he retired that he would talk about his stories.  The first time we heard about some of them was when he sat down with a local high school kid who was writing a paper for the 50th anniversary of V-E Day in '95.  He told most of his story to the kid before he ever told any of us.  

Exact same thing with my grandfather.  A few years ago a kid at his church was doing a project interviewing WWII vets.  He recorded the interviews.  When we watched it we were like ho lee fuck.

[HouTex 1878]

3 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Any good YouTube videos about DDay from the nazis point of view?

The Longest Day at least has some scenes that depict what the German generals were thinking about the invasion while it was happening on June 6.  It also has a few scenes showing how the flotilla must have looked to the Germans guarding the beaches.  But as to what the Nazi's/German generals were thinking about the invasion (was it the main invasion or just a decoy for the main invasion at Calais?, whether to send tank reinforcements (as Rommel wanted) to Normandy, whether to wake Hitler (which no one did--or they might have been shot), etc. the Nazi/German military point of view is pretty well documented in the D-Day books mentioned here, in Ike's memoirs, in Churchill's memoirs, and in several of Churchill's biographies.  I doubt you will find a video on the Nazi point of view (as propaganda) of D-Day .  Their stated view probably was something like it was the evil doings of Churchill, the warmonger, and Roosevelt, the evil capitalist, both of which were controlled by the Jews.

[HouTex 1878]

48 minutes ago, Nueces River Rat said:

And the irony is they open up more with complete strangers before they would with their own families which is something I don't think many of us can explain.  Same is said about Vets of even more recent conflicts albeit I've heard  more Vietnam Vets open up about their tours here now that many are now or approaching their golden years.   

My godfather served in the Italian campaign during WWII and up until I was 14 or so I always wanted to hear about his war experience but he would not talk about it.  My father (one of his best friends) said it was too painful for him to talk about and told me to stop asking him about it.  The only story my father said he had heard about was that my godfather was running on the beach near another soldier when the other soldier was hit by an artillery shell.  My godfather was not injured but the other guy was basically blown to bits.  Those of us who have never experienced battle, myself included, can't imagine the horror of it all, or how it would affect us.

[Aqua Buddha 14598]

I read a story once that had an interview with one of the few German pilots that got off the ground on D-Day.  He flew over Normandy and said he saw ships as far as the eye could see on the horizon.  He knew at that point Germany was screwed because there was no way the German industrial complex could replicate that.

[Aqua Buddha 14598]

3 hours ago, Moby Ric said:

We all owe every single one of those men a debt of thanks.  We would not be here if not for them, and the world would be a very different place.

This is the underpinning of the importance of WWII and one thing that has always fascinated me about it.  The War was not like the wars of today where the outcome is wildly predetermined.  We could have easily lost that war.  At the beginning we had the 13th largest military in the world (or something like that) and were mired in the Great Depression.  By the time we got to Normandy, we were formidable army but had Germany pursued a different strategy and held the beaches, history would have a completely different outcome.  They could have held Europe until the developed jet fighter planes which would have eliminated our air superiority or later that that, developed the bomb.  Any number of different outcomes could have happened.

To call D-Day one of the most important days in the history of the world is not an understatement.  

[FartingMonk 3608]

1 hour ago, Nueces River Rat said:

And the irony is they open up more with complete strangers before they would with their own families which is something I don't think many of us can explain.  Same is said about Vets of even more recent conflicts albeit I've heard  more Vietnam Vets open up about their tours here now that many are now or approaching their golden years.   

That's exactly what happened to me.  The first couple of times was with really good friends grandparents.  I happened to be on leave and end up having a 5-6 hour talk with them in the living room.  As the families realize what we were actually talking about they started to gather around.  After we were finished, I got told that it was odd because they had never talked about it before and would change the subject if anyone brought it up.  

[phdhorn 6224]

At this very moment, 75 years ago, the fight for the world's life was happening... at about 5 p.m. in France, the plan was at least at that point failing miserably.. paratroopers launched overnight were way off of their marks, the gliders and planes being pushed well to east of their intended marks.  The idea for a pincer movement, where the beach troops would be aided from these paratroopers "from behind" the Germans, simply didn't happen.  Entire platoons were lost, captured, or killed.  After the first 2-3 waves of troops from the beach were essentially annihilated,  it was simply due to the seemingly inexhaustible consecutive waves of troops just being too much for the Germans.  By this time (about 5 p.m.) it was hoped that the entire beaches and bluffs would be cleared and in Allied hands, and efforts would be underway to capture some of the strategic towns (St. Marie-Englise, Cherbourg, St. Lo, etc.) and be well on their way inland.  However, the Allies greatly underestimated the hedgerow country, and the combination of the bad storm which was barely gone, logistical problems, terrible geography, and to some degree some reinforcements by Rommel, one of the only Germans who absolutely expected the invasion where it happened (but was fooled and went home during this day because Nazi meteorologists really didn't know the coming weather and gave him bad reports, since the lost the Atlantic when they lost air and sea supremacy... so Rommel thought the storm would last longer than it did), made life hell for the Omaha landing, although the other beaches weren't quite as heavily defended.

Anyway, as it was by late afternoon, the Allies had clung onto a beachhold, and over the next 24 hours would have to slog their way up the cliffs and clear out the Germans.  The invasion did succeed, but at much greater cost of lives than hoped mostly due to the weather, breakdown of communications, and at least one German who wasn't fooled.

It's been said that one of the main differences between the Germans/Axis and the Allies was that the common German/Japanese soldier couldn't do shit if an officer was killed or taken away, they were utterly dependent on officers to give orders, and they didn't think for themselves.  One major reason why this invasion succeeded was the allies' ability to learn "on the fly" and take shit into their own hands, use their heads, and figure shit out without having to go through 55 levels.  The 24 hours from landing through final security of the coast was due to so many of these "regular Joe" stories that it's almost incredible.  These guys not only performed great as expected, but they went beyond that and essentially maneuvered their way to the beginning of the final end of the Nazi occupation.  Amazing story after story of courage.

[Buffsoldier 1895]

1 hour ago, Nueces River Rat said:

And the irony is they open up more with complete strangers before they would with their own families which is something I don't think many of us can explain.  Same is said about Vets of even more recent conflicts albeit I've heard  more Vietnam Vets open up about their tours here now that many are now or approaching their golden years.   

 

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

i did not serve. i'm just an idiot on the internet.

but i would imagine that a lot of these guys lost friends and what they consider family members during wartime.

i imagine that surviving the horrors of war brings heaps of survivor's guilt, and i would imagine that many of them are of a generation that speaking aloud that guilt may spread it around to others, somehow. nearly to a man, they have said that they weren't the heroes - it was their fallen brothers that were the real heroes. as such, any pride we might assign to their experience would feel shameful to them, because here they are, and their brothers in arms are under the ground. 

I can't speak to what everyone else has experienced. This is just my perspective after my experiences.

There's something to what hayden said regarding survivors guilt.  Quite a bit actually.  I still experience it from time to time.  And probably always will.  But there is more.

As mentioned, and like others, I don't like talking about my experiences at war with my family members.  I am considerably more open with (some) strangers.

Why? A few reasons:

It's easier to be open with strangers.  With people you have no personal connection with, it's, for lack of a better definition, like speaking to a wall or other inanimate object.  You know, you KNOW, you won't be judged by a stranger, or even if you are, it's someone you aren't in any way attached to, and therefore that judgment holds no weight.  You can say everything about what you went through, and what you felt, and have no filter in doing so.  It's like pouring smoke into the wind, knowing that it's going to disperse and be of no further consequence.

It's significantly less frustrating.  Family members, by and large, simply don't understand, and can't understand, what we went through in war.  And there's no way to adequately describe it.  None.  That brings on a double-edged frustration: that the family members don't understand, and that you can't describe it in a proper way.  With a stranger, you don't really care if they understand or not.

Some of us, or at least me, feel some unknown need to protect my family members from what I experienced.  There's nothing pretty about war, especially for those that have been in direct combat (thank God Almighty I never was).  Not one goddamn thing.  Even the mundane office aspects of it aren't pretty.  We want to protect those we love from the ugliness.  And we are afraid that even talking about the goofy funny shit will lead into the ugly.  Or at least I am.

You won't, by and large receive pity.  There's a tendency among family members to blanket us as veterans with an overdose of pity after we relay our stories, or at least I have witnessed this.  Especially if we have talked about something traumatic.  We, generally speaking, don't want that.  Let me say it again: WE DON'T WANT PITY.  Sometimes we don't even want empathy.  We just want to vent, receive understanding if it's possible, and move on.  But no pity.  Talking to strangers, I've generally not received pity. 

Anyways, that's my view.

[Beau Vine 54253]

20 hours ago, Rusty Shackelford said:

 

Also, a 97 year old D-Day vet made the jump again.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2019-06-05/american-british-veterans-recreate-d-day-parachute-drops

Got dam.  Pretty dusty in here.

[HouTex 1878]

16 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

This is the underpinning of the importance of WWII and one thing that has always fascinated me about it.  The War was not like the wars of today where the outcome is wildly predetermined.  We could have easily lost that war.  At the beginning we had the 13th largest military in the world (or something like that) and were mired in the Great Depression.  By the time we got to Normandy, we were formidable army but had Germany pursued a different strategy and held the beaches, history would have a completely different outcome.  They could have held Europe until the developed jet fighter planes which would have eliminated our air superiority or later that that, developed the bomb.  Any number of different outcomes could have happened.

To call D-Day one of the most important days in the history of the world is not an understatement.  

I agree with the last two sentences, but not that we could have easily lost the war--given the status of the war in 1944.  But the "what ifs" are very interesting to consider regarding WWII as a whole.  If (a big if) the US was not attacked and stayed out of the war then perhaps Germany could have developed the bomb eventually.  But we know that they were not close to developing the bomb when the war ended in May 1945.  And had Germany not attacked the USSR and focused on the UK who knows how it would have turned out.

[Trey3216 15347]

1 minute ago, HouTex said:

I agree with the last two sentences, but not that we could have easily lost the war--given the status of the war in 1944.  But the "what ifs" are very interesting to consider regarding WWII as a whole.  If (a big if) the US was not attacked and stayed out of the war then perhaps Germany could have developed the bomb eventually.  But we know that they were not close to developing the bomb when the war ended in May 1945.  And had Germany not attacked the USSR and focused on the UK who knows how it would have turned out.

Yep, a lot of what ifs for sure.  We still had the numbers to continue building the military force at home.  There were millions that never even got overseas as they were still at home training.  However, how willing would the American public have been had the Normandy invasion been an utter failure?  Perhaps we don't keep up the almost unbelievable pace of wartime production on the home front.  Perhaps the women working in the factories and on the farms with the kids left at home don't continue to push because they're helping Dad get home.  Perhaps the parents who fought in WWI are starting to reign their own children in and telling them not to go.  We can't know.  And thank God we never had to.  

[Gil Bang 25975]

SIAP

 

 

[Beau Vine 54253]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1960/11/first-wave-at-omaha-beach/303365/

 

 

[Sandman 3403]

5 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

Exact same thing with my grandfather.  A few years ago a kid at his church was doing a project interviewing WWII vets.  He recorded the interviews.  When we watched it we were like ho lee fuck.

My uncle told me that my grandfather would only speak about the war with his war buddies. He told nothing to his four sons and died in his sleep way too soon at age 55. I was born 4 months later, never got to know him. Very unfortunate for me.

[Knoxtnhorn 6055]

Had my kids - 6 and 12 - listen to a doc podcast on the way back from San Antonio today.  I wanted them to understand today's significance.  One of the things that got me a bit was that the narrator stated DDE purposely put in the 129th(?) to storm Omaha because it was made up mostly of 17-20 year-old's who wouldn't understand what they were about to run into.  Veteran soldiers may not have been as effective due to the fact that they would see/know the danger ahead of them and possibly respond differently.

I'm not sure about the "129th" part hence the question mark.  

Edited June 6, 2019 by Knoxtnhorn

[ztejas 43475]

5 hours ago, HouTex said:

Those of us who have never experienced battle, myself included, can't imagine the horror of it all, or how it would affect us.

I agree, but I like to think that called upon, many men in this country could summon that same courage and will that our fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers did 75 years ago. I think it was the last war that was truly... necessary. Was another cause like that to come up, I don't doubt heroes and men of valor would be found again in unlikely places or circumstances. Humans are amazing creatures and rarely exhibit their fullest potential - but when they do, it tends to be in life and death situations. 

Edited June 6, 2019 by ztejas
Miswording

[TwiceHorn 31495]

5 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

Exact same thing with my grandfather.  A few years ago a kid at his church was doing a project interviewing WWII vets.  He recorded the interviews.  When we watched it we were like ho lee fuck.

I have a friend whose father was a JASCO at Okinawa (long story short, he landed early, reconned, killed people, set charges on obstacles, killed some more people, killed a few more people, etc.) from a Greek Orthodox family in Michigan. In addition to not talking about it, he wouldn't set foot in a church for 30-40 years and that was very conspicuous in his family.  So, not only were they traumatized by the violence they witnessed and were party to, many had a great deal of trouble morally reconciling what they had done. 

Wittingly or not, a church member doing  that probably went a long way to helping with that latter aspect.  Also may explain why easier to open up to strangers than family.

 

[AUS-97HORN 11809]

10 minutes ago, Knoxtnhorn said:

Had my kids - 6 and 12 - listen to a doc podcast on the way back from San Antonio today.  I wanted them to understand today's significance.  One of the things that got me a bit was that the narrator stated DDE purposely put in the 129th(?) to storm Omaha because it was made up mostly of 17-20 year-old's who wouldn't understand what they were about to run into.  Veteran soldiers may not have been as effective due to the fact that they would see/know the danger ahead of them and possibly respond differently.

I'm not sure about the "129th" part hence the question mark.  

  29th Infantry Division ,  116th Regiment 

 

they got fucking slaughtered.  As others said, approx 90% of the kids in the first boats (and the 116th was in the first boats in the first wave at Omaha) never returned home, most of the kids in Company A of the first boats were from Bedford, Va  as a result of the losses sustained on D-Day, Bedford VA had the largest per-capita loss of any US town in WW2, its why they put the National DDay Museum   in Bedford

[HouTex 1878]

1 minute ago, ztejas said:

I agree, but I like to think that called upon, many men in this country could summon that same courage and will that our fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers did 75 years ago. I think it was the last war that was truly... necessary. Was another cause like that to come up, I don't doubt heroes and men of valor would be found again in unlikely places or circumstances. Humans are amazing creatures and rarely exhibit their fullest potential - especially in life and death situations. 

I agree and I hope that, if called, I would have done my duty for my country and my fellow soldiers and fought bravely.  I was one of the first group of 18 year old men (boys?) who were required to register for the draft in 1979-80 and I was happy to register.  Still, when bullets start flying and the shelling starts and/or IEDs start going off, it's hard know whether you'll react with honor and courage, or not.  And remember Buck Compton in BofB.  He was a good soldier and did his duty and acted bravely on several missions.  Then he finally succumbed to battle fatigue (or something like it) outside of Foy when he saw his fellow soldiers get hit by artillery fire.  Others couldn't handle it and broke sooner.  Others, I'm sure, were just plain cowards from the get-go.  

[Brisketexan 105154]

8 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I agree, but I like to think that called upon, many men in this country could summon that same courage and will that our fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers did 75 years ago. I think it was the last war that was truly... necessary. Was another cause like that to come up, I don't doubt heroes and men of valor would be found again in unlikely places or circumstances. Humans are amazing creatures and rarely exhibit their fullest potential - but when they do, it tends to be in life and death situations. 

This.  It also helps that most of the men being sent over were quite young.  I was 19-20 in the buildup to the first Gulf War.  At the time, there was much speculation as to how involved a fight it would be, and of course talking heads bantering about reinstating a draft.  My mother called and reminded me I had family in Mexico, and of course, I'd go hang out with them to avoid the draft.  Maybe the most profane I've ever been with her -- no fucking way am I telling my friends they can go fight, while I hide.  19-20 year olds have a STRONG sense of duty and bravado.

I ain't 19 anymore.  My views are much more nuanced.  I'm not nearly as gung-ho as I was back then.  Almost all the young folks would answer the call, no matter what.  The rest of us would answer it....but we might run it through the filter of whether it was a just war or just some bullshit.  WWII was a pretty easy call.  Many of our later entanglements, not so much.

If we really needed it, I imagine that almost all of us would answer the call.  But it's the times we don't really need it -- plenty of young men willing to be gung-ho and charge into the meat grinder -- that keeps me tossing and turning at night.  Good men may answer that call. But bad men may issue the call.  We the people should be vigilant to make sure they don't.  Our sons (and now daughters) are worth more than being meat to be chewed up in some pointless war.

[AUinHsv 579]

One or two thoughts.  First is that if you were lucky enough to be landing at Utah then your chances were very good. Think only about 200 died there. They also landed in the wrong place but it turned out to be a very good place to be - few enemy soldiers. General Roosevelt (Teddy's son IIRC) was pretty clear - we will start the war from here and they did. Also the scateering of the paratroopers was helpful since the Germans could not figure out how many there were an spent a lot of time chasing very small groups. Finally - the output of America was absolutely on display here - the largest invasion ever followed up by a very similar invasion two weeks later on the other side of the world at Saipan. We had the resources to support two huge invasions back to back. Yamamoto was right to fear the American industrial capacity. It simply overwhelmed enemies on both sides of the world.

[HouTex 1878]

1 minute ago, AUinHsv said:

One or two thoughts.  First is that if you were lucky enough to be landing at Utah then your chances were very good. Think only about 200 died there. They also landed in the wrong place but it turned out to be a very good place to be - few enemy soldiers. General Roosevelt (Teddy's son IIRC) was pretty clear - we will start the war from here and they did. Also the scateering of the paratroopers was helpful since the Germans could not figure out how many there were an spent a lot of time chasing very small groups. Finally - the output of America was absolutely on display here - the largest invasion ever followed up by a very similar invasion two weeks later on the other side of the world at Saipan. We had the resources to support two huge invasions back to back. Yamamoto was right to fear the American industrial capacity. It simply overwhelmed enemies on both sides of the world.

This right here.  The estimates of the number of invading Allied troops on D-Day is from 130k to 150k--I've seen both numbers.  That only (not "only" for those killed in action or their loved ones) around 4,500 died on June 6 is actually pretty incredible.  I don't believe the Army discloses their casualty predictions, but I have to believe they would have predicted more than 4,500 deaths in Normandy on D-Day.

[Guest Lobo]

“I didn’t know that that many ships and that much armor existed in all the history of the world.  When they were all bearing down on just my beach position, I knew everything i had ever known was a lie.”   

[Pato del Muerto 52524]

8 minutes ago, Lobo said:

“I didn’t know that that many ships and that much armor existed in all the history of the world.  When they were all bearing down on just my beach position, I knew everything i had ever known was a lie.”   

Sounds like shock. Also awe. 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

41 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  It also helps that most of the men being sent over were quite young.  I was 19-20 in the buildup to the first Gulf War.  At the time, there was much speculation as to how involved a fight it would be, and of course talking heads bantering about reinstating a draft.  My mother called and reminded me I had family in Mexico, and of course, I'd go hang out with them to avoid the draft.  Maybe the most profane I've ever been with her -- no fucking way am I telling my friends they can go fight, while I hide.  19-20 year olds have a STRONG sense of duty and bravado.

I ain't 19 anymore.  My views are much more nuanced.  I'm not nearly as gung-ho as I was back then.  Almost all the young folks would answer the call, no matter what.  The rest of us would answer it....but we might run it through the filter of whether it was a just war or just some bullshit.  WWII was a pretty easy call.  Many of our later entanglements, not so much.

If we really needed it, I imagine that almost all of us would answer the call.  But it's the times we don't really need it -- plenty of young men willing to be gung-ho and charge into the meat grinder -- that keeps me tossing and turning at night.  Good men may answer that call. But bad men may issue the call.  We the people should be vigilant to make sure they don't.  Our sons (and now daughters) are worth more than being meat to be chewed up in some pointless war.

Another thing, in WWII, everyone male of draft age was enlisting.  It was pretty conspicuous by '42  or '43 if you were under 35, still stateside, and not in uniform.  There was a fairly immense amount of peer pressure and group bravado.  Even those with valid exceptions (age, health, sole male provider,  essential professions, etc.) felt some shame about not serving.

There were no men on college campuses except in V12 or other training programs after 1942, period.

And WWII was easy after Pearl Harbor.  Recall that we dithered over involvement as a nation for two-plus years before Pearl Harbor.  But then Congress hadn't surrendered all its responsibility to the executive back then.  There was no war without a Congressional declaration of same.

Edited June 6, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[The Royal We 3072]

4 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1960/11/first-wave-at-omaha-beach/303365/

 

 

This was a great read.  Lieutenant Walter Taylor sounds like he made a clacking noise between his legs when he walked.

My grandfather was in the Marine Corps and fought in the Battle of Guadalcanal and others in the Solomon Islands.  He would never speak about it until he started to get Alzheimer's and then would tell a few of the same harrowing stories over and over.  I wish I had more information about his time over there so I could one day share more about it with my own kids. 

I would like to think I would answer the same call if it ever came, but I can't help but feel a little inadequate when I think about what he went through and what he was able to accomplish during such a dark time in our history.

[Chad Fuck 17684]

SIAP
 
 

Thanks for your cervix!

[phdhorn 6224]

8 hours ago, HouTex said:

I agree with the last two sentences, but not that we could have easily lost the war--given the status of the war in 1944.  But the "what ifs" are very interesting to consider regarding WWII as a whole.  If (a big if) the US was not attacked and stayed out of the war then perhaps Germany could have developed the bomb eventually.  But we know that they were not close to developing the bomb when the war ended in May 1945.  And had Germany not attacked the USSR and focused on the UK who knows how it would have turned out.

Man, I dunno.  The Germans were developing shit so fast in the waning months of the war, and I mean they were weeks away from some really serious shit.  I've seen stuff like stealth fighters that look pretty damn much like today's, and those things were doing 800 mph in tests.  Their jet technology was ready, it was simply supply and money. And of course the bomb.  And of course the allies had no real answer for the V-2 and the Buzz Bomb - especially the V-2.  That was the most terrifying weapon in the entire war (well, up to August, 1945).

I think it really was a race - Germany of course was running out of men, money, and materials.  That vs. the ability to high-tech the war to kill unfathomable populations and develop an arsenal that was three decades at least beyond what the allies had in 1945.  I think the Battle of the Bulge was just that - Hitler's gamble that he could prolong the war long enough through capturing Antwerp and cutting Allied supply lines in return for the delivery of some of these weapons that could more than make up for lack of manpower.  Would the Germans have been able to sue for peace had some of these become reality?  Maybe not, but I'd hate to think of that scenario, and if not it's pretty likely they would have been able to secure the means to nuke or otherwise destroy half of New York or some large American city.  I think the Allies knew it and the Bulge became much more of a frantic thing that otherwise.  "Last gasp"?  Maybe, but it could have changed the war, and possibly civilization in the worst case scenario.

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

On 6/5/2019 at 10:25 AM, usmc0331horn said:

Best documentaries? I'm reading Ambrose now.

Unfortunately, writing books is not his strong suit. The more you read on WWII, the more that will become apparent. 

[tx 3 putt 77058]

37 minutes ago, phdhorn said:

I think the Battle of the Bulge was just that - Hitler's gamble that he could prolong the war long enough through capturing Antwerp and cutting Allied supply lines in return for the delivery of some of these weapons that could more than make up for lack of manpower.

The Russians at that point were unstoppable 

[HouTex 1878]

The Russians at that point were unstoppable 

This. The Germans really had no chance to win after around early 1943, and probably sooner. Russian winters are hell.

[tx 3 putt 77058]

Just now, HouTex said:

This. The Germans really had no chance to win after around early 1943, and probably sooner. Russian winters are hell.

Operation Barbarossa started on Sunday, 22 June 1941 <<<<< that's the day Germany lost the war

[HouTex 1878]

Operation Barbarossa started on Sunday, 22 June 1941

Agreed.

[atomheartbevo 89727]

15 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Any good YouTube videos about DDay from the nazis point of view?

Very dry and just maps and troop movement, but discussed what the German leaders knew and when they knew it, and how they were fooled or, caught off guard.  

 

[atomheartbevo 89727]

And another

 

[Homesickhorn 2202]

It was, is, and always will be, about the men next to you.

 

[phdhorn 6224]

 

8 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

The Russians at that point were unstoppable 

 

8 hours ago, HouTex said:

This. The Germans really had no chance to win after around early 1943, and probably sooner. Russian winters are hell.

 

8 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Operation Barbarossa started on Sunday, 22 June 1941 <<<<< that's the day Germany lost the war

Hitler's hope (and mistake) is that he thought the Allies were worse fighters than the Russians (on this of course he was totally wrong), and that he could get the Western Allies to get bogged down after the breakthrough, secure the peace in that sector, then go after the Russians with their new weapons, now not having to use so much material and manpower on two fronts.  The Russians had one thing more than any other - an endless supply of men (just like the Allies).  They weren't equipped to the level of the West, but they had tons of men to spare.  I mean holy shit, they lost over 10 million military alone, which is almost more than all of the other 41 countries combined. The Nazis were more deterred by the technological weaponry of the West than of the Russians' stuff (the newer Tiger tank one notable exception).  But they felt that if they could just get the breakthrough from the Ardennes, they could go after Russia with their mass weaponry - and perhaps the nukes that were literally days away.

In hindsight we can say that the war was essentially over, but that's the point... no one knows what could have happened if they had broken through the Western front.  That stop of the Bulge could very well have saved the world from continued Nazi Germany existence.

[HouTex 1878]

 
Hitler's hope (and mistake) is that he thought the Allies were worse fighters than the Russians (on this of course he was totally wrong), and that he could get the Western Allies to get bogged down after the breakthrough, secure the peace in that sector, then go after the Russians with their new weapons, now not having to use so much material and manpower on two fronts.  The Russians had one thing more than any other - an endless supply of men (just like the Allies).  They weren't equipped to the level of the West, but they had tons of men to spare.  I mean holy shit, they lost over 10 million military alone, which is almost more than all of the other 41 countries combined. The Nazis were more deterred by the technological weaponry of the West than of the Russians' stuff (the newer Tiger tank one notable exception).  But they felt that if they could just get the breakthrough from the Ardennes, they could go after Russia with their mass weaponry - and perhaps the nukes that were literally days away.

In hindsight we can say that the war was essentially over, but that's the point... no one knows what could have happened if they had broken through the Western front.  That stop of the Bulge could very well have saved the world from continued Nazi Germany existence.

You give the Germans too much credit. They didn't even have enough gasoline. They had to rely on capturing Allied fuel depots. German generals were against the offensive. They gave it a slight chance to succeed. Even if the Germans had reached Antwerp the Allies were never going to sue for peace. We likely would have nuked the Huns had the war not ended when it did.

[Chad Fuck 17684]

35 minutes ago, HouTex said:

You give the Germans too much credit. They didn't even have enough gasoline. They had to rely on capturing Allied fuel depots. German generals were against the offensive. They gave it a slight chance to succeed. Even if the Germans had reached Antwerp the Allies were never going to sue for peace. We likely would have nuked the Huns had the war not ended when it did.

This.  When Hitler was told of the industrial capacity of the United States, he simply didn't believe those reporting to him.  The numbers were so large in comparison to Germany's industrial capacity that he thought there had to be an error.  Along with underestimating the ability of the Russians to replace losses, this sort of willful ignorance to reality prevented Germany's success.  All the techs type stuff the Germans were doing (ballistic missiles, IR sights, jet aircraft) were all very eye-popping.  But even when they were maxing out production, they could never compete with the West on that front.  While it makes for interesting History channel fodder, it was never going to happen.  The Russians hordes were going to come knocking or Western industrial might was going to overwhelm them no matter what.  In the end, it was a combination of both.

[Pato del Muerto 52524]

I wonder what happens if hitler pushes his tech through before starting his military campaign. 

[miguelito 11266]

33 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

This.  When Hitler was told of the industrial capacity of the United States, he simply didn't believe those reporting to him.  The numbers were so large in comparison to Germany's industrial capacity that he thought there had to be an error.  Along with underestimating the ability of the Russians to replace losses, this sort of willful ignorance to reality prevented Germany's success.  All the techs type stuff the Germans were doing (ballistic missiles, IR sights, jet aircraft) were all very eye-popping.  But even when they were maxing out production, they could never compete with the West on that front.  While it makes for interesting History channel fodder, it was never going to happen.  The Russians hordes were going to come knocking or Western industrial might was going to overwhelm them no matter what.  In the end, it was a combination of both.

The similarities between Nazis and aggy are neverending.

[Chad Fuck 17684]

The similarities between Nazis and aggy are neverending.

Qfmft.

[BillyGoatHill 4312]

17 hours ago, Knoxtnhorn said:

Had my kids - 6 and 12 - listen to a doc podcast on the way back from San Antonio today.  I wanted them to understand today's significance.  One of the things that got me a bit was that the narrator stated DDE purposely put in the 129th(?) to storm Omaha because it was made up mostly of 17-20 year-old's who wouldn't understand what they were about to run into.  Veteran soldiers may not have been as effective due to the fact that they would see/know the danger ahead of them and possibly respond differently.

I'm not sure about the "129th" part hence the question mark.  

Most of the Divisions and troops in them used on D Day had never seen combat. Really only the 1st Division (used in North Africa and Italy) had a mix of old and new troops. The 82nd Airborne also had seen some combat in both places also but it was mainly the 504th within that and had been badly mauled in Italy and was being built back  up in England so it was not used in the "big jump" . The 4th and 29th Divisions was also green troops. The 29th was Division made up from Natinonal Guard troops from throughout the country and as noted by @AUS-97HORN below, the first companies and regiments ( 116th) were pretty much annihilated in the first minutes upon landing.

 

Why new troops?

New troops will do things that seasoned veterans know better than to do. Both in the book and mini series Band of Brothers, Carwood Lipton, while talking about the assault on Brecourt Manor (4 fixed 88's gun emplacements with supporting machine gun/MG42s to support along with around 40-50 troops) being attacked by a dozen troops from Easy Company. He stated " there were things I did on D Day ( and got away with) that I would never do later in the war".

Winters took the assignment (Easy Co. was the assault company within the Battalion) knowing full well he didn't have  his full or even half/partial company with him. A couple of men were from anohter company with one being Col. Sinks jeep driver (those assigned that weren't always the best training/combat trooper). 

Wartime, by Paul Russell writes that men in combat go through two stages of rationalization followed by one of perception. Considering the possibility of a severe wound or death, the average soldier's rationalization is i cannot hapeen to  me due to I am to clever/well-trained/good-looking/tightly lace, etc.....The 2nd is "it can happen to me , and I'd better be careful". I can avoid the danger by watching more prudently by the way I cover/dig in/ expose my position.....

Finally, it is followed by the perception/realization, " It will happen to me, and only by my not being there is going to prevent it".

17 hours ago, AUS-97HORN said:

  29th Infantry Division ,  116th Regiment 

 

they got fucking slaughtered.  As others said, approx 90% of the kids in the first boats (and the 116th was in the first boats in the first wave at Omaha) never returned home, most of the kids in Company A of the first boats were from Bedford, Va  as a result of the losses sustained on D-Day, Bedford VA had the largest per-capita loss of any US town in WW2, its why they put the National DDay Museum   in Bedford

This is a must read if you want to know what is what like and the aftermath of landing on Omaha Beach within the first minutes on June 6th, 1944. http://www.alexkershaw.com/books-by-alex-kershaw/the-bedford-boys/

Edited June 7, 2019 by BillyGoatHill

[usmc0331horn 953]

12 hours ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

Unfortunately, writing books is not his strong suit. The more you read on WWII, the more that will become apparent. 

I definitely didn't get much out of it.

[Guest Lobo]

We would have succeeded anyway, but things were slightly easier because Lucia Rommel was a Gemini.  

[EastTexan 662]

A lot of interesting posts and thoughts. For sure the men, boys and women of that era are our Greatest Generation.

 My father was a senior in high school when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. If I remember correctly, all the boys in his class (except one. He had an illness of some kind) enlisted before graduation. It was a very small school in northeastTexas with ten or so boys in his class.

 He said when in basic training (not sure it was called that back then) he heard paratroopers were paid $10 more. He was assigned to the 82nd Airborne and shipped to England after completing training. Dad didn't jump on D-Day but did jump in the Market Garden operation and fought in the Battle of the Bulge.

 He didn't talk at all about the actual fighting or killing. Story he did tell was on his jump he landed in a tree and got tangled up. Dropped his knife trying to cut the lines. A buddy came by and cut him down. Shortly after they saw several German troops in the area. Can only imagine what happened. Only other thing I remember him saying was how damn cold it was.

Hearing and reading the stories of the WW-II vets are most interesting and always makes me feel like I'm peeling onions. God bless them.

btw. Dad died at 59yrs. Wish I had tried to learn more.

[EastTexan 662]

2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I wonder what happens if hitler pushes his tech through before starting his military campaign. 

Thankfully Hitler was a stupid dumbass.

[NaTeWHO 852]

Didn't see this posted, but here is an awesome video narrated by Tom Brokaw called D-Day Normandy 1944 that played in IMAX.

LINK to video

[BillyGoatHill 4312]

2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I wonder what happens if hitler pushes his tech through before starting his military campaign. 

He needed the labor and more importantly, the raw materials and resources from the countries that he annexed and invaded. While the tech (rockets/jets) they had were very advanced for the time, it was very costly and time consuming. Germany would  have been better off with producing their conventional weapons (their 88mm Antiaircraft Fliegerabwehrkanone  Flak weapon was deadly not only to aircraft but effectively and accurately used against tanks and so accurate they sometimes could or would single out individual soldiers). 

Our Sherman tanks were underarmored and outgunned by the larger and more heavily armored Panzer and Tiger Tanks that Germany produced. The British used them against the Germans extensively before we were wholeheartedly in the war and the Germans nicknamed them" Tommy Cookers" due to them catching fire so easily after being hit usually by a single round. 

But we massed produced them in unlimited production and threw them into the front lines. So much so, the Germans could not knock them all out. The Germans (Hitler) spent too much time on his "wonder" weapons which were costly, time producing, and in limited amounts which helped us and the Allies defeat him.

Edited June 7, 2019 by BillyGoatHill

[Parliament 14260]

I can't find the YouTube video again that discusses the demographic impact on Russia...but it was massive.

Something like 70% of Russian men born in 1923 were dead by 1943. It caused a "birthrate ripple" that continues to shwack their birthrate every 25 years. The late 60's early 90's and right now. Or something like that.