I wouldn't say Germany lost "catastrophically" it was 1944. By that point most of the German army was on full retreat in the East (running from the Red Army and Marshall Zhokov) Germany was already DONE by 1944. D-Day accomplished the iron curtain not starting on the Atlantic coast of Europe.
@@jontaedouglas7244 True, I think Germany would win USSR in a 1v1. Britain attacking their oil holdings in the middle east was a major blow, which is why they later went towards the direction of the stalingrad in the first place to get to the caucasus.
@@IG7799-c4u the only thing the Britain had going for it was the inspiration Churchill instilled in his people. Had it been chamberlain he would’ve surrender no doubt. Hitlers defense against the US and would’ve been the pacific and he would’ve been able to focus full force on Stalin and who would’ve stopped him ?
@@georgecoventry8441 It's air force which was around 3 times smaller than the US ,6 times smaller than the Soviets ,slightly larger than RAF ,working in 15 percent efficiency due to extreme fuel shortage in 1944,lack of pilots ,lack of fuel quality which was detrimental to engine and aircraft performance Shit dude,the Germans were simply God gifted Add that to army which spread on all fronts,it's plans constantly leaked to allies due to codebreaking of enigma ,immobility ,absolute allied superiority German army had to make its army footed for human wave and deep attack doctrine of Soviets,mass air assault and grand battle plan doctrine of the US,while cognitive and light doctrine of the British ,the German strength was the best use of their mobile warfare doctrine ,that too without fuel ,it's NCO training which was the best in the world,the germans lacked NCOs by that time in 1944,caught completely by surprise ,well the heer did wonders
@@GotoHere doesn't always work like that when your railway is getting bombed ,much of manpower destroyed in Russia,lack of fuel,partisans Also 4.2million allied army was defeated by 3.3 million German army which had lesser resources and combat stamina than French Also 21000 Soviet tanks were annihilated for just over 2000 German tanks in operation barbarossa and German tanks were inferior at that time ,neither was russian landscape favourable
What's wild is that as far as imperial collapse goes, Germany appeared to have both too much bureaucracy AND power concentrated too far up. Usually, these problems are AT ODDS with each other, not in parallel. Germany was basically speedrunning imperial rise and fall in 12 years instead of 1000.
I think the main reason is that Germany get played into British deception way too many time, To the point that now they're incapable of taking a concrete decision, Not to mention, they get sabotaged a lot, with double agent, the communication sabotage. the British was good at playing a mind game Germany could hold up just fine if this is was a weaker and dumber enemies
Bureaucracies are inherently arms of the state. Whether or not any particular institutions are corrupted, they still possess a jurisdiction granted to them by the state. In contrast, an anarchist state would accordingly have no bureaucratic institutions.
Wonderful comment,but please understand that it was the war that brought it down,not it's system The notion that Germany would have collapsed without war is a myth
The simple truth is that the German forces in France were too few to hold back or defeat any determined large Allied attack. Largest share of German military was in the east. Also Allied large caliber massive fire support from their battleships did a lot of damage on the Germans.
The Germans could have won if they had known where to put their forces, but they had no idea. Even Rommel had it largely wrong, and we still would have beaten him. They did eventually realize where they should put things but our air power prevented quick movement. That and the Soviets about to launch their offensive so the whole issue was moot.
I was surprised that Hitler left close to a million troops in Northern Italy to surrender separately. I could never understand why he did not abandon Italy earlier with the natural barrier of the Alps to the North and redeploy those forces in Normandy or Russia.
Same reason he did in the east. He didn't want to lose any territory. If he allowed the armies in the east to regroup and fall back in 1942 like they wanted, they would've sacrificed land for stronger defense, but Hitler wanted to hold onto territory and delude himself into thinking the armies could still push while under equipped
Would that possible have been because the allies were already pushing up through Italy and Hitler wanted to stop that advance? In fact, the allied advance through Italy was going so quick that it was a worry for IKE and Churchill. They did not want to many German troops retreating from Italy so quickly as that would indeed have freed them up for use by Hitler in Normandy. Therefore, instead of having the US forces go around the town of Casino, IKE ordered that they go through that town, knowing it was heavily defended enough for a prolonged battle to take place. That would then keep German units in Italy and away from Normandy. The battle of Casino was really an unnecessary battle that cost a large amount of US lives. The allies could have simply gone around it, left the small German unit still remaining in that town and pushed on towards Rome. The small German unit in Casino would have then been encircled and easy to deal with once cut off from receiving support and supplies. IKE and Churchill Tactics for the success of D-Day that sacrificed allied lives.
okay boys lets be real. Without having to worry about an eastern front, the allies would have failed. But without air supremacy, even with an eastern front, the allies would have most definitely also failed. It was due to multiple factors favoring the allies that this landing succeeded.
@@Plexpara No. Even if the Eastern front never happened, Germany would still have too many coastline and frontlines to cover. You really think 4 million germans are going to defending Omaha beach? Britain, USA, and Canada had an overwhelming material and manpower advantage over Germany through the entirety of WW2. It would take a lot longer but the western allies were 99% mechanised so could outmanoeuvre German units everywhere. "You have horses, what were you thinking!"
@@AverageWagie2024 You really think its no Problem to fight against several superpower at different sides? Sorry but you got 0 idea. Of course it would look absolute different if Germany would focus inly on the west. 100 % btw eben a mass of english and US general said tha them self. Germany had main focus on russia. tehy didnt even attack the west just defend cause they were mainly on russia
The Answer is very easy. Cause Germany had Russia on the other Side and millions of Soldiers there. So they could not focus on the west. It would look different if Germany had total focus on the west.
@@izevbizuatrustine611 Thats not true... Cause the same thing again. Germany had the West on the other side and could not focus fully on Russia. Russia would do nothing against germany...as we saw in WW1 And Russia came at the same time as the West did.
@@Plexpara no that's not true, the whole world has to wait for Russia decision about German invasion of Europe.... Let me tell you, if US would have done anything, they wouldn't have waited till when Russia has to decide, meanwhile Russia didn't take any decisions until winter comes.... Also according to history, Soviet Union has already pushed Nazi to Berlin and millions has surrendered before the US troops come from the west
@@Plexparayou try take out 10million well trained Axis troops then if it’s so easy ? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II) I’m no fan of Communsim but you got to respected their people for taking out 10 millions German + Axis troops And remember in 1942 they was practically alone (but Uk was a big helper in the War of the West) and still won at Stalingrad ?
@@whyucomingfast9972 yeaa...I think we all got to respect even more that the western world and the eastern world was needed, plus 6 years to beat one little Germany...do you know Germany won over Russia in ww1 allready? Russia gave up. And in ww2 was Germany again close to Moscow. The only reasy why they dont did it this time was the western front. Sorry but i cant respect World Powers if they cant even beat a small country alone...I respect that small country then.. do you respect when 20 big guys beat up 1 small dude or you respect the small dude who take out 15 of them before he goes down?
Germany was in full retreat mode after Kursk. So in Normandy by 44 the forces available would always be too weak to defend the atlantic coast. It was just a matter of time and many top german oficials knew it.
German High Command were successful in the invasion of France because Blitzkrieg was a fluid armored concept that would attack windows of weakness in any defenses. The Germans realized the weakness in relying upon fixed defensive lines. France was the perfect example. As for Normandy, had the Germans spent less on stationary defensive positions and more on mobile Panzer Groups for rapid deployment things could have turned out quite different. Also, they lacked air support & air superiority at this point in the war. Defeat was inevitable, because the Germans faltered during and after operation Barbarossa. Yes, there were moments that Germany expended up to 80% - 85% against the Russians on the Eastern Front. As the war continued Hitler took more control over all aspects of the military operations instead of letting his commanders complete the tasks that needed to be accomplished. Although the Germans almost won the war, they knew that they lacked the men & resources necessary to win any protracted - drawn out war. They were experts in Rapid Deployment - Blitzkrieg and not conquest on Three Fronts. World conquest - Never.
Imagine Hitler keeping the alliance with Russia who was supplying Fuel to the German Military. Without having to invade Russia, Hitler could have tripled the support for Romel in North Africa against the Allies. 1/3 could focus on capturing new oilfields in the Middle East. Hitler should have focused on an Invasion of England. Telling the Japanese to stay away from attacking the USA would have helped his cause, because Hitler declared war on "America". Too soon and too early. As it stands, Germany would suffer shortages of fuel and the ability to outproduce Great Britian & the USA. We won - He lost.@@oliverhughes610
Yes, they were. Imagine no war with Russia. Probably, much later. Then he could have given Rommel enough to possibly defeat Montgomery & USA. Then get those new Arab oil fields without relying on Russia providing fuel. Half the panzers would be under Rommel's control. The other half would be stockpiled in France for the German Invasion of England. But - No Cigar. We won - He lost. @@gabbytay
It wasnt static defense lines, France was aware of this, in fact, the Germans had along with the Russians developed a concept of operations(yes in the 20s and 30s this were friends and cooperated extensively). The Main lesson from WWI wasnt that Offensives failed to move the line, they failed to keep it, because the true aim should be not the enemy front but the enemy rear(its tactical depth). The Battle of France was a narrow front attack based on the battle of Movements(Bewegungskrieg not Blitzkrieg). It was a risky maneuver, a narrow front attack can end catastrophically(as many soviet counter Offensives proved). Also France was caught on the move, you see the Defense of Belgium was planned, but then to appease Hitler the Belgium King declared Neutrality and did not allow the French to position, the fortifications around key Belgium rivers were the defense lines and the theoretical continuation of the Maginot line. The Soviets denied German Bewengungskrieg with their own plan Deep Battle. Deep Battle unlike Bewengenskrieg is a complete Battle doctrine since it has a plan for all situations(defensive, Offensive, active defense, fighting retreat). How this was implemented in practice was more complicated, because Red Army command had been purged prior to the war and Soviet division were on the attack when they really had to concentrate strength. The Soviet units were really powerful on paper, they had way to much firepower for its logistical trail. There was a key difference in how they attacked, Germany took Advantage of weak points (Schwerpunckt) when engaging the operational front, the Soviets choose to attack the strong points in order to create the operational opportunity(Bagration an example the target were the biggest German fortifications in Belarus and they would all be gone in 3 days).
To be fair, no one in Germany could have known of the remarkable Higgins boats and their ability to land large numbers of troops so quickly. It had simply never been done before like this.
Higgins boats had been in use in the Pacific for over a year and a half prior to d-day. The Japanese had the similar Daihatsu class landing craft in service dating back to ‘37. The Germans definitely knew about them. They had defenses specifically designed to counter landing craft.
Why? Well...number 1: The Allies had enormous material advantages over the Germans. 2. The Allies had complete air superiority over the battlefield. 3. The Allies had complete naval superiority. 4. The majority of Germany's ground forces were tied up in the East, fighting the Russians, and they were already losing that campaign, with no hope of victory there. 5. The Germans were critically short of fuel and some other strategic resources, and they could not move reinforcements or supplies during the daytime without getting constantly attacked by Allied air power. That's enough right there. They never had a chance. The Russians had already beaten them before Normandy even happened, though Hollywood tends not to mention that much for some reason.
At Caen The British and Canadians faced off against 8 panzer divisions (4 of which were SS) and 3 heavy panzer battalions (2 of which were SS) with Tiger and King Tigers. Despite this they managed to keep the enemy off balance forcing them to commit forces piecemeal and attrit the enemy forces to the stage where the units were shadows of their former selves. The allies supply situation was result of Patton not capturing the Brittany ports as he was ordered. The Brittany ports were to supply the US troops and the Channel ports were to supply the British and Canadians. The Canadian 1st Army having the task of clearing the ports and took Le Harve, Boulogne and Calais before repositioning and clearing the Scheldt. The broad front strategy was another contributing factor to the supply crisis of autumn 1944. 7 infantry divisions 8 panzer divisions 3 heavy tank battalions
Reason? Assured generalship by Monty ensured the Germans never had a chance to build a reserve with which to dictate tactics. He made sure they lived on the defensive with no opportunity to use the big panzer divisions as they would wish to. He outmanoeuvred the vast concentration of opposition forces around Caen including all but one of those panzer divisions. This gave the right wing on opportunity to break out against limited opposition albeit very difficult terrain. It ended with decimation of over 20 German divisions by the end.
Correct. Montgomery's plan was perfect, used the German's preconceptions against them, took advantage of the respective fighting qualities of the Canadian, British, and American armies, and worked as he had intended. We were fortunate he was appointed, since he almost wasn't because he was difficult to work with. Incompetents like Eisenhower couldn't understand military strategy, no matter how many times Montgomery explained it to them (and Monty spent half the war explaining the same simple concepts to Eisenhower, to no effect).
The sound answer is already given in the video: Germany had already lost WW2 way before D-Day, since they launched a war that did not manage to conclude decisively in its early years. The retreat of December 1941 out of Moscow, the first retreat of the Wehrmacht, was the first blow. The catastrophic loss of Stalingrad was the heaviest blow. The Battle of Kursk took the initiative away from their hands in 1943 and gave the Soviets the advantage. Add to these the El-Alamein defeat, the loss of Africa and the loss of Italy afterwards…the occupation forces that were spread across Europe…the logistic nightmare that the Holocaust was causing…the continuous and rising problems in weapon production due to the Allies’ heavy bombarding…no, the war was already lost, even if everything went in Germany’s favour on D-Day. The outcome of defeat was inevitable, it would only be delayed if everything ran smoothly. And it didn’t. Normandy was the icing on the cake, a huge icing, yet the whole battle was already lost!
WW2's unfortunate reality is that a key strategic area was won by the wrong place. Yet, we had all made the agreement that a West front was necessary, and in the end we needed a place at the table. The Soviets end up in a 1 on 1 with Germany for over 2 years, and as the Soviet strength cranked up, Germany's ability to defend other fronts withered away. Even as D-Day was happening, Germany had maintained a force of over 3 million on the East front, most of which got blipped in the summer.
I would say either strategy, keeping the reserves inland for a big counter strike or dispersed close to the front to hit the landing instantly would work. But with Hitler trying to do both strategies which resulted in neither strategy having enough strength to work.
I think a lot of Germany's problem was they had no air power to speak of at this point. Had they squandered it in Russia and the UK they could have seen the invasion coming , knew where the landing was and destroyed much of it
That may be true. But Germany army was well trained, disciplined, and equipped. More importantly, German army had many outstanding officers who used effective tactics.
The map is wrong. The french island of Corsica was liberated by the Free French armed forces on September 8th 1943, just after the Kingdom of Italy had surrendered to the Allies and the armed forces of the German Reich had been retreated to the mainland of France, which central and southern parts were the French State at this time, officially, but german armed forces were stationed inside this puppet state since November 18th 1942.
I think with hindsight we can see the main reason both Germany and Japan were doomed to lose. Both countries lacked the resources for a long war. Germany needed relatively quick knockouts of the French and British. If the British didn't hold them off, D Day could never have happened. Then Germany wouldn't be desperate for resources and could deal with the Soviet Union later. As it happened, Germany had no real choice but to make a grab for the resources in the east, thus dooming them to a two front war. That meant losing was just a matter of time. Each individual battle might go either way, but the war as a whole was lost. The Soviets and US could throw far more troops at them than they could cope with over the long term.
Good video. It's often overlooked to what extent the Allies went to trick Germany into thinking their attack would be on Calais. But it is even more overlooked that Germany's defeat was inevitable. The moment they declared war on the Soviet Union it was over. It was only a matter of time at that point. The same was true of Japan's war against the US. Pearl Harbor was their own sealed fate. And I think a lot of leaders, with the exception of Hitler, understood that at the time including most of the Japanese war cabinet. But even so, they knew it was inevitable that they would go to war. There was no other path for them at that point. Even Germany declaring war on the Soviets was inevitable. They either wait for the Soviets to declare war on them when they are ready, meaning absolute defeat or declare war first and hope for a miracle. Same with invading France and all of it...either face a strengthened enemy entrenched in France or a coastal invasion later and hope for a miracle. Things happened as they had to happen. Everyone made the right decisions for the most part, but the outcome was pretty much established early on.
What is up with the maps in this video? It puts 2 extra British Armies South of the American Armies between them and the French. There was just 1 British Army in France after D-Day and 5 American Armies (1st, 3, 7th, 9th and 15th).
No there wasn't, each troops were in their own side of the attack while americans were struggling to infiltrate, British troops with Canadian were against most of the German troops and still did it, the numbers aren't correct the British never tried to take the win by themselves but not only they had all the forces in the air and sea they also had the best result in Normandy, the British and canadian troops could have made it alone Americans made it easier by... well literally being target practice by their own incompetence in infiltrating, we don't know half of what truly happened in WW2 but one thing is for sure, the British were the only reason democratic western countries won, if it wasn't for Britain we would be in a very bad place (I'm not British)
@@erikerik3823 Dude what are you talking about here? Your post doesn't makes any sense and has nothing to do with what I said at all. I'm talking about the map in the video being wrong. And it is. Right from the start a few seconds into the video they put 2 American flag, 3 British flags and a Canadian flag. On D-Day the US sent in 5 Divisions, the British 3 and the Canadians 1. 32 seconds into the video the put in order from top to bottom a Canadian flag, an American flag, A British flag, 2 American flags, 2 British flags and then a french flag. That is COMPLETELY wrong. The Canadian army was at the top of the line along the coast, south of them was the British army, then south of the British army was in order, the US 9th Army, the US 1st Army, the US 3rd Army, the US 7th Army and then the French Army. The US 15th Army comes in at the end of the war while pushing into Germany. Additionally there was the US 5th Army in Italy along with the British 8th army which was like 40% British with the rest Canadian, Indian and other nations troops. In regards to your irrelevant post to what I said though, that isn't even correct. When the Allies landed British were supposed to take the city of Caen on the first day as the area they were attacking was the lightest defended area. There is a reason that Omaha beach was the only beach that had 2 divisions dedicated to taking it. Going into the battles it was known that was the most heavy defended area of the Normandy Beach. But because Caen was not taken it was easily the most defensive and important area of the Normandy front the Germans could hold. Which is why the Germans started the majority of their armoured divisions in that area after the initial landings. As the landings continued and the Americans built up their troops the US launched the break through attack with Bradley's armies lead by Patton's 3rd Army. When that break through happened the Germans rushed all of their top divisions over to try to stop the break through at first and then they tried to cut off Patton's 3rd army after the breakthrough happened. That failed and Patton completely outflanked the German top divisions. That resulted in the Germans best divisions essentially have all of their firepower wiped out at the Falaise pocket and could have resulted in them being completely surrounded had the British pushed up to the line they were supposed to meet Patton at to complete the pocket. Patton urged the higher ups to let him keep pushing forward to get to the British positions to finish off the pocket early but his request was denied because it was feared that his already stretched out Army could be overrun if they pushed forward anymore. So he was told to wait until the British broke through the German line in front of them and completed the pocket. That allowed a sizeable portion of the German forces in France to escape. Though they did so without most of their heavy equipment and were constantly strafed and bombed from the air on the one road out they had. And what you are talking about when you say they had all the forces in the air and sea again makes no sense. The US Army Airforce and Navy were so much larger then any other force in the world during WW2. They were so large that the rest of the world combined didn't have a larger airforce or Navy then the US did. So again, your crazy, rambling barley literate post makes no sense, is completely wrong everywhere, and had nothing to do with my initial post from the very start. My post was about the video in the map posting units that didn't exist in real like that should have been easily researched by the channel and posted correctly.
@@erikerik3823 What are you talking about in this post? It makes no sense. What is it that makes you think the British had the best result in Normandy? They landed on the easiest beaches to attack and still didn't take their primary target in the city of Caen and then didn't take it until way later when the Americans broke through the German lines and pulled the German best divisions away from that area to attack the Americans who were breaking through the German lines and encircling them everywhere.
@@erikerik3823 I think you put this reply into the wrong thread because it makes no sense. For the OP, you are correct. The video did completely make the maps incorrect. The US did send the most divisions into France on D-Day, they did attack the most well defended of the beaches and following D-Day the US did have 6 armies in Europe to the 1 and half British armies, 1 Canadian army and 1 French army.
This isn't logical this is pointless, it's basically whoever supports it's club, all of you guys support USA you are gonna fight the most that USA was the best country in D Day while i will fight it was britain, no one knows for a fact, the difference is that I'm a Brazilian defending a country that has no intention whatsoever to impose itself as the best western country in WW2, if it wasn't for my research and i mean properly research not only googling a few stuff (an american company) i wouldn't even know about canadian troops, because of the thousands of WW2 media a small percentage shows anything that isn't American, a guy here just said British got it easy and USA encircled Germany, that isn't true but it is for him the same way someone would defend that it's football team was better last season
It was to be expected. It's mid-1944 and the Axis had been losing the war quite badly since 1942. 1942 was when the Allies had started to truly get their act together. The German military had been losing the war for years with mounting losses, lost territory. They have far too much area to defend with powerful opponents able to attack them from any compass direction. The German government fought a war on ideals and got the country into a war against basically every economic, population, and industrial power in the world *at the same time* who also all happen to sit on most of the strategically important resources. Their enemies actually coordinated grand strategy and supported each other immensely at crucial times. Things the Axis never got any decent with. Things they were incapable of doing. It was to be expected. The Axis never had a chance.
They lost when they decided to invade Russia, if all the resources that went to the eastern front went to Britain instead then they could of won, because launching an invasion over the channel was one thing but launching it over the Atlantic would of been a complete other
@@danielclancy1132 they attacked the soviets because they were desperately out of oil, it was a gamble all or nothing there's no invasion without fuel to move stuff or even train new personnel
The Canadian flag was there second from the right which was the Red Ensign. The Maple Leaf first flew in 1965 and was another one of Lester Pearson’s accomplishments. I remember the Union Jack flying in Canada before that and if I remember correctly Canadian soldiers used the ensign just to distinguish themselves from the British during battles.
Near impossible to stop the Allied juggernaut, which made its beachead on June 6, 1944. This does in fact make you see the plight of the best German division in the Western Theatre of WWII. But it must be seen in the minds of all who read this and watched this well done video, that this was indicitive of the entire German war effort at this point... namely that they were at all odds against them and they were scattered and delayed and scrambling to get to their battle stations. The landings of Operation Overlord (DDay) were facilitated in large measure due to the annihilation of the German armies in the Eastern Theatre (Russia); Continued allied bombings on German factories; pressure on the Italian front. ~$uper
The war was lost before it had started, the first move was supposed to be made in 1945, Germany wanted a larger navy, more tanks, and most of all, more modern aircraft, this would have been the case had the war started in 45. We have no idea how the French or the Polish military would have looked like at that time, but if the timetable would have been kept by the Germans, nobody could have saved France or Poland, with a fleet including aircraft carriers it would have been possible to attack the UK from anywhere with impunity. I'm glad we lost the war, but the Brits could have stopped it earlier by not appeasing Hitler.
You are assumingI presume that England would be unaware of Hitlers intentions. Bare in mind that Englands spy network was second to none. In addition there are some intelligent people in the restof the world besides the germans .
it also would've helped if Hitler didn't try speed running genocide until AFTER the war was won. Also he never shouldve attacked Russia and TBH I genuinely believe the world would've let Germany have France and Poland if he just stopped there
For the same reason that Japan was defeated and the South in the U.S. Civil War lost: They could not produce and/or replace lost men and materiel at the same rate as their enemies. In the case of Nazi Germany a significant secondary factor was Hitler's political ideologies about conducting war that saw huge numbers of soldiers captured and/or surrounded and neutralized such as in Tunisia 1943, Stalingrad 1942-43, and France & the eastern front in the summer of 1944.
Your map also shows American landing east of the British landing. Wrong. There were two American landing beaches, Omaha and Utah both west of the three British/Canadian beaches. And the Free French. It is also wrong to say Rommel went home for Frau Rommel’s birthday. Rommel had been seriously injured when an RAF Typhoon drove his car off the road into the ditch. These Typhoons flew all the Normandy roads below tree-top hight rocketing and cannon-firing everything on the roads, including Rommel’s car. I knew one of these pilots. He might have been the pilot who got Rommel.
An American General worked out that one Flak Division and two Infantry Divisions would have stopped the invasion cold. That is how good the German weapons, and the German Army training was. Monty was accused of failure, like today the Russians in Ukraine are accused of failure..while in fact bleeding the opponent to death.
No…just as cited in this video, the Wehrmacht in Normandy were poorly trained conscripts, equipped with older weapons and a lot of captured foreign materiel. All those “secret weapons of the Third Reich” videos are utter rot. Bolt action rifles and horse drawn carriages; THAT was the actual Wehrmacht.
I read a lot about this. Hitler pulled all his troops back from the coast. Thinking that America had a nuclear weapon which they did just wasn't ready. But he knew they had a nuclear weapon
The key to D-Day for Normandy was the weather. June in Normandy is not usually that great every year until almost the end of the month and 1944 seemed to be the same as usual. But there was a great secret afoot with the few in the know about it holding their breath. What appeared to be a normal long early June storm coming in off the ocean was actually two separate storms with a few days of passable invasion weather between them if it all held together. That was why the nazis found themselves unprepared for the "surprise invasion" that showed up amost a month early.
Bureaucratic red tape can be overwhelming, making it difficult to get things done efficiently. This phenomenon is often a symptom of a larger issue - the stifling of initiative and creativity. It's essential for anyone in any job to recognize the signs of excessive control and speak out against it, promoting a healthier work environment that values productivity and innovation.
The Germans failed at Normandy because the under strength Canadian 3rd division stopped 3 full strength German armoured divisions (12th SS, 21st Panzer and Panzer Lehr) from reaching the invasion beaches in the days following D-Day.
My uncle from my mother’s side visited Paris long ago, and he went to Normandy. Every time I mention WW2, D-Day was all he talked about, and he knows I’m a WW2 nerd.
Rommel was on leave , and people where afraid to wake Hitler with this news . They woulda lost anyways, but that was a horrible start to the battle for them
@JamieM450 i just see so many people in videos like this saying "my dad/uncle/grandpa did xyz" and I swear a high fraction of them are complete lies because some people have a weird obsession with getting likes on their comments
Why did Germany actually failed at Normandy? Easy , because they lost their army against the Soviets. All the experienced soldiers Germany had up to this point ended up 6 feet under the dirt , fertilizer for the Ruski steppes.
The issue was creating another front for the Germans to defend. They were having a back and forth with Russia on the east. They were losing Italian land and now had another
Germany lost the war on Normandy because Hitler didn't heed Rommel who said small armored units should be placed near the beaches. Could you imagine the carnage on the beaches if just 4 Panthers had made it to each beach ? Rommel had learned from North Africa that tanks that had to travel any distance , they were open to devastating attacks from the Allied air forces.
Just imagine what was going on when they needed to tell Hitler about it, but he was asleep.. "We can't wake up the Fuhrer now, he'd be furious!" "The last thing we want is a furious Fuhrer!"
Well 70% of the german army was fighting in eastern front ... What worst to german is the absence of luffwaffe in western front thats why the allies have a total Air superiority thats leave the german panzer and armor very vulnerable ..
Incredible that Germany used 3/4 of their Army fighting the Russians on the Eastern front. Hitler was truly a madman fighting a 2 front war. 3 front war if you include Italy.
the only chance the germans had was, as rommel thought, to stop them at the waterline. once the allies got ashore, the air support and naval gunfire support doomed any counter-attack. just look at sicily, salerno and anzio for proof of this.
this may be but its also true there were catastrohic loss of life just on omaha beach alone, equal to the raid on pearl harbor!! So saying the germans did not mount a robust defense seems....indefensable.
I see the beginning of the end for Germany when they unnecessarily insisted on taking Stalingrad. It was unnecessary at the time, an ego trip for Hitler and turned the tide in the East giving the Russians motivation and momentum.
Britain, USA & Russia each investigated the option of assassinating Hitler, and all reached the same conclusion; it was practically impossible to accomplish and it would be a suicide mission. And the fact that Hitler tended to hamper his forces from being efficient, so he was an asset to have in power over the Wehrmacht.
A couple of mistakes in this video that came from relying on very old and misinformed source material. The Germans did not have respect for Patton prior to the Normandy invasion. He was basically an unknown general from the Sicily campaign and not considered important, a mistake magnified by the 1970 film "Patton." Second, the German high command was obsessed with where the Canadian divisions were because they had taken such a mauling from them in WW1. So Allied high command played on these fears by assigning fake Canadian divisions to the apparent 1st US Army group opposite Calais, and allowing Canadian signals units to handle a part of the radio traffic generated by this fake US army group. This helped solidify Hitler's fear that Calais was the invasion point and that the Canadians would be the spearhead. A great deal of this information has only been made available from declassified documents at the British national archives at Kew in the last 25 years or so. One of the best historians to take advantage of this material is Dr. Marc Milner whose "Stopping the Panzers: The Untold Story of D Day" unveils this incredible tale of Allied subterfuge and why the Canadian beach at Juno was the most important for the success of the Normandy invasion. 👌😉
Correct. Patton was a buffoon who never did well when he had to actually fight Germans (as at Metz and in the Ardennes). When others did all the fighting, he drove around the countryside (Sicily, France). The movie made him into a hero that he wasn't - his soldiers hated him, because they knew he didn't care about their welfare. He was the opposite of Montgomery in every way, the person the movie pretended was his rival.
@@seathanaich6 I wouldn't go so far as to call Patton a buffoon, but he was not a particularly principled man. Anyone who is curious about that statement should look up Task Force Baum and they will find out what I mean. I saw a presentation here on UA-cam somewhere where someone had combed through the German records and prior to Normandy in mid-1944 they found only two mentions of Patton, and neither made any note of him being a formidable Allied general. At the end of WW2 General Eisenhower wrote a letter to General Marshall and he called Patton the problem child of the army, due to his bad press for a number of reasons. If Patton had not died shortly after the war I don't think his future would have been bright in the US army.
Yes they bombed the hell out of the Normandy beaches, but because of cloud cover they missed most of their targets. Bombing wasn't the decisive factor. It was the guts of the troops, and the Navy destroyers who sailed close enough to the beaches to destroy key Nazi defenses. Thank for asking. Lots of good books on this subject at your library. And it's an important subject.
@@brianniegemann4788Can you please choose the best book about this in your opinion and then type the entire contents of it from start to finish in your reply to this comment so I can read the book here?
1) They expected an attack in Pas-de-Calais. 2) The best German troops were concentrated on the Eastern Front. Normandy was occupied by the worst soldiers (some Nazi collaborators, criminals, wounded, soldiers, too young or too old). 3) The German troops there were poorly equipped.
By 1944, I would say that Germany had the two major nations against them organized (the US & USSR, of course). If I remember correctly, they had approximately 200,000 forces in Norway, for example, to occupy it. So, there were a lot of resources they needed, sure, but also a lot that wasn't used, especially Hitler's decisions (like Courland, for example). In the summer of '44, Albert Speer & co managed to achieve the highest production numbers ever, although they were continuously bombed since '42-'43. But, sure, a lot of Germany's best soldiers had died. However, the worst must be Hitler's removal of great generals, those who had taken Europe for him in the first place. If you ask me, the Germans did not fail in Normandy, Hitler did. But I could go on; the Germans really came through with a miracle but with a madman at the wheel. (All Hitler knew was "stand your ground," probably since that worked in WWI...) In Normandy, many German units fought until annihilation. Why? Partly because of Allied air superiority. Cheers
If germany was strong the allies would invade in southern france but the victories in africa and italy enhanced confidence for an attack in northern france.
Army order of Battle. XXXXX - army group/front (Soviet case). XXXX - Army. XXX - Army Corps. XX - Division X - Brigade III - Regiment II - Battalion I - Company.
Allied invasion could have succeeded even if they had choosen Calais instead of Normandy !!..... Because of the reason of the weakened Luftwaffe and the Navy..... But had their been Me 262 in service (with mass production) during D-Day ...the D-Day could have been a catastrophic failure for the Allies..
Sleep is a crucial facter which turned the destiny of some political autocrats for eg.,napolean had slept long unusually before the water loo war where he lost where as so far he was unpregnable.
In simple terms: bro it's a 3v1 what do u think, as we can see if it was a 1v1 or a 1v2 it might be possible but America joined and UK and the world so basically germany can't handle the fact 100 other countries are against him, this is basically like a 120 vs 1
yes i agree to this he thinks that he is indestructible and choses to fight both sides i think it would be better if he finishes first gbr then go for soviet next when he's done with gbr
Its called a smokescreen .All the officers were en route past Gibraltar .the deal i beleive eas done by Churchill/Berman and the financers in new york.
Yes having the Allies best General (Adolf) in charge and not allowing any movement of Armor without his direct orders didn't help matters any. Allies having complete control of Air and Sea also helped
I wouldn't say Germany lost "catastrophically" it was 1944. By that point most of the German army was on full retreat in the East (running from the Red Army and Marshall Zhokov) Germany was already DONE by 1944. D-Day accomplished the iron curtain not starting on the Atlantic coast of Europe.
Easy to say , it was the third front and over stretched them to the max think your view has a lack of nuance
@Chipsandgravy202 nothing about what he said is lacking nuance or incorrect.
If America and Britain wouldn’t have opened up other fronts. Germany would have broke through Stalingrad AND took Moscow 2:58
@@jontaedouglas7244 True, I think Germany would win USSR in a 1v1. Britain attacking their oil holdings in the middle east was a major blow, which is why they later went towards the direction of the stalingrad in the first place to get to the caucasus.
@@IG7799-c4u the only thing the Britain had going for it was the inspiration Churchill instilled in his people. Had it been chamberlain he would’ve surrender no doubt. Hitlers defense against the US and would’ve been the pacific and he would’ve been able to focus full force on Stalin and who would’ve stopped him ?
The fact that the Germans kept holding the front for 2 months was nothing less than a miracle
Correct. They fought well under hopeless conditions.
@@georgecoventry8441 It's air force which was around 3 times smaller than the US ,6 times smaller than the Soviets ,slightly larger than RAF ,working in 15 percent efficiency due to extreme fuel shortage in 1944,lack of pilots ,lack of fuel quality which was detrimental to engine and aircraft performance
Shit dude,the Germans were simply God gifted
Add that to army which spread on all fronts,it's plans constantly leaked to allies due to codebreaking of enigma ,immobility ,absolute allied superiority
German army had to make its army footed for human wave and deep attack doctrine of Soviets,mass air assault and grand battle plan doctrine of the US,while cognitive and light doctrine of the British ,the German strength was the best use of their mobile warfare doctrine ,that too without fuel ,it's NCO training which was the best in the world,the germans lacked NCOs by that time in 1944,caught completely by surprise ,well the heer did wonders
Indeed it was.
It’s always easier to defend than attack.
@@GotoHere doesn't always work like that when your railway is getting bombed ,much of manpower destroyed in Russia,lack of fuel,partisans
Also 4.2million allied army was defeated by 3.3 million German army which had lesser resources and combat stamina than French
Also 21000 Soviet tanks were annihilated for just over 2000 German tanks in operation barbarossa and German tanks were inferior at that time ,neither was russian landscape favourable
What's wild is that as far as imperial collapse goes, Germany appeared to have both too much bureaucracy AND power concentrated too far up. Usually, these problems are AT ODDS with each other, not in parallel.
Germany was basically speedrunning imperial rise and fall in 12 years instead of 1000.
What an amazing comment
I think the main reason is that Germany get played into British deception way too many time,
To the point that now they're incapable of taking a concrete decision,
Not to mention, they get sabotaged a lot, with double agent, the communication sabotage.
the British was good at playing a mind game
Germany could hold up just fine if this is was a weaker and dumber enemies
Bureaucracies are inherently arms of the state. Whether or not any particular institutions are corrupted, they still possess a jurisdiction granted to them by the state. In contrast, an anarchist state would accordingly have no bureaucratic institutions.
Wonderful comment,but please understand that it was the war that brought it down,not it's system
The notion that Germany would have collapsed without war is a myth
Well, starting a war with the rest of the world just was not a good idea.
The simple truth is that the German forces in France were too few to hold back or defeat any determined large Allied attack. Largest share of German military was in the east. Also Allied large caliber massive fire support from their battleships did a lot of damage on the Germans.
And scattering what little you have, over 2000 miles of coastline, is hardly a brilliant strategy.
@@flashgordon6670 They had no other viable strategy. It's not the best, but still better than nothing.
Germans sent 7 panzer divisions against Monty. Including 5 SS ones. All fully equipped and manned.
@@coling3957 Nuts!
The Germans could have won if they had known where to put their forces, but they had no idea. Even Rommel had it largely wrong, and we still would have beaten him. They did eventually realize where they should put things but our air power prevented quick movement. That and the Soviets about to launch their offensive so the whole issue was moot.
I was surprised that Hitler left close to a million troops in Northern Italy to surrender separately. I could never understand why he did not abandon Italy earlier with the natural barrier of the Alps to the North and redeploy those forces in Normandy or Russia.
I think that even if the Alps is a better for defense the front also will get bigger, the could could be shorter in Emilia-romagna
his meth ego
Same reason he did in the east. He didn't want to lose any territory. If he allowed the armies in the east to regroup and fall back in 1942 like they wanted, they would've sacrificed land for stronger defense, but Hitler wanted to hold onto territory and delude himself into thinking the armies could still push while under equipped
Would that possible have been because the allies were already pushing up through Italy and Hitler wanted to stop that advance?
In fact, the allied advance through Italy was going so quick that it was a worry for IKE and Churchill.
They did not want to many German troops retreating from Italy so quickly as that would indeed have freed them up for use by Hitler in Normandy.
Therefore, instead of having the US forces go around the town of Casino, IKE ordered that they go through that town, knowing it was heavily defended enough for a prolonged battle to take place.
That would then keep German units in Italy and away from Normandy.
The battle of Casino was really an unnecessary battle that cost a large amount of US lives.
The allies could have simply gone around it, left the small German unit still remaining in that town and pushed on towards Rome.
The small German unit in Casino would have then been encircled and easy to deal with once cut off from receiving support and supplies.
IKE and Churchill Tactics for the success of D-Day that sacrificed allied lives.
Hitler thought retreats would beome contagious and never stop the easy option for lack of elan and ideological zeal of national socialism
The Allies had aerial supremacy over Normandy. Air power is crucial for winning a war.
it was more like Germany had to send Millions of Soldiers to the eastern Front. Thats the ONLY Reason
okay boys lets be real. Without having to worry about an eastern front, the allies would have failed. But without air supremacy, even with an eastern front, the allies would have most definitely also failed. It was due to multiple factors favoring the allies that this landing succeeded.
Most of the men fighting in the western front were conscripts the veterans were mostly on the eastern front.
@@Plexpara No. Even if the Eastern front never happened, Germany would still have too many coastline and frontlines to cover.
You really think 4 million germans are going to defending Omaha beach? Britain, USA, and Canada had an overwhelming material and manpower advantage over Germany through the entirety of WW2. It would take a lot longer but the western allies were 99% mechanised so could outmanoeuvre German units everywhere.
"You have horses, what were you thinking!"
@@AverageWagie2024 You really think its no Problem to fight against several superpower at different sides? Sorry but you got 0 idea. Of course it would look absolute different if Germany would focus inly on the west. 100 %
btw eben a mass of english and US general said tha them self. Germany had main focus on russia. tehy didnt even attack the west just defend cause they were mainly on russia
The Answer is very easy. Cause Germany had Russia on the other Side and millions of Soldiers there. So they could not focus on the west. It would look different if Germany had total focus on the west.
You have said it all, Russia was already in Berlin before other countries intervention
@@izevbizuatrustine611 Thats not true... Cause the same thing again. Germany had the West on the other side and could not focus fully on Russia. Russia would do nothing against germany...as we saw in WW1
And Russia came at the same time as the West did.
@@Plexpara no that's not true, the whole world has to wait for Russia decision about German invasion of Europe.... Let me tell you, if US would have done anything, they wouldn't have waited till when Russia has to decide, meanwhile Russia didn't take any decisions until winter comes.... Also according to history, Soviet Union has already pushed Nazi to Berlin and millions has surrendered before the US troops come from the west
@@Plexparayou try take out 10million well trained Axis troops then if it’s so easy ?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)
I’m no fan of Communsim but you got to respected their people for taking out 10 millions German + Axis troops
And remember in 1942 they was practically alone (but Uk was a big helper in the War of the West) and still won at Stalingrad ?
@@whyucomingfast9972 yeaa...I think we all got to respect even more that the western world and the eastern world was needed, plus 6 years to beat one little Germany...do you know Germany won over Russia in ww1 allready? Russia gave up. And in ww2 was Germany again close to Moscow. The only reasy why they dont did it this time was the western front.
Sorry but i cant respect World Powers if they cant even beat a small country alone...I respect that small country then..
do you respect when 20 big guys beat up 1 small dude or you respect the small dude who take out 15 of them before he goes down?
Germany was in full retreat mode after Kursk. So in Normandy by 44 the forces available would always be too weak to defend the atlantic coast. It was just a matter of time and many top german oficials knew it.
By 1944, Germany was running out of juice. After 06-1941, that is when the weakening of Germany began.
German High Command were successful in the invasion of France because Blitzkrieg was a fluid armored concept that would attack windows of weakness in any defenses. The Germans realized the weakness in relying upon fixed defensive lines. France was the perfect example. As for Normandy, had the Germans spent less on stationary defensive positions and more on mobile Panzer Groups for rapid deployment things could have turned out quite different. Also, they lacked air support & air superiority at this point in the war. Defeat was inevitable, because the Germans faltered during and after operation Barbarossa. Yes, there were moments that Germany expended up to 80% - 85% against the Russians on the Eastern Front. As the war continued Hitler took more control over all aspects of the military operations instead of letting his commanders complete the tasks that needed to be accomplished. Although the Germans almost won the war, they knew that they lacked the men & resources necessary to win any protracted - drawn out war. They were experts in Rapid Deployment - Blitzkrieg and not conquest on Three Fronts. World conquest - Never.
How would those extra 'mobile panzer corps' be fuelled?
Most of the panzers were in the east.
Imagine Hitler keeping the alliance with Russia who was supplying Fuel to the German Military. Without having to invade Russia, Hitler could have tripled the support for Romel in North Africa against the Allies. 1/3 could focus on capturing new oilfields in the Middle East. Hitler should have focused on an Invasion of England. Telling the Japanese to stay away from attacking the USA would have helped his cause, because Hitler declared war on "America". Too soon and too early. As it stands, Germany would suffer shortages of fuel and the ability to outproduce Great Britian & the USA. We won - He lost.@@oliverhughes610
Yes, they were. Imagine no war with Russia. Probably, much later. Then he could have given Rommel enough to possibly defeat Montgomery & USA. Then get those new Arab oil fields without relying on Russia providing fuel. Half the panzers would be under Rommel's control. The other half would be stockpiled in France for the German Invasion of England. But - No Cigar. We won - He lost. @@gabbytay
It wasnt static defense lines, France was aware of this, in fact, the Germans had along with the Russians developed a concept of operations(yes in the 20s and 30s this were friends and cooperated extensively). The Main lesson from WWI wasnt that Offensives failed to move the line, they failed to keep it, because the true aim should be not the enemy front but the enemy rear(its tactical depth). The Battle of France was a narrow front attack based on the battle of Movements(Bewegungskrieg not Blitzkrieg). It was a risky maneuver, a narrow front attack can end catastrophically(as many soviet counter Offensives proved). Also France was caught on the move, you see the Defense of Belgium was planned, but then to appease Hitler the Belgium King declared Neutrality and did not allow the French to position, the fortifications around key Belgium rivers were the defense lines and the theoretical continuation of the Maginot line.
The Soviets denied German Bewengungskrieg with their own plan Deep Battle. Deep Battle unlike Bewengenskrieg is a complete Battle doctrine since it has a plan for all situations(defensive, Offensive, active defense, fighting retreat). How this was implemented in practice was more complicated, because Red Army command had been purged prior to the war and Soviet division were on the attack when they really had to concentrate strength. The Soviet units were really powerful on paper, they had way to much firepower for its logistical trail. There was a key difference in how they attacked, Germany took Advantage of weak points (Schwerpunckt) when engaging the operational front, the Soviets choose to attack the strong points in order to create the operational opportunity(Bagration an example the target were the biggest German fortifications in Belarus and they would all be gone in 3 days).
To be fair, no one in Germany could have known of the remarkable Higgins boats and their ability to land large numbers of troops so quickly. It had simply never been done before like this.
Higgins boats had been in use in the Pacific for over a year and a half prior to d-day. The Japanese had the similar Daihatsu class landing craft in service dating back to ‘37. The Germans definitely knew about them. They had defenses specifically designed to counter landing craft.
Why? Well...number 1: The Allies had enormous material advantages over the Germans. 2. The Allies had complete air superiority over the battlefield. 3. The Allies had complete naval superiority. 4. The majority of Germany's ground forces were tied up in the East, fighting the Russians, and they were already losing that campaign, with no hope of victory there. 5. The Germans were critically short of fuel and some other strategic resources, and they could not move reinforcements or supplies during the daytime without getting constantly attacked by Allied air power.
That's enough right there. They never had a chance. The Russians had already beaten them before Normandy even happened, though Hollywood tends not to mention that much for some reason.
At Caen The British and Canadians faced off against 8 panzer divisions (4 of which were SS) and 3 heavy panzer battalions (2 of which were SS) with Tiger and King Tigers. Despite this they managed to keep the enemy off balance forcing them to commit forces piecemeal and attrit the enemy forces to the stage where the units were shadows of their former selves.
The allies supply situation was result of Patton not capturing the Brittany ports as he was ordered. The Brittany ports were to supply the US troops and the Channel ports were to supply the British and Canadians. The Canadian 1st Army having the task of clearing the ports and took Le Harve, Boulogne and Calais before repositioning and clearing the Scheldt.
The broad front strategy was another contributing factor to the supply crisis of autumn 1944.
7 infantry divisions
8 panzer divisions
3 heavy tank battalions
The British and Canadian Troops were amazing! The Canadian troops for there size held ther own and more!
Because of overwhelming allied firepower, especially dominating the skies for pretty much 100%.
Reason? Assured generalship by Monty ensured the Germans never had a chance to build a reserve with which to dictate tactics. He made sure they lived on the defensive with no opportunity to use the big panzer divisions as they would wish to. He outmanoeuvred the vast concentration of opposition forces
around Caen including all but one of those panzer divisions. This gave the right wing on opportunity to break out against limited opposition albeit very difficult terrain. It ended with decimation of over 20 German divisions by the end.
Correct. Montgomery's plan was perfect, used the German's preconceptions against them, took advantage of the respective fighting qualities of the Canadian, British, and American armies, and worked as he had intended. We were fortunate he was appointed, since he almost wasn't because he was difficult to work with. Incompetents like Eisenhower couldn't understand military strategy, no matter how many times Montgomery explained it to them (and Monty spent half the war explaining the same simple concepts to Eisenhower, to no effect).
The sound answer is already given in the video: Germany had already lost WW2 way before D-Day, since they launched a war that did not manage to conclude decisively in its early years. The retreat of December 1941 out of Moscow, the first retreat of the Wehrmacht, was the first blow. The catastrophic loss of Stalingrad was the heaviest blow. The Battle of Kursk took the initiative away from their hands in 1943 and gave the Soviets the advantage. Add to these the El-Alamein defeat, the loss of Africa and the loss of Italy afterwards…the occupation forces that were spread across Europe…the logistic nightmare that the Holocaust was causing…the continuous and rising problems in weapon production due to the Allies’ heavy bombarding…no, the war was already lost, even if everything went in Germany’s favour on D-Day. The outcome of defeat was inevitable, it would only be delayed if everything ran smoothly. And it didn’t. Normandy was the icing on the cake, a huge icing, yet the whole battle was already lost!
WW2's unfortunate reality is that a key strategic area was won by the wrong place. Yet, we had all made the agreement that a West front was necessary, and in the end we needed a place at the table. The Soviets end up in a 1 on 1 with Germany for over 2 years, and as the Soviet strength cranked up, Germany's ability to defend other fronts withered away. Even as D-Day was happening, Germany had maintained a force of over 3 million on the East front, most of which got blipped in the summer.
I would say either strategy, keeping the reserves inland for a big counter strike or dispersed close to the front to hit the landing instantly would work. But with Hitler trying to do both strategies which resulted in neither strategy having enough strength to work.
I think a lot of Germany's problem was they had no air power to speak of at this point. Had they squandered it in Russia and the UK they could have seen the invasion coming , knew where the landing was and destroyed much of it
“I did Not See this coming” - Germany
Germany was destined to eventually lose the war. One country against how many? They didn't have the resources or man power to win.
That may be true. But Germany army was well trained, disciplined, and equipped. More importantly, German army had many outstanding officers who used effective tactics.
@@DonChon-q2fyeah he never said otherwise. But yes that’s why they lasted as long as they did. Germany never could have won that war
The map is wrong. The french island of Corsica was liberated by the Free French armed forces on September 8th 1943, just after the Kingdom of Italy had surrendered to the Allies and the armed forces of the
German Reich had been retreated to the mainland of France, which central and southern parts were the French State at this time, officially, but german armed forces were stationed inside this puppet state since November 18th 1942.
I think with hindsight we can see the main reason both Germany and Japan were doomed to lose. Both countries lacked the resources for a long war. Germany needed relatively quick knockouts of the French and British. If the British didn't hold them off, D Day could never have happened. Then Germany wouldn't be desperate for resources and could deal with the Soviet Union later. As it happened, Germany had no real choice but to make a grab for the resources in the east, thus dooming them to a two front war. That meant losing was just a matter of time. Each individual battle might go either way, but the war as a whole was lost. The Soviets and US could throw far more troops at them than they could cope with over the long term.
Good video. It's often overlooked to what extent the Allies went to trick Germany into thinking their attack would be on Calais. But it is even more overlooked that Germany's defeat was inevitable. The moment they declared war on the Soviet Union it was over. It was only a matter of time at that point. The same was true of Japan's war against the US. Pearl Harbor was their own sealed fate. And I think a lot of leaders, with the exception of Hitler, understood that at the time including most of the Japanese war cabinet. But even so, they knew it was inevitable that they would go to war. There was no other path for them at that point. Even Germany declaring war on the Soviets was inevitable. They either wait for the Soviets to declare war on them when they are ready, meaning absolute defeat or declare war first and hope for a miracle. Same with invading France and all of it...either face a strengthened enemy entrenched in France or a coastal invasion later and hope for a miracle.
Things happened as they had to happen. Everyone made the right decisions for the most part, but the outcome was pretty much established early on.
Once you start down the road of war, there are only two ends. And never a more than 50-40 chance.
What is up with the maps in this video? It puts 2 extra British Armies South of the American Armies between them and the French. There was just 1 British Army in France after D-Day and 5 American Armies (1st, 3, 7th, 9th and 15th).
No there wasn't, each troops were in their own side of the attack while americans were struggling to infiltrate, British troops with Canadian were against most of the German troops and still did it, the numbers aren't correct the British never tried to take the win by themselves but not only they had all the forces in the air and sea they also had the best result in Normandy, the British and canadian troops could have made it alone Americans made it easier by... well literally being target practice by their own incompetence in infiltrating, we don't know half of what truly happened in WW2 but one thing is for sure, the British were the only reason democratic western countries won, if it wasn't for Britain we would be in a very bad place (I'm not British)
@@erikerik3823 Dude what are you talking about here? Your post doesn't makes any sense and has nothing to do with what I said at all. I'm talking about the map in the video being wrong. And it is. Right from the start a few seconds into the video they put 2 American flag, 3 British flags and a Canadian flag. On D-Day the US sent in 5 Divisions, the British 3 and the Canadians 1. 32 seconds into the video the put in order from top to bottom a Canadian flag, an American flag, A British flag, 2 American flags, 2 British flags and then a french flag. That is COMPLETELY wrong. The Canadian army was at the top of the line along the coast, south of them was the British army, then south of the British army was in order, the US 9th Army, the US 1st Army, the US 3rd Army, the US 7th Army and then the French Army. The US 15th Army comes in at the end of the war while pushing into Germany. Additionally there was the US 5th Army in Italy along with the British 8th army which was like 40% British with the rest Canadian, Indian and other nations troops.
In regards to your irrelevant post to what I said though, that isn't even correct. When the Allies landed British were supposed to take the city of Caen on the first day as the area they were attacking was the lightest defended area. There is a reason that Omaha beach was the only beach that had 2 divisions dedicated to taking it. Going into the battles it was known that was the most heavy defended area of the Normandy Beach. But because Caen was not taken it was easily the most defensive and important area of the Normandy front the Germans could hold. Which is why the Germans started the majority of their armoured divisions in that area after the initial landings. As the landings continued and the Americans built up their troops the US launched the break through attack with Bradley's armies lead by Patton's 3rd Army. When that break through happened the Germans rushed all of their top divisions over to try to stop the break through at first and then they tried to cut off Patton's 3rd army after the breakthrough happened. That failed and Patton completely outflanked the German top divisions. That resulted in the Germans best divisions essentially have all of their firepower wiped out at the Falaise pocket and could have resulted in them being completely surrounded had the British pushed up to the line they were supposed to meet Patton at to complete the pocket. Patton urged the higher ups to let him keep pushing forward to get to the British positions to finish off the pocket early but his request was denied because it was feared that his already stretched out Army could be overrun if they pushed forward anymore. So he was told to wait until the British broke through the German line in front of them and completed the pocket. That allowed a sizeable portion of the German forces in France to escape. Though they did so without most of their heavy equipment and were constantly strafed and bombed from the air on the one road out they had.
And what you are talking about when you say they had all the forces in the air and sea again makes no sense. The US Army Airforce and Navy were so much larger then any other force in the world during WW2. They were so large that the rest of the world combined didn't have a larger airforce or Navy then the US did. So again, your crazy, rambling barley literate post makes no sense, is completely wrong everywhere, and had nothing to do with my initial post from the very start. My post was about the video in the map posting units that didn't exist in real like that should have been easily researched by the channel and posted correctly.
@@erikerik3823 What are you talking about in this post? It makes no sense. What is it that makes you think the British had the best result in Normandy? They landed on the easiest beaches to attack and still didn't take their primary target in the city of Caen and then didn't take it until way later when the Americans broke through the German lines and pulled the German best divisions away from that area to attack the Americans who were breaking through the German lines and encircling them everywhere.
@@erikerik3823 I think you put this reply into the wrong thread because it makes no sense.
For the OP, you are correct. The video did completely make the maps incorrect. The US did send the most divisions into France on D-Day, they did attack the most well defended of the beaches and following D-Day the US did have 6 armies in Europe to the 1 and half British armies, 1 Canadian army and 1 French army.
This isn't logical this is pointless, it's basically whoever supports it's club, all of you guys support USA you are gonna fight the most that USA was the best country in D Day while i will fight it was britain, no one knows for a fact, the difference is that I'm a Brazilian defending a country that has no intention whatsoever to impose itself as the best western country in WW2, if it wasn't for my research and i mean properly research not only googling a few stuff (an american company) i wouldn't even know about canadian troops, because of the thousands of WW2 media a small percentage shows anything that isn't American, a guy here just said British got it easy and USA encircled Germany, that isn't true but it is for him the same way someone would defend that it's football team was better last season
They failed because most of there army was in the east.
That's why they invaded where they did,strategy.
2:38 That was Gold beach and not Cold beach...
When I saw that I released this video isn’t worth the watch
Hey I was there last winter, it was cold
It was to be expected. It's mid-1944 and the Axis had been losing the war quite badly since 1942. 1942 was when the Allies had started to truly get their act together.
The German military had been losing the war for years with mounting losses, lost territory. They have far too much area to defend with powerful opponents able to attack them from any compass direction.
The German government fought a war on ideals and got the country into a war against basically every economic, population, and industrial power in the world *at the same time* who also all happen to sit on most of the strategically important resources. Their enemies actually coordinated grand strategy and supported each other immensely at crucial times. Things the Axis never got any decent with. Things they were incapable of doing.
It was to be expected. The Axis never had a chance.
They lost when they decided to invade Russia, if all the resources that went to the eastern front went to Britain instead then they could of won, because launching an invasion over the channel was one thing but launching it over the Atlantic would of been a complete other
Hitler's hubris was the allies best edge lol, what a dinkel berry seriously
Less areas to be forced to do slave labor in?
@@danielclancy1132 they attacked the soviets because they were desperately out of oil, it was a gamble all or nothing there's no invasion without fuel to move stuff or even train new personnel
France wasnt liberated on DDay that happened few months later
One of the flags on the introduction should be Canadian.
The Canadian flag was there second from the right which was the Red Ensign. The Maple Leaf first flew in 1965 and was another one of Lester Pearson’s accomplishments. I remember the Union Jack flying in Canada before that and if I remember correctly Canadian soldiers used the ensign just to distinguish themselves from the British during battles.
In a word, logistics.
The bane of the Germans in both world wars
Yes a problem in both conflicts. Love your avatar, BTW 👍🏼
Near impossible to stop the Allied juggernaut, which made its beachead on June 6, 1944. This does in fact make you see the plight of the best German division in the Western Theatre of WWII. But it must be seen in the minds of all who read this and watched this well done video, that this was indicitive of the entire German war effort at this point... namely that they were at all odds against them and they were scattered and delayed and scrambling to get to their battle stations. The landings of Operation Overlord (DDay) were facilitated in large measure due to the annihilation of the German armies in the Eastern Theatre (Russia); Continued allied bombings on German factories; pressure on the Italian front. ~$uper
The war was lost before it had started, the first move was supposed to be made in 1945, Germany wanted a larger navy, more tanks, and most of all, more modern aircraft, this would have been the case had the war started in 45. We have no idea how the French or the Polish military would have looked like at that time, but if the timetable would have been kept by the Germans, nobody could have saved France or Poland, with a fleet including aircraft carriers it would have been possible to attack the UK from anywhere with impunity. I'm glad we lost the war, but the Brits could have stopped it earlier by not appeasing Hitler.
You are assumingI presume that England would be unaware of Hitlers intentions. Bare in mind that Englands spy network was second to none. In addition there are some intelligent people in the restof the world besides the germans .
it also would've helped if Hitler didn't try speed running genocide until AFTER the war was won. Also he never shouldve attacked Russia and TBH I genuinely believe the world would've let Germany have France and Poland if he just stopped there
Brits also lost the war, just look at their country lol
one of the landing sites is named cold instead of gold.......
For the same reason that Japan was defeated and the South in the U.S. Civil War lost: They could not produce and/or replace lost men and materiel at the same rate as their enemies. In the case of Nazi Germany a significant secondary factor was Hitler's political ideologies about conducting war that saw huge numbers of soldiers captured and/or surrounded and neutralized such as in Tunisia 1943, Stalingrad 1942-43, and France & the eastern front in the summer of 1944.
Your map also shows American landing east of the British landing. Wrong. There were two American landing beaches, Omaha and Utah both west of the three British/Canadian beaches. And the Free French.
It is also wrong to say Rommel went home for Frau Rommel’s birthday. Rommel had been seriously injured when an RAF Typhoon drove his car off the road into the ditch. These Typhoons flew all the Normandy roads below tree-top hight rocketing and cannon-firing everything on the roads, including Rommel’s car. I knew one of these pilots. He might have been the pilot who got Rommel.
intelligence of French and Poles are very competent to help Britain win Blitz and liberate Europe.
An American General worked out that one Flak Division and two Infantry Divisions would have stopped the invasion cold. That is how good the German weapons, and the German Army training was.
Monty was accused of failure, like today the Russians in Ukraine are accused of failure..while in fact bleeding the opponent to death.
No…just as cited in this video, the Wehrmacht in Normandy were poorly trained conscripts, equipped with older weapons and a lot of captured foreign materiel. All those “secret weapons of the Third Reich” videos are utter rot. Bolt action rifles and horse drawn carriages; THAT was the actual Wehrmacht.
Its Gold beach not Cold
Great assistance from the French Resistance who were more than just a thorn in the Germans' need to rush reinforcements to Normandy
I read a lot about this. Hitler pulled all his troops back from the coast. Thinking that America had a nuclear weapon which they did just wasn't ready. But he knew they had a nuclear weapon
The key to D-Day for Normandy was the weather. June in Normandy is not usually that great every year until almost the end of the month and 1944 seemed to be the same as usual. But there was a great secret afoot with the few in the know about it holding their breath. What appeared to be a normal long early June storm coming in off the ocean was actually two separate storms with a few days of passable invasion weather between them if it all held together. That was why the nazis found themselves unprepared for the "surprise invasion" that showed up amost a month early.
Bureaucratic red tape can be overwhelming, making it difficult to get things done efficiently. This phenomenon is often a symptom of a larger issue - the stifling of initiative and creativity. It's essential for anyone in any job to recognize the signs of excessive control and speak out against it, promoting a healthier work environment that values productivity and innovation.
The Germans failed at Normandy because the under strength Canadian 3rd division stopped 3 full strength German armoured divisions (12th SS, 21st Panzer and Panzer Lehr) from reaching the invasion beaches in the days following D-Day.
My uncle from my mother’s side visited Paris long ago, and he went to Normandy. Every time I mention WW2, D-Day was all he talked about, and he knows I’m a WW2 nerd.
Why a direct frontal attack? Why not outflank them? Why weren’t the cliffs pulverized? I still don’t get it.
Dropping bombs from the sky was notoriously inaccurate and inconsistent during World War II
Great video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👍
Y'think?
Rommel was on leave , and people where afraid to wake Hitler with this news . They woulda lost anyways, but that was a horrible start to the battle for them
My great Grandpa died on June 7 1944 in Normandy. American bombers hit his Flak position on June 6th. He died due to the injuries.
No he didn't
@@mkailov13 He did. What sense would it make to lie?
@@mkailov13why would he lie? My great grandad was in the RAF during WW2, he died in 2022, people don’t need to lie about stuff like that.
@JamieM450 i just see so many people in videos like this saying "my dad/uncle/grandpa did xyz" and I swear a high fraction of them are complete lies because some people have a weird obsession with getting likes on their comments
Rommel was a true strategist regardless of which side he fought on. Way ahead of his contemporaries. none of the allied commanders compares.
Half the British forces were actually Canadian.
Why did Germany actually failed at Normandy?
Easy , because they lost their army against the Soviets. All the experienced soldiers Germany had up to this point ended up 6 feet under the dirt , fertilizer for the Ruski steppes.
They never had the numbers to keep winning. They were destined to eventually lose.
That map showing the expansion of Allied forces into France ignored Operation Dragoon.
Overwhelmed by a determined superior force.
It was Churchill Secret Amy which made a big difference.
The issue was creating another front for the Germans to defend. They were having a back and forth with Russia on the east. They were losing Italian land and now had another
When Head of Military thought he always right🫡😏
Kudo for using the period correct Canadian flag.
Hey knowledgia tell us the story why hitler invaded soviet union? What he was mad of getting involved in eastern front ?
Germany lost the war on Normandy because Hitler didn't heed Rommel who said small armored units should be placed near the beaches. Could you imagine the carnage on the beaches if just 4 Panthers had made it to each beach ? Rommel had learned from North Africa that tanks that had to travel any distance , they were open to devastating attacks from the Allied air forces.
Just imagine what was going on when they needed to tell Hitler about it, but he was asleep.. "We can't wake up the Fuhrer now, he'd be furious!" "The last thing we want is a furious Fuhrer!"
No matter how well the Germans might have responded to Overlord, France would still have fallen to Dragoon.
Glad the perception tactics got mentioned, great video
Well 70% of the german army was fighting in eastern front ...
What worst to german is the absence of luffwaffe in western front thats why the allies have a total Air superiority thats leave the german panzer and armor very vulnerable ..
This year will be the 80th anniversary of D-Day!
I hear they're releasing a boxset to celebrate
What about Operation Mincemeat?
Incredible that Germany used 3/4 of their Army fighting the Russians on the Eastern front. Hitler was truly a madman fighting a 2 front war. 3 front war if you include Italy.
It’s not the baddle of Normandy. It’s the battle.
Thanks for the video and here is my 2 cents is feedback on the editing: 1:30 onwards it's a complete cacophony of competing noises.
Because more then 80% of their division were fighting the soviets
the only chance the germans had was, as rommel thought, to stop them at the waterline. once the allies got ashore, the air support and naval gunfire support doomed any counter-attack. just look at sicily, salerno and anzio for proof of this.
this may be but its also true there were catastrohic loss of life just on omaha beach alone, equal to the raid on pearl harbor!! So saying the germans did not mount a robust defense seems....indefensable.
I see the beginning of the end for Germany when they unnecessarily insisted on taking Stalingrad. It was unnecessary at the time, an ego trip for Hitler and turned the tide in the East giving the Russians motivation and momentum.
That general Erich Marcks could have ruined the day for the Allies in Normandy.
Britain, USA & Russia each investigated the option of assassinating Hitler, and all reached the same conclusion; it was practically impossible to accomplish and it would be a suicide mission. And the fact that Hitler tended to hamper his forces from being efficient, so he was an asset to have in power over the Wehrmacht.
A couple of mistakes in this video that came from relying on very old and misinformed source material. The Germans did not have respect for Patton prior to the Normandy invasion. He was basically an unknown general from the Sicily campaign and not considered important, a mistake magnified by the 1970 film "Patton."
Second, the German high command was obsessed with where the Canadian divisions were because they had taken such a mauling from them in WW1. So Allied high command played on these fears by assigning fake Canadian divisions to the apparent 1st US Army group opposite Calais, and allowing Canadian signals units to handle a part of the radio traffic generated by this fake US army group. This helped solidify Hitler's fear that Calais was the invasion point and that the Canadians would be the spearhead.
A great deal of this information has only been made available from declassified documents at the British national archives at Kew in the last 25 years or so. One of the best historians to take advantage of this material is Dr. Marc Milner whose "Stopping the Panzers: The Untold Story of D Day" unveils this incredible tale of Allied subterfuge and why the Canadian beach at Juno was the most important for the success of the Normandy invasion. 👌😉
Correct. Patton was a buffoon who never did well when he had to actually fight Germans (as at Metz and in the Ardennes). When others did all the fighting, he drove around the countryside (Sicily, France). The movie made him into a hero that he wasn't - his soldiers hated him, because they knew he didn't care about their welfare. He was the opposite of Montgomery in every way, the person the movie pretended was his rival.
@@seathanaich6 I wouldn't go so far as to call Patton a buffoon, but he was not a particularly principled man. Anyone who is curious about that statement should look up Task Force Baum and they will find out what I mean.
I saw a presentation here on UA-cam somewhere where someone had combed through the German records and prior to Normandy in mid-1944 they found only two mentions of Patton, and neither made any note of him being a formidable Allied general.
At the end of WW2 General Eisenhower wrote a letter to General Marshall and he called Patton the problem child of the army, due to his bad press for a number of reasons. If Patton had not died shortly after the war I don't think his future would have been bright in the US army.
ok but I have a question did the bombers bomb the normandy defense ? like bomb it until no defense left then send the invasion?
Yes they bombed the hell out of the Normandy beaches, but because of cloud cover they missed most of their targets. Bombing wasn't the decisive factor. It was the guts of the troops, and the Navy destroyers who sailed close enough to the beaches to destroy key Nazi defenses. Thank for asking. Lots of good books on this subject at your library. And it's an important subject.
@@brianniegemann4788Can you please choose the best book about this in your opinion and then type the entire contents of it from start to finish in your reply to this comment so I can read the book here?
@@phoenixmodellingphotography certainly, I'll get back to you in about 300 years.
Thought they failed due to guess wrong at smallest point, and thought the Allies failure in 42 would be done again. Both incurred.
1) They expected an attack in Pas-de-Calais. 2) The best German troops were concentrated on the Eastern Front. Normandy was occupied by the worst soldiers (some Nazi collaborators, criminals, wounded, soldiers, too young or too old). 3) The German troops there were poorly equipped.
Did I hear you say the allies lost around 10,000? It was 45,000 dead and over 160,000 wounded 😅
That was on the initial day where the Allies had to clear German FORTIFIED positions. The U.S. had to clear the toughest beaches at Omaha.
By 1944, I would say that Germany had the two major nations against them organized (the US & USSR, of course). If I remember correctly, they had approximately 200,000 forces in Norway, for example, to occupy it. So, there were a lot of resources they needed, sure, but also a lot that wasn't used, especially Hitler's decisions (like Courland, for example). In the summer of '44, Albert Speer & co managed to achieve the highest production numbers ever, although they were continuously bombed since '42-'43. But, sure, a lot of Germany's best soldiers had died. However, the worst must be Hitler's removal of great generals, those who had taken Europe for him in the first place. If you ask me, the Germans did not fail in Normandy, Hitler did. But I could go on; the Germans really came through with a miracle but with a madman at the wheel. (All Hitler knew was "stand your ground," probably since that worked in WWI...) In Normandy, many German units fought until annihilation. Why? Partly because of Allied air superiority. Cheers
If germany was strong the allies would invade in southern france but the victories in africa and italy enhanced confidence for an attack in northern france.
Hitler opening a front with Russia sealed Germany's fate.
Germany 1944, "I feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter over too much bread"
German arrogance was the allies greatest advantage.
The man literally offered us peace. We had no place in this war. Check the state of the place today 😅
These deceptive tactics greatly reflect how they lie to and deceive the present world on so many matters.
They didn't have enough fuel for their airplanes, boats.
6:00 What do the Xs mean?
Army order of Battle.
XXXXX - army group/front (Soviet case).
XXXX - Army.
XXX - Army Corps.
XX - Division
X - Brigade
III - Regiment
II - Battalion
I - Company.
Allied invasion could have succeeded even if they had choosen Calais instead of Normandy !!..... Because of the reason of the weakened Luftwaffe and the Navy..... But had their been Me 262 in service (with mass production) during D-Day ...the D-Day could have been a catastrophic failure for the Allies..
This video is completely wrong. Hitler thought the invasion would be at Normandy but was talked out of it. He did sleep in late on D Day though.
Too busy staying up late reading Time magazine
Sleep is a crucial facter which turned the destiny of some political autocrats for eg.,napolean had slept long unusually before the water loo war where he lost where as so far he was unpregnable.
Does that suggest sleeping for longer leads to lesser quality performance or sleeping less produces better results?
No Canada on the thumbnail
Hitler was a terrible military strategist
I know but they were afraid to tell him
In simple terms: bro it's a 3v1 what do u think, as we can see if it was a 1v1 or a 1v2 it might be possible but America joined and UK and the world so basically germany can't handle the fact 100 other countries are against him, this is basically like a 120 vs 1
Germany had Japan, Romania, Finland, Hungary and many more, and a lot of those allied countries barely did anything
Not to mention they probably didn’t have their supply of meth 😂
The most realistic answer for the failure of any person/entity of power
Germany lost the war for one reason Hitler attacking Russia two early
yes i agree to this he thinks that he is indestructible and choses to fight both sides i think it would be better if he finishes first gbr then go for soviet next when he's done with gbr
Patton had his balloon division
Germany had last air battled over Germany.
Unlike battle of Britain which Britain won.
German army had no air cover.
Its called a smokescreen .All the officers were en route past Gibraltar .the deal i beleive eas done by Churchill/Berman and the financers in new york.
Yes having the Allies best General (Adolf) in charge and not allowing any movement of Armor without his direct orders didn't help matters any. Allies having complete control of Air and Sea also helped
It's never so simple as made seem. I recommend reading books for anyone interested.