I vaguely recall something about Ike writing out a defeat-related note ahead of time. I think it was something to do with being easier to write ahead of time than it would be if the mission actually did go wrong.Gawdzilla Sama wrote:No clue. That missive was written before the attack, so Ike wouldn't have to compose something while dealing with an utter disaster. I therefore suspect they meant JUNE 5.MiM wrote:Who is July, 5
D-Day landings have failed.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
That's in the OP, CES.Coito ergo sum wrote:I vaguely recall something about Ike writing out a defeat-related note ahead of time. I think it was something to do with being easier to write ahead of time than it would be if the mission actually did go wrong.Gawdzilla Sama wrote:No clue. That missive was written before the attack, so Ike wouldn't have to compose something while dealing with an utter disaster. I therefore suspect they meant JUNE 5.MiM wrote:Who is July, 5

-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
It isn't, actually. Your OP has the image with the quote, but it doesn't say when or why it was written. Or, am I missing it?Gawdzilla Sama wrote:That's in the OP, CES.Coito ergo sum wrote:I vaguely recall something about Ike writing out a defeat-related note ahead of time. I think it was something to do with being easier to write ahead of time than it would be if the mission actually did go wrong.Gawdzilla Sama wrote:No clue. That missive was written before the attack, so Ike wouldn't have to compose something while dealing with an utter disaster. I therefore suspect they meant JUNE 5.MiM wrote:Who is July, 5
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
It was just the starter, CES. Sheesh.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Isn't "OP" a reference to the first post in the thread?Gawdzilla Sama wrote:It was just the starter, CES. Sheesh.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Fuck it. Have fun.Coito ergo sum wrote:Isn't "OP" a reference to the first post in the thread?Gawdzilla Sama wrote:It was just the starter, CES. Sheesh.
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Eisenhower's note, I suppose he didn't trust himself to say this clearly should the landings have actually failed. Really the landings were a very successful surprise attack, note that Rommel had gone home for his wife's birthday, no way he would have gone if this was even slightly expected on these days.
Folding with:
Phenom II 955 2x GTX 560 ti.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
FUSAG had a great deal to do with that. Without the fake First US Army Group, and it's famous "commander", there would have been less confidence in Berlin that the Normandy landings were a feint.kiore wrote:Eisenhower's note, I suppose he didn't trust himself to say this clearly should the landings have actually failed. Really the landings were a very successful surprise attack, note that Rommel had gone home for his wife's birthday, no way he would have gone if this was even slightly expected on these days.
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Criticism without proposing a realistic alternative, or any alternative for that matter, is nothing more than a whine.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
And rather hard in this case as the proponent would have to come up with an viable "easier" alternative that SHAEF missed. That brain trust was very impressive.Ian wrote:Criticism without proposing a realistic alternative, or any alternative for that matter, is nothing more than a whine.
- laklak
- Posts: 21022
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
- About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
- Location: Tannhauser Gate
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
They should have taken off and nuked the whole site from orbit.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Yes the misinformation campaign also very effective, but perhaps most effective on the day rather than the misinformation which indicated that a second main invasion site near Calais was the main attack which successfully tied up significant defensive resources, was that the weather forecast indicated it was not a go for this time.. The battle of the weather forecasters.. As the weather seems to indicate the invasion would be not possible until the next tide cycle, the defenders felt they had a few weeks breathing space, when in fact a small window had opened.Gawdzilla Sama wrote:FUSAG had a great deal to do with that. Without the fake First US Army Group, and it's famous "commander", there would have been less confidence in Berlin that the Normandy landings were a feint.kiore wrote:Eisenhower's note, I suppose he didn't trust himself to say this clearly should the landings have actually failed. Really the landings were a very successful surprise attack, note that Rommel had gone home for his wife's birthday, no way he would have gone if this was even slightly expected on these days.
Folding with:
Phenom II 955 2x GTX 560 ti.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Well, I don't give SHAEF any credit for the weather fooling the Germans.
But I get your point. However, I still credit FUSAG with tying up vital troops, causing Normandy to be shorted with regard to supplies and fortification building, and for confusing the wenig Bayerischen Korporal when it came time to act.

Re: D-Day landings have failed.
Well the weather gave a window for the operation to be successful, the planning was indeed the key factor, casualties were really quite light considered those suffered in training and the projections.. Surprise was achieved despite the attack being expected.. This was really quite extraordinary, perhaps the major planning failure was in the follow through.. It is similarly extraordinary that the Bocage was not planned for or even understood, a major intelligence blunder that the photo reconnaissance cannot be be wholly blamed for, even the Romans had commented on it, so was hardly a new surprise factor..Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Well, I don't give SHAEF any credit for the weather fooling the Germans.But I get your point. However, I still credit FUSAG with tying up vital troops, causing Normandy to be shorted with regard to supplies and fortification building, and for confusing the wenig Bayerischen Korporal when it came time to act.
Folding with:
Phenom II 955 2x GTX 560 ti.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: D-Day landings have failed.
And the Maquis had warned them about this unique terrain feature as well.kiore wrote:Well the weather gave a window for the operation to be successful, the planning was indeed the key factor, casualties were really quite light considered those suffered in training and the projections.. Surprise was achieved despite the attack being expected.. This was really quite extraordinary, perhaps the major planning failure was in the follow through.. It is similarly extraordinary that the Bocage was not planned for or even understood, a major intelligence blunder that the photo reconnaissance cannot be be wholly blamed for, even the Romans had commented on it, so was hardly a new surprise factor..Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Well, I don't give SHAEF any credit for the weather fooling the Germans.But I get your point. However, I still credit FUSAG with tying up vital troops, causing Normandy to be shorted with regard to supplies and fortification building, and for confusing the wenig Bayerischen Korporal when it came time to act.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests