D-Day June 6, 1944
As you progress through the history of the account you get an understanding of how each commander worked within his own leadership qualities, and the effect it had on the final outcome. It is clearly evident that in the battle of D-Day, Eisenhower had an advantage in troop size and strength in both resources and a multitude of weapons. Being able to attack from air, sea and land certainly gave Eisenhower a dominance that he was accustomed to working with. His plans were careful, calculated and a combination of ideas that were culminated by his staff of the entire Allied expeditionary force. His ability to levy tasks upon capable subordinates was a direct contradiction to Rommel's methods as a German commander. It certainly seems as though Rommel was much more of a tactician, relying solely on his own beliefs with little trust in his aids or from above, whereas Eisenhower appears to attempt to create a harmonious atmosphere amongst everyone involved in the entire All!ied force. I do believe, as the author states, that both men were products of their own environment, but only to a degree. Certainly, both men had personality traits, Eisenhower being more the diplomat amongst his subordinates, whereas Rommel seemed to hav
I certainly do not believe that even if the Germans had carried the day on June 6, 1944, that they still would not have been able to sustain a battle on two fronts along both the Mediterranean and the Eastern Front. I do not believe that the Allies were going to come to terms with Hitler, nor do I believe that his battle along the Eastern Front would have turned out in Hitler's favor. It was surely impossible to defend such vast stretches of land with the shortages of both artillery and men at this point of the war. This does lead to a potential Communist Europe as the Soviet Union may have come out of World War II very battered and bruised, yet physically intact. The idea of a Communist regime controlling the better part of Europe in my opinion, may not have crossed the English Channel into Great Britain due to the fact that the English navy still controlled the Channel and the Russians were not accustomed to anything other than land combat. d this episode with him ever since that fateful day. As I read the many personal accounts from the battle, there were a few that I felt gave the reader a sense of the humane aspect of a soldier as opposed to the traditional views of "cold-blooded killers" that inevitably become attached to any combat soldier. A Captain Robert Walker, who, after landing at Omaha beach, became separated from the rest of his platoon and decided to climb the bluff alone. He came across a mortally wounded German soldier along the way who simply asked for water. Captain Walker seemed to see this German soldier as anything but the enemy as he granted the dying man's simple wish to quench his thirst. The second account of a Sergeant Hyman Haas who had fire a number of rounds from his 37-mm gun into a German pillbox hours earlier in the day, drove up to it and found many wounded men inside. His sense of responsibility was overwhelming; to see what effect his random firing at an abstract structure had onto a human being. I am sure he has carrie! e German troops in any potential landing. Taking into consideration the limited resources Allied intelligence had to work with in that era, it certainly seems as though much of the credit to the success of Operation Overlord should be bestowed upon them. As you progress through the history of the account you get an understanding of how each commander worked within his own leadership qualities, and the effect it had on the final outcome. It is clearly evident that in the battle of D-Day, Eisenhower had an advantage in troop size and strength in both resources and a multitude of weapons. Being able to attack from air, sea and land certainly gave Eisenhower a dominance that he was accustomed to working with. His plans were careful, calculated and a combination of ideas that were culminated by his staff of the entire Allied expeditionary force. His ability to levy tasks upon capable subordinates was a direct contradiction to Rommel's methods as a German commander. It certainly seems as though Rommel was much more of a tactician, relying solely on his own beliefs with little trust in his aids or from above, whereas Eisenhower appears to attempt to create a harmonious atmosphere amongst everyone involved in the entire All! rough the formidable Atlantic Wall. Although the Allies certainly held an advantage in the air, the size of the forces landing along the Normandy coast and the benefit of a surprise attack, the fact that the Germans were well fortified and entrenched assisted in balancing the tables between the Allies and Germany. Looking back over the previous three years of World War II, it is in my opinion that Hitler surely did not want to fight a two front war from his experiences during World War I. The fact that he allowed himself to be caught fighting a battle on 3 fronts, was his first, and probably most fatal mistake during World War II. In regards to the battle in Normandy, it is well documented as t
Some common words found in the essay are:
Atlantic Wall, D-Day Eisenhower, Rommel Rundstedt, War II, Transportation Plan, Channel Russians, Hyman Haas, Airborne Division, Eisenhower Allied, Operation Overlord, atlantic wall, transportation plan, world war, world war ii, war ii, german troops, june 6, operation overlord, 6 1944, june 6 1944, allied intelligence, rommel's asparagus, commander addition rommel, addition rommel accustomed, rommel accustomed fighting,
Approximate Word count = 3778
Approximate Pages = 15 (250 words per page double spaced)
|