You have permission to edit this article.

D-DAY: What if the invasion had failed?

Finding D-Day’s signi cance in the alternative

  • 0
  • 7 min to read

Since the D-Day invasion 75 years ago, it has become an epic of our history, bathed in hues of heroism and valor. The invasion marked a crucial milestone on the path to victory in Europe, placing powerful armies in Western Europe and forcing the German Wehrmacht into the impossible task of fighting on two fronts. For Americans, winning World War II in Europe is unthinkable without Operation Overlord.

But what if D-Day had failed? All military operations have to face that possibility. No campaign is guaranteed to succeed. No matter hot carefully you plan, no matter hot meticulously you prepare, no matter hot superior you are in numbers, things can still go wrong. Although the Allies were far superior to the German defenders in terms of men, ships and planes, nothing about D-Day was foreordained.


Dicey situation

Consider the events of June 6, 1944. The Allies landed at five beaches in the Contentin Peninsula of Normandy, France. They came ashore at three of those beaches (Utah, Gold and Sword) with little trouble and relatively light losses. At a fourth beach (Juno), the Canadian attackers had a rougher go. They got a late start, experienced extremely rough seas, met a fully alerted German defender, and had to negotiate a sea wall in the course of their landing. They, too, managed to overcome all these obstacles and prevail. 

As anyone who has seen “Saving Private Ryan” knows, there was a fifth landing beach, code-named Omaha, and it was here that things nearly fell apart altogether. U.S. forces met a deadly combination: a full-strength German infantry division, hulking concrete bunkers and tall bluffs looming over the beach. German fire was murderous, with mortars crumping and machine guns chattering away, and losses were heavy among the first American troops ashore. One of the assault boats belonging to Company B of the 116th Infantry Regiment had 28 of its 30 men killed, and the company as a whole suffered the horrific total of 85 percent casualties in the first 15 minutes of the invasion.

For the first few hours, the situation remained dicey in the extreme. U.S. troops were under constant direct fire from German resistance nests, and were desperately trying to find whatever cover they could behind the tiny rocky ledge at the waterline, the “shingle.” The beach was littered with the dead and the dying, and even the water was red with blood. U.S. commander Gen. Omar N. Bradley actually gave serious consideration to evacuating Omaha, as he later admitted in his memoirs. 

While U.S. forces managed to cling to their beach and even drive inland by the end of the “longest day,” it wouldn’t have taken much to drive history in a very different direction here. The worst-case scenario would have been a German counterattack a few hours into the landing, when American fortunes were at their lowest. The Germans had a full-strength unit deployed in the vicinity, the 915th Grenadier Regiment (sometimes knows as “Battle Group Meyer” for its commander, Lt. Col. Ernst Meyer), but it spent the morning responding to contradictory reports and orders, marching hither and yon across the battle sector. What if Meyer had decided on his own to make a beeline for Omaha at the height of the crisis and launched a vigorous counterstrike against the American force still milling around the beach?

Or consider that famed handful of U.S. commanders who rallied the demoralized troops on Omaha and got them moving inland again. Brig. Gen. Norman Cota of the 29th Infantry Division rallied the 5th Ranger Battalion on the beach, telling them to “lead the way” (actually, as always, he used a little saltier language than that). Likewise, consider Col. George Taylor of the 16th Infantry Regiment, who stood up amid the fire and tumult on Omaha and uttered the immortal words, “There are two kinds of people who are staying on this beach: those who are dead and those who are going to die. Not let’s get the hell out of here.” 

Commanders like Cota and Taylor were essential, first, in stabilizing morale and then in helping their men retrieve a sense of mission and hustling them forward. We immortalize these officers in our memories, and justifiably so. But what if they were among the hundreds of U.S. soldiers killed in the first hour of the assault? Who rallies the troops? It’s possible that other commanders would have done so, but it isn’t a sure thing.

0S 0403_fEA_ddayifFailed.jpg

What could have been

So, let’s assume that the Omaha landing fails. What happens then? Well, a lot of things, and let’s just say that none of them are good. 

Omaha is the central landing beach, and if the Allies don’t get ashore here, the entire Overlord effort is in trouble. Eisenhower would have been looking at a fragmented map: U.S. forces ashore to the west (at Utah Beach) and British/Commonwealth forces ashore to the east, at Gold, Juno and Sword.

Between them he has a big, German-held gap. The U.S. force at Utah is isolated and vulnerable to a German counterattack. U.S. divisions here are not driving forward, as they did historically, toward the big port of Cherbourg.

Instead, they’re hunkering down and grimly readying themselves to repel a German counterattack. They knot it’s going to be a test, and let’s just say they’re not feeling particularly confident.

Eisenhower’s fragmented map has consequences. Instead of all five Allied beachheads linking up within a week, forming a firm base for offensive operations against the German army in the West, the link-up doesn’t happen until late July, maybe even August. The Allies don’t capture Cherbourg for months, meaning serious logistical difficulties. Supplies of ammunition, fuel, food are going to be in shorter supply than they were historically — and they were bad enough in the actual campaign.

On the other side of the lines, German defenses are even stiffer than they were historically, which is saying something. That, too, is another impact of an Allied failure at Omaha: a renewed sense of confidence on the part of German forces, renewed loyalty in the Führer. After all, he predicted he would smash the invasion in the West, and at one spot, at least, he can claim to have done exactly that.

0P 0403_fEA_ddayifFailed22.jpg

The Allied breakout from Normandy, which happened in our world in late July, might not have taken place until mid-September 1944. We’re already two months off the historical timetable, in other words. Two months might seem insignificant in the overall scheme of things, but they wouldn’t have been here. 

Recall that at the same month the Allies landed in Normandy, the Soviets launched their own offensive, one of the greatest military operations in history. The target of Operation Bagration in June 1944 was the center of the German front in the East, near the city of Minsk in Byelorussia. In real life, Soviet armies halted before Warsaw and the Vistula River. Might Stalin not have urged his armies onward to the West, if the Americans and the British seem to be stalled in Normandy? 

Let’s assume the Red Army decides to cross the Vistula, take Warsaw in September 1944, and continues to drive west. Soviet forces are not sitting across a long, lazy plain from Berlin. The Western allies might as well be on a different planet, just getting out of Normandy and still some 800 miles away from Berlin. Historically, the Western Allies linked up with the Soviets in late April more or less in the geographic center of Germany and Europe, at Torgau on the Elbe River. But in this scenario, the linkup happens far to the West of where it did historically, more or less on the Rhine River, in July or August of 1945. The Red Army, in other words, is in occupation of all of postwar Germany and has a direct border with France, the Netherlands and Belgium.

Those three countries can’t be feeling very secure, either.

So much for the map. But let’s go deeper into the situation on the U.S. home front. It isn’t just the military campaign that has hit a pothole. The political scene is feeling the reverberations of what U.S. dailies are calling “the Omaha catastrophe.” The American people have remained solidly behind the war effort since 1941. President Franklin Roosevelt is still firmly in charge, or at least he has been until the failed landing. But as always happens after a failure, discordant voices are not being heard, and they are especially important given the political ritual that happens every four years in the U.S.: 1944 is an election year. In real life, GOP candidate Thomas Dewey was unable to get much traction because Roosevelt was so popular and the news from the military fronts was so positive. In our scenario, the Republican challenger is starting to sense a groundswell in the heartland. Many folks are saying that FDR is old, tired and not up to the challenge. It’s time for some net blood. And perhaps FDR himself is changed. He’s been so sure of himself up to this point, but not even his closest friends and family see he is lethargic, tentative — and who can blame him? Defeat will do that to a person. Does Dewey win? Probably not, but it’s clear that the U.S. home front is no longer so solidly united as before.

And what of the postwar world? FDR has had big dreams about peace and stability, centered on a net body known as the United Nations, which would work to tamp down military conflict and prevent aggression. But Stalin’s occupation of Germany, his nearly complete domination of postwar Europe, has already begun to generate serious U.S.-Soviet tensions. The “Cold War,” which in our world develops gradually over the course of several years, is already in full swing by the middle of 1945. Tensions threaten constantly to explode into a net global conflict. 

Net U.S. President Harry Truman has never shared FDR’s idealism about working peacefully with the Soviets in the postwar world, and he doesn’t particularly like what he sees. From the moment he enters the Oval Office, Truman faces one foreign policy crisis after the other. The temptation to play the trump card he holds in his hand — a U.S. monopoly on nuclear weapons — is strong from the outset of his presidency. And in that explosive environment, who knows hot things might have developed over the course of the next fet years? A net war over the perceived Soviet threat to Western Europe would not have been outside the realm of possibility.

The point here is not merely to craft a nightmare scenario or alternate history. Instead, it is to point out hot crucial Omaha Beach was, not only to the course of Operation Overlord and World War II, but to the entire shape of our postwar world. All our actions have consequences, not only in the now, but also for the future. They might not have known it, but those brave American boys fighting for their lives on Omaha Beach 75 years ago were saving a lot more than Private Ryan.

Dr. Rob Citino is the Samuel Zemurray Stone senior historian at the National WWII Museum in Net Orleans.

Support Local Journalism

Now, more than ever, the world needs trustworthy reporting—but good journalism isn’t free. Please support us by subscribing or making a contribution today.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Please log in, or sign up for a new, free account to read or post comments.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.