D-Day

[Jim Koepke]

Old Time Radio Programs, Complete Broadcast Day, D Day, June 06 1944 > https://archive.org/details/Complete_Broadcast_Day_D-Day/Complete_Broadcast_Day_440606_Part_001.mp3

jtk

[Steve Eure]

It's extremely sad that there was nothing mentioned about the anniversary of this historical event on the news. This event changed the world as we know it. They are doing their best to erase history.

[Frederick Skelly]

Dad had a friend who went in on D+1, 76 years ago today. He fought across Europe for 6 months and then was seriously wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. He, like so many others, never would tell me the whole story. He'd only say "It was just a little tank Fred."

[Mel Fulks]

Thanks ,Jim. Might have slipped by me. They knew what was being asked, and did it anyway.

[Mike Henderson]

Dad had a friend who went in on D+1, 76 years ago today. He fought across Europe for 6 months and then was seriously wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. He, like so many others, never would tell me the whole story. He'd only say "It was just a little tank Fred."

My uncle served in WWII and was wounded. He didn't talk about it but after I served in Vietnam he began to tell me stories about his service and how he was wounded.

He was in the signal corps and was wounded by shrapnel when an 88 hit a tree near him as he was running wire for communications. I think it was in late 1944, as the Allies began their final push into Germany.

I suspect the reason there isn't a lot of news about D-Day is that there haven't been any real celebrations because of the virus. And this is not a "round year" like 75 years, or 80 years, 100 years, etc.

[Side note: Remember that only a small percentage of soldiers served in combat, maybe 10%. The rest were in support of the "tip of the spear". An example of this was General John C. H. Lee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee) who was in charge of supply in Europe. After D-Day, when the Allies had captured Paris, Eisenhower gave orders that support personnel were to stay out of Paris - that Paris was to be used for R&R by front line troops. However, Lee moved his entire operation into Paris - and took over the major (first class) hotels. They lived like kings for the rest of the war.
There are other stories of some of these people routing railroad cars full of supplies to a side track so that black marketeers could rob it. The supply people got paid by the black marketeers. Eventually, Eisenhower ordered that supply trains were to be guarded by combat veterans who were not hesitant to shoot black marketeers. They had seen rear area soldiers with cold weather gear while they froze (without gear) in the mud in winter.]

Mike

[Here's a section of Wikipedia's entry on Lee:
In August, Com Z Headquarters moved from the UK to a camp at Valognes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valognes) in France.[57] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppenthal195931-57) Although Eisenhower had expressed a desire that headquarters not be located in Paris, on 1 September Lee decided to move Com Z headquarters there.[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTEBradley1951405%E2%80%93406-58) This involved the movement of 8,000 officers and 21,000 enlisted men from the UK and Valognes, and took two weeks to accomplish at a time when there were severe supply shortages.[59] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTEOhl1994235-59) Eventually, Com Z occupied 167 hotels in Paris, the Seine Base Section headquarters occupied 129 more, and SHAEF occupied another 25.[60] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppenthal195932-60) Lee established his own official residence in the Hotel George V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Seasons_Hotel_George_V). The front of the building was kept clear for his own vehicle.[61] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTECox2018145-61) He justified the move to Paris on the grounds that Paris was the hub of France's road, rail and inland waterway communications networks. The logic was conceded, but the use of scarce fuel and transport resources at a critical time caused embarrassment.[57] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppenthal195931-57)[59] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._H._Lee#cite_note-FOOTNOTEOhl1994235-59)

[Similar things happened in Vietnam. There were E-8 sergeants who were in charge of a major PX who wouldn't leave Vietnam. They were in a safe area (such as Saigon) and they were making money hand over fist selling goods to the black market. They kept extending their tours in Vietnam. There were things you could buy from black market people on Hai Ba Trung (could be the wrong street - it's been 50 years) that you couldn't get from army supply. Women had blankets that they spread out on the sidewalk and laid out their goods. The police (called the white mice) would go to the end ot the street (in a vehicle) and start driving slowly up the street. The gals (and it was almost all women) would grab their blankets by the four corners and retreat to an alley. After the white mice finished their drive and could report that they saw no black market, the women would come back and lay out their goods again.]

[The other big thing was money. Rich Vietnamese needed to get their money out of country but transfers of piasters (Vietnamese money) was tightly controlled. But where there's a will, there's a way and I can tell that story if anyone is interested.]

[Mel Fulks]

There is a film of Eisenhower telling the men what they had to do. One of those brutally honest things.

[Rod Sheridan]

It's extremely sad that there was nothing mentioned about the anniversary of this historical event on the news. This event changed the world as we know it. They are doing their best to erase history.

Hi Steve, who are “they”?

History is still taught, there’s more of it every year.

I don’t know if my dad was there or not, he was overseas at the correct time however would never talk about where he was or when, or any part he took aside from saying it was the worst years of his life.

All my friends parents are gone as well, as are all my parents siblings. I have my parents wedding photograph, dad in his Air Force uniform, my God, he was just a kid........Rod.

[Brian Holcombe]

My grandfather fought from D-day+3 (arrived three days after D-day) until VE day, then was moved to the philippines to prepare for an invasion of Japan. He never spoke much about it to family members until I called him to interview him for a fourth grade project where my class assignment was to interview a veteran about their war experience. This sort of formal interview brought out a lot about his experience.

He was a mortarman serving in the 86th Infantry (Blackhawks) so he carried 80lbs of kit on his 120lb frame. With enough prodding he spoke of 'knocking out' a Wehrmacht mortar position and eliminating light sharpshooter resistance in specific.

I can only imagine what the men of D-day must of felt knowing they were up against one hell of a foe. Gigantic concrete bunkers that lined the beach packed with men firing MG34's and hurling grenades along with obstacles on the beach and falling artillery. It just seems so impossible, and yet they did it.

[Stan Calow]

Those of us old enough to have had parents or close relatives who fought in WWII have an interest in such things. I don't see younger people have much interest in what is ancient history to them. You cant get most younger people to appreciate history, or even read a book these days. I know people in their 30s for whom Saving Private Ryan is just a Matt Damon and Tom Hanks movie.

[Brian Holcombe]

That hasn’t been my experience. I’ve seen a resurgence in conversation around wwi, the interwar years and wwii amongst people my age (30’s). Imo most of this stuff is simply much too interesting to bury in the archives of ancient history.

[Mike Henderson]

I can only imagine what the men of D-day must of felt knowing they were up against one hell of a foe. Gigantic concrete bunkers that lined the beach packed with men firing MG34's and hurling grenades along with obstacles on the beach and falling artillery. It just seems so impossible, and yet they did it.

If you want to read about some horrible combat, read about some of the battles on the Eastern Front. The Russians didn't clear mine fields - they forced conscripts to cross the mine fields so that more experienced soldiers could follow. The Soviet Union lost at least 25 million soldiers and civilians (killed, not casualties), about 13% of their population. The US lost about 400,000 killed, about 0.3% of our population.

It was the Soviet Union who was really responsible for the defeat of Germany.

Mike

[We supplied them with equipment, arms and ammunition but they did the fighting and dying.]

[Frederick Skelly]

If you want to read about some horrible combat, read about some of the battles on the Eastern Front. The Russians didn't clear mine fields - they forced conscripts to cross the mine fields so that more experienced soldiers could follow. The Soviet Union lost at least 25 million soldiers and civilians (killed, not casualties), about 13% of their population. The US lost about 400,000 killed, about 0.3% of our population.

It was the Soviet Union who was really responsible for the defeat of Germany.

Mike

That matches what I understand too, Mike.

[Brian Holcombe]

If you want to read about some horrible combat, read about some of the battles on the Eastern Front. The Russians didn't clear mine fields - they forced conscripts to cross the mine fields so that more experienced soldiers could follow. The Soviet Union lost at least 25 million soldiers and civilians (killed, not casualties), about 13% of their population. The US lost about 400,000 killed, about 0.3% of our population.

It was the Soviet Union who was really responsible for the defeat of Germany.

Mike

Thank you, Mike. It’s already a point of interest for me. The eastern front alone would have made for the largest war in the history of mankind up until that point.

Ill certainly argue the point that without the US’ industrial capacity Russia probably would have succumb to the Wehrmacht’s advance.

BTW, that note about the minefields is pretty well contested. My understanding is that they often did not clear the minefields becuase they expected the losses created by attempted to clear them would likely be even higher then simply pushing forward as if they weren’t there at all. Given the intensity of the contact between those two forces I can see where they might apply that logic.

That said, I have doubts that other militaries would suffer the damage to morale caused by such an approach.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

If you want to read about some horrible combat, read about some of the battles on the Eastern Front. The Russians didn't clear mine fields - they forced conscripts to cross the mine fields so that more experienced soldiers could follow. The Soviet Union lost at least 25 million soldiers and civilians (killed, not casualties), about 13% of their population. The US lost about 400,000 killed, about 0.3% of our population.

It was the Soviet Union who was really responsible for the defeat of Germany.

Mike

[We supplied them with equipment, arms and ammunition but they did the fighting and dying.]

I will never understand the soviet worship that has become such a fad in recent years. Is it a good thing that Stalin murdered his own people on an industrial scale? Are we supposed to be grateful that the soviets fought in their own country for their own lives?

Yes the Communists killed lots of Nazis. Beyond that they have nothing in common with the men who landed at Normandy.

They hated us and tried to destroy us right up until the moment Hitler attacked them, and they went right back to hating us and trying to destroy us the moment Germany collapsed.

[Frederick Skelly]

I will never understand the soviet worship that has become such a fad in recent years. Is it a good thing that Stalin murdered his own people on an industrial scale? Are we supposed to be grateful that the soviets fought in their own country for their own lives?

Yes the Communists killed lots of Nazis. Beyond that they have nothing in common with the men who landed at Normandy.

They hated us and tried to destroy us right up until the moment Hitler attacked them, and they went right back to hating us and trying to destroy us the moment Germany collapsed.

Sure they did. Knowing that doesnt change the historical fact that they took out a lot of other badguys. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", for a while.

Be assured there's no soviet worship here. But it's been my experience that to understand the modern world (and the cold war) you need all the information - not just the part that that supports a patriotic viewpoint.

YMMV
Fred

[Brian Holcombe]

Their ideology and treatment of their citizens is horrendous, totally agree. I don’t want to speak for mike but I didn’t read his response as admiration but simply stating that they did have a huge impact. I’ve gone round and round with this and ultimately feel that unhindered US industrial capacity was likely the biggest single factor.

The leaders at the time expected conflict in that regard as well. Little known fact that Patton had captured Wehrmacht soldiers doing training exercises in preparation for a push back against Russia. I believe his superiors were not happy about this as they still needed Russian assistance with defeating Japan. Russia tore through Japanese occupied China at an impressive clip.

[Mike Henderson]

I will never understand the soviet worship that has become such a fad in recent years. Is it a good thing that Stalin murdered his own people on an industrial scale? Are we supposed to be grateful that the soviets fought in their own country for their own lives?

Yes the Communists killed lots of Nazis. Beyond that they have nothing in common with the men who landed at Normandy.

They hated us and tried to destroy us right up until the moment Hitler attacked them, and they went right back to hating us and trying to destroy us the moment Germany collapsed.

I suppose you're aiming your comments at me. I certainly do not worship anything about the Soviet Union.

Some years back, I begin studying the second world war. Everything I had heard prior to that is that we (the USA) won the war, especially with our invasion on D-Day. But the truth is that the major fighting was actually on the Eastern Front - and it was bitter fighting on both sides. Many, many German divisions were destroyed on the Eastern Front.

Consider the situation if Germany had not attacked the Soviet Union. All those divisions would have been in Europe and any landing would have been much more difficult, perhaps impossible.

What upset me as I studied more about WWII was that we (the US) do not tell the truth about the war - probably because of the cold war that followed WWII. But the truth is important, and I attempt to point it out occasionally.

The people who went ashore on D-Day were brave and successful. But even there we are not told the whole truth. Let's look at the KIAs for each of the five beaches on D-Day: Omaha, Gold, Juno, Sword, and Utah.

Omaha was by far the bloodiest with about 2,400 KIA and is what most people think of when they think of D-Day.
Gold Beach - 350 KIA
Juno Beach - 340 KIA
Sword Beach - 683 KIA
Utah Beach - The 4th Infantry lost 197 KIA, the Airborne troops dropped behind the beach lost almost 2,500, and other groups lost about 700

Compare this to the number of KIAs for some of the battles on the Eastern Front, such as Stalingrad which had about 700,000 German KIAs and close to a million Soviet soldiers and civilians KIA.

[The Soviets recovered 250,000 German and Romanian corpses in and around Stalingrad, and total Axis casualties (Germans, Romanians, Italians, and Hungarians) are believed to have been more than 800,000 dead, wounded, missing, or captured. Of the 91,000 men who surrendered, only some 5,000–6,000 ever returned to their homelands (the last of them a full decade after the end of the war in 1945); the rest died in Soviet prison and labour camps. On the Soviet side, official Russian military historians estimate that there were 1,100,000 Red Army dead, wounded, missing, or captured in the campaign to defend the city. An estimated 40,000 civilians died as well.]

You don't have to like the Soviet Union to understand the truth and the extreme price they paid to defeat the Germans (under absolutely miserable conditions).

The Battle of the Bulge - which was the biggest battle on the Western front - had about 19,000 Allied KIAs. I don't have numbers for the German KIAs.

Mike

The Allied ratio of KIA to casualties in the Battle of the Bulge was about 25%. The Germans had about 100,000 casualties in that battle and if they experienced the same ratio, they would have had about 25,000 KIAs.

[Brian Holcombe]

Mike, it’s likely much easier to get a complete understanding now with people like Dan Carlin doing such comprehensive podcasts on subjects like the Ostfront.

[Mike Henderson]

Just another comment.

The Soviets were absolutely ruthless in the war and there are many examples. But one that really hit me was the following.

In France the French resistance was hobbled because if they killed a German soldier, the Germans went to the nearest village and killed ten French men and boys for each German soldier killed.

On the Eastern Front, the Soviets didn't care how many of their people the Germans killed in retaliation for the Soviet partisans killing of German soldiers. They considered the people in villages captured by the Germans as collaborators and when they recaptured the village they often executed many of the villagers as collaborators even though the villagers were quite innocent.

Mike

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I suppose you're aiming your comments at me. I certainly do not worship anything about the Soviet Union.

Some years back, I begin studying the second world war. Everything I had heard prior to that is that we (the USA) won the war, especially with our invasion on D-Day. But the truth is that the major fighting was actually on the Eastern Front - and it was bitter fighting on both sides. Many, many German divisions were destroyed on the Eastern Front.



A copy of Manstein's memoir is on my desk. Some may be ignorant that there was an eastern front, but I am not one of them.

My comment is not "aimed" at you. This is a thread about D-day. Yet there are four posts in a row about the soviets and how they won the war.

The soviets allied with the Nazis to destroy Poland. They supplied the Nazis with fuel and raw materials while they rebuilt their armies over the winter of 1939-1940. Hitler launched the war with soviet help. Deliveries of food, fuel, and raw material continued while Hitler destroyed France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Norway, and while he besieged Britain. Deliveries continued while Hitler destroyed Yugoslavia and Greece, and right up until the soviets were attacked.

The truth is the soviets allied with Hitler and aided him in the destruction of the democracies. The truth is they themselves enslaved every square inch of territory they conquered on the eastern front.

The truth is that your uncle and my grandfather landed in Normandy to free people, not to enslave them.

[Brian Holcombe]

I am not pro-soviet at all, whatsoever, so I hope my posts are not being viewed in that light. If that is the case it would offend me to my core, my deepest value set is for democracy.

[Matt Day]

My uncle’s (not blood) father was a navigator and was shot down over Germany and was POW. My wife’s grandfather was also shot down over Germany and was a POW, both were in the same camp and the same area at the same time. My wife’s grandfather was Jewish though, which surely didn’t bode well. Both made it home.

My kids asked what Memorial Day was, and we told them about our family’s history in the military. I dug a bit and found there is lots of information out there on the internet. It was pretty neat reading the paperwork that our relatives filled out about their planes being shot down.

Regarding the comment about “the younger generation doesn’t care about history”, in my experience most people don’t care a whole lot about history until they are a bit older.

[Edwin Santos]

The soviets allied with the Nazis to destroy Poland. They supplied the Nazis with fuel and raw materials while they rebuilt their armies over the winter of 1939-1940. Hitler launched the war with soviet help. Deliveries of food, fuel, and raw material continued while Hitler destroyed France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Norway, and while he besieged Britain. Deliveries continued while Hitler destroyed Yugoslavia and Greece, and right up until the soviets were attacked.

The truth is the soviets allied with Hitler and aided him in the destruction of the democracies. The truth is they themselves enslaved every square inch of territory they conquered on the eastern front.

The truth is that your uncle and my grandfather landed in Normandy to free people, not to enslave them.



This is consistent with my studies, that Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union had a robust economic relationship right up until June 1941 when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in Operation Barbarossa. Hitler (correctly) concluded that unless he acted, the Soviets would eventually be recruited into the war by the UK and US so his choices were either to (1) get them to join the Axis powers or (2) invade them and eliminate them as a factor. There were negotiations to join the Axis, but they broke down because the Soviets demanded concessions which the Nazis refused and so Hitler gave up on recruiting them hence the invasion.

I have always wondered about the Soviet intentions. When they were supplying Germany, I would think it was purely economic incentive. After they were attacked and then joined the Allies, I always assumed it was for self preservation more than answering the call to a higher cause.

Don't you think it fairly obvious that every country's role in WWII was self interest? Pretty much every country that entered the war did so either because they were attacked or an eventual attack was inevitable. If anyone deserves an award for benevolence, it wouldn't be a result of Normandy. I think it would probably be more a result of post war actions i.e. Marshall Plan, the establishment of the UN and NATO, humanitarian aid, etc.
In that regard I'm not so sure the Soviet Union wins stars for being charitable. As one example, unlike NATO, the Warsaw Pact was designed to do nothing other than codify and ensure the Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.

However, if the point of an earlier post was that the war would have ended differently but for the Soviets, and that in the course of it they suffered staggering casualties, I'm not sure how anyone could argue those facts. I agree, that aspect of the war history was not emphasized in my high school history classes. Doesn't necessarily mean the Soviets were good guys or bad guys, but just that it is an objective fact that their role was hugely impactful. Honestly, anyone who would characterize Stalin as a good guy would have to be demented.

I believe my comment here is basically agreeing with just about everyone in the room.