re: A seriously underrated aspect of D-Day and the Allied offensive in France

quote:

---

If the Germans just let Rommel do his thing the outcome could have been totally different

---

The problem is that the Germans were in a very untenable situation. By June 1944, the Luftwaffe was completely irrelevant as a ground attack force or as a means of protecting German ground forces from air attacks in the West. The bulk of the Luftwaffe combat power in the West had to be dedicated to defending against the strategic bombing raids. Allied air power was overwhelming over Western France in the leadup to the invasion. Not only had transportation targets been incessantly pummeled from the air for months in the leadup, making German logistics once the invasion began a nightmare, but roving Allied fighter bombers were also buzzing around searching for any moving targets to strafe and bomb. P-47's, P-38's, and Hawker Typhoons were extraordinary ground attack aircraft and they made life a living hell for German ground forces and logistical elements attempting to move around France in response to the Allied invasion. It got so bad that German forces were reduced to traveling at night to avoid air attack. If anything gets underrated in respect to popular narrative, it's this.

Now for the Rommel argument, in hindsight it does appear that his strategy was likely the better one but that's easy to say considering we know how the first iteration worked out for them. The main disagreement in the defense strategy centered around Rundstedt and Rommel's disagreement on how to position the armored divisions. Rundstedt thought they should be held further from the coast so that once the invasion location was clearly identified, a massed armor attack could be thrown at it. Rommel wanted the armor positioned closer to the coast at the expense of forces being more dispersed across the potential landing zones and weaker but allowing quick deployment of at least some armored forces to counter the invading forces.

The irony is that massed armor was the linchpin in German military doctrine at the time and was the innovative strategy that brought them their historical victories in France 4 years earlier. In this instance though, it appears that Rommel's idea of dispersing the armor likely would have contributed to the German defensive efforts at Normandy. That being said, the Germans had to confront the unknown regarding where the landings would occur as well as potential Allied feints. While I think Rommel's efforts would have caused more Allied casualties and made for a tougher go of it, I think ultimately they weren't going to be able to throw the invasion back either way given all the surrounding circumstances.