riotbeard

I am watching Ken Burns' The War right now, and I was wondering what people thought would have happened had the invasion of Europe come first instead of North Africa in WW2. I am going to debate this as I have very minimal knowledge on this era, but I thought it an interesting question. According to the doc (I trust Burns generally. The Civil War Doc is great, a topic I know a lot more about), Churchill advised against Europe, because failure could lose the war outright for the allies. What are the thoughts of more knowledgable members of historum? Cheers!

Greyter

I dont claim to be more knowledgable than anyone but if the Allies had felt capable of launching a major assault on continental Europe earlier they would have done so. If that had been possible Africa would have been ignored.

The landings in Africa were essentially a training operation.

pikeshot1600

Neither the troops nor the resources were available to invade Europe before AT LEAST 1943 (Italy). The estimates of troops and materiel required to invade France were not available until 1944 - especially landing craft.

The British tended to favor operations around the periphery of continental Europe - in Scandinavia or the Balkans. The US wanted to go straight for France, where the objective was more direct, and then straight into the industrial heart of Germany to deny that to their war effort.

Prior to 1944, the build up in Britain was not considered sufficient, and there were around 1,000,000 allied troops in North Africa with adequate support to knock Italy out of the war. There was a big difference between post-Dunkirk in 1940 and Italy in 1943. North Africa wound up as a staging area, and the invasion of Sicily/Italy required up to 40 or more divisions (including the Balkans) that Germany could not allocate to Russia.

riotbeard

According to the doc, American Generals thought an invasion of France would be possible for Spring of 43.

pikeshot1600

Nah...much easier and more certain for some success to concentrate on the Med where experienced troops and materiel were already concentrated. The Brits got their way in '43. By 1944, it was the US calling the shots - and by then the resources were available in adequate measure.

It cannot be forgotten that, even though it was "Europe first," the Pacific war had more need for amphibious craft due to the naval character of the war. The landing craft had to be allocated to where they were needed first.

Much of British strategy (certainly understandable) was to avoid the blood bath of the first war; hence their desire to peck away around the edges of the continent. The US staff (and Roosevelt) wanted to go right at Europe, when the resources justified that, on the theory that it would shorten the war. That US strategic doctrine dated to U.S. Grant....take casualties and get it over with as soon as possible.

Cicero

Like Pikeshot, I thought that one reason was the lack of landing craft. Another was the untried nature of the American Army and its commanders. The North African Campaign revealed some weaknesses in tactics and generalship. The battle of Kasserine Pass, the first battle with the Germans went badly for the American Army.

The US units were too far for one another for mutual support.
US units did not dig in properly in foxholes.
Germany had air superiority.
U.S. Army forces, the II Corps commander, General Fredendall was found wanting and relieved.

It was better that mistakes be made in North Africa where the Axis Armies were isolated and smaller than on continental Europe.

Edward

Initially, it was not a British (or American) choice. Italian attacked across Egyptian border first in 1940.
Apart, as pointed in previous posts, from obvious lack of resources and experience to invade European mainland, allies could not afford to leave African Business unfinished before invading France.

riotbeard

Accepting that they made the right decision. If they had invaded Europe first and been reppelled, is it coceivable that Hitler would have suceeded or would the two fronts still have been enough?

Chookie

There was an attempted landing in 1942 (the Dieppe raid, which occurred on 19th August). It wasn't a full-scale invasion but in military terms, it was a complete failure as it did not achieve any of it's objectives.

Yet, at the same time it did achieve one objective - it proved that the Allies did not have the ability at that time to mount a full-scale invasion with any hope of success.

Lucius

See - The Decision To Invade North Africa (TORCH)

From - COMMAND DECISIONS