jimmo

I have a hypothetical claim for you all:
The success of the Normandy invasion was only because of overwhelming manpower

For this sake of this argument, let's ignore all other factors such as strategic and tactical mistakes, Hitler's hesitation to send re-inforcement until too late, luck, etc, etc. I would like to simply concentrate on the hypothetical statement that the only factor in the success of the allied invasion was their overwhelming manpower.

Given this hypothesis, is there anything during the invasion that could not be explained simply by "overwhelming manpower"?

The background to this exercise is a claim by someone in a recent discussion who insists that the simplest argument is always best. My counter argument was that while the principle might apply to historical events, they typically do have one single cause. In this case, "overwhelming manpower" is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition, as bad luck or poor tactical decision could have screwed things up for the allies.

I am grateful for any input.

OpanaPointer

I cannot name one single thing that happened for one reason and one reason only.

HyperWar: US Army in WWII: Cross-Channel Attack

jimmo

I cannot think of one either, but I am trying to come up with an example where one could explain all of the events with a single cause, such as "overwhelming manpower."

OpanaPointer

You missed my point. There is no such animal. Or rather, in sixty years I've not come across one. You may succeed where others have failed, of course. However, when you think you have your hypothesis smoothed out, stop and ask yourself The Question: What I have missed?

Qymaen

I believe that a formula for invading heavily defended was created. It was something like you needed at least three times as many soldiers than the defenders.

OpanaPointer

Defense is to attack as three is to one.

Qymaen

Operation Fortitude also played an extremely important and vital role in the success of Normandy.

Qymaen

An attacker with 100 troops won't defeat 300 troops unless the enemy commander is a doofus and their commander is a genius.

OpanaPointer

You've got that backwards, I think.. Defense is three to the attackers' one. Defenders are based as being three times as strong as attackers in any given situation.

OpanaPointer

I used to keep that straight by referring to Patton's "forces" as the Fake US Army Group rather than the First US Army Group. I've long wanted a copy of the Order of Battle for the Allied Forces that the Germans had hung on a wall in their Paris HQ just to see how many of Fortitude's units were included.