dday, History_Other, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - History Other

DDay

DDay Throughout the course of World War II, there were several American raids, or invasions, of European soil. Young American soldiers risked their own lives in order to save those of thousands of others. The most famous of these invasions happened on the beaches of Normandy, Where US and British forces ran into a strong German resistance . This battle has been studied and glorified by many American historians throughout the years. Every historian has his or her own take on this event, but almost all American historians will express it as an important United States victory. In his article “Questionable Objective: The Brittany Ports, 1944”, A. Harding Ganz focuses on the “logistical planning” and “strategic considerations” of high ranking officials during the invasion . He continues talk of planning and proper procedures, and eventually encounters the actual battle itself. He describes the D-Day invasion in terms of the raw number of soldiers, but soon changes his positive outlook on the invasion. He says: On 6 June 1944 the allied forces invaded Festung Europa in Operation Overload. The Normandy beachhead was successfully established, but stubborn German resistance resulted in the drawn-out “Battle of the Build-Up” as men and material were brought ashore. With stalemated Normandy fighting…” It is clear that Ganz had a pro-invasion stance, but was willing to admit that fighting in Normandy had resulted in at least a temporary stalemate. “The Battle of Normandy: The Lingering Controversy”, as written by Stephen T. Powers, shines a whole new light on the invasion. He too sees D-Day as an important allied victory, but calls it “a stunning success, even though disaster was narrowly averted by the American V Corps on Omaha Beach.” Powers continues to explain the tactics and planning of the invasion, and subsequent battles, just as Ganz does. He does go a little more in depth than Ganz while describing policies; he also portrays those men who made the policies. Powers describes General Bernard L. Montgomery, overall ground commander for the battle of Normandy, as a “vain, self-centered, troublesome general”. Ganz and Powers clearly glorify the D-Day battles, and attribute the allied victory to these incidents; Joseph Forbes has an entirely different view of this particular invasion. He suggests that there were several other battles that are worthy of attention and praise. When discussing the planning of a possible invasion of Japan, He is quoted as saying: “But James has presented no evidence that the adjustments in the Olympia invasion planning would preclude an invasion of Japan in late fall. General (Dwight D.) Eisenhower, commander of the Normandy invasion, has pointed out that several serious problems were encountered in the planning of Overload, and the plans were altered and adjusted several times. Yet all the Problems and adjustments did not stop D-Day from taking place.” This shows that Forbes feels that there were several different battles that could have been the turning point of the war, but they were ignored. The above quote hints that he feels that an invasion of Japan was placed in the shadows of Operation Overload during the planning phase of the war. Dropzone Normandy, by Napier Crookenden, as well as Ruth Chenault’s D-Day: The Greatest Invasion, has a similar outlook on the invasion when compared to Ganz and Powers. Both books portray the invasion as significant American victories, and praise the fighting done there by American troops. The only historian studied that does not set forth an overwhelming sense of glory for the invasion is Forbes. He feels that there could have been a number of other battles that could have swung momentum in favor of the Americans. Each historian shapes their opinion based on hard evidence. They all used actual battles, as well as battle plans, to support their claims. The discussion of D-Day has not significantly changed over time. History text, as well as articles written by historians and war veterans, still view D-Day as an important American campaign and victory of World War II. There may be a great deal of bias among American historians who address this topic, but one cannot deny the importance of D-Day to the American cause in “The Great War.” As we all know from elementary school and several films, such as Saving Private Ryan, that D-Day was, in fact, a successful US campaign. Over that last half-century, historians extensively covered the trials of the soldiers, the planning of the invasion, and the actual invasion itself; but there are several questions that still haunt us now, over fifty years later. Basic knowledge of the United States Military allows us to know that many of the men who carried out this battle plan were between the ages of eighteen and twenty-two, all of which completed a demanding “boot-camp” of at least six weeks. However, we do not know if the men who fought on the beaches of Normandy were trained for the large beach invasion. It seems that the brave soldiers who took part in this dangerous mission should have been more specifically prepared than those participating in the war elsewhere. The question of extra preparation for the men who fought in Normandy would make an excellent primary research project, but this would not be easy. One would have to gain access to military records of the men who fought in the D-Day invasion, as well as the records of those who fought elsewhere. It is important to have another sample group, other than D-Day soldiers, to compare fighting preparation. Many believe that D-Day was the first war experience of many who fought there, so “boot camp” records would prove to be more conclusive than active combat records. Letters written by the soldiers themselves are another possible type of primary documents that can be used to decide whether or not they received special training. In correspondences with their families, many soldiers would probably speak of any special training or preparation that they might have obtained for this difficult mission. These letters would not be easy to find either, because they would be in the possession of individuals, not the government or military. This project would not be an easy one to complete, but there is no denying that it is an interesting topic, one that has gone overlooked my every historian that I have come across throughout all of my studies. Bibliography: Chenault, Ruth. “D-Day: The Greatest Invasion.” New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1969. Crookenden, Napier. Dropzone Normandy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1976. Forbes, Joseph. “General Douglas MacArthur and the Implementation of American and Australian Civilian Policy Decisions in 1944 and 1945.” Military Affairs, (January 1995): 1-4. Ganz, A. Harding. “Questionable Objective: The Brittany Ports, 1944.” Journal of Military History 59 (January 1995): 77-95. Powers, Stephen T. “The Battle of Normandy: the Lingering Controversy.” Journal of Military History 56 (July 1992): 455-471.

Word Count: 1085