D-Day had no effect on the outcome of WWII.
Debate Rounds (4)
D-Day, also known as the Normandy Landings had no effect on the outcome of WWII. In WWII, there were two possible outcomes to the war.
Outcome #1: Axis Victory
Outcome #2: Allied Victory
I will be arguing that if D-Day had never happened, Germany would still have lost the war no matter what. My opponent will be arguing that Germany had a chance of winning WWII by the time the allies invaded France and might still have won the war if D-Day had never happened.
Note: In this debate, saying that the allied invasion of France stopped the Soviets from invading France is not a valid argument.
My opponent will attempt to argue that D-Day did have an effect on the outcome of the war (axis victory) and I will be arguing that the Normandy Landings had no effect on the outcome of WWII.
Round 1 is for acceptance. Good luck and have fun.
I really would have appreciated if my opponent just said "I accept" instead of stating arguments. Nevertheless, I will write my arguments.
Battle of Stalingrad
The Battle of Stalingrad lasted from 1942-1943 and was Hitler's worst defeat. 850,000 German, Romanian, Hungarian, Croatian, and Italian soldiers were killed, captured, or taken prisoner. After Stalingrad, it was all downhill for Germany. This was the most important turning point of WWII.
Battle of Kursk
The Battle of Kursk was the main German offensive of 1943. In the summer, Hitler attempted to pinch off the Kursk Salient. Eventually Germany was forced to retreat. During the 1943 summer offensive, Germany suffered around 250,000 casualties. In addition to this, the German Wehrmacht lost so many tanks that the German armored forces were no longer a real threat to anybody. After the Battle of Kursk, Germany lost all chances of winning WWII.
At the same time that the Western Allies were invading France, the Red Army launched Operation Bagration which finally crushed the German army. Germany lost hundreds of thousands of men. Operation Bagration eventually brought the Red Army to the gates of Berlin.
The information that I just presented may seem pointless but what I am trying to show is that by the time the Western Allies invaded France, Germany was all but defeated. By the time the Western Allies had invaded France, the Soviet army outnumbered Germany by a ratio of at least 6:1. I really can't see how Germany would have won. The Lufftwaffe (Germany air force) no longer existed. Germany had no tanks left. The Soviet Union was producing more than 3 times as much as Germany. There was no longer any chance for Germany to win the war.
In the previous round, my opponent presented an argument stating that D-Day prevented Hitler from escaping into France and continue the war from there. This argument is laughable. Where would Hitler recieve his troops from if the German forces were defeated and all major German cities captured? From France? No, the French hated the Germans and would most likely start uprisings after seeing that the Red Army had captured Germany. There was no longer any chances of a German victory.
Con also says that if D-Day had never happened then Mussolini would have been able to support Hitler. This is new to me because last time I checked, D-Day took place on the coast of France, not in Italy. Also, by 1944 most of Italy had been conquered by the British and Americans.
I await arguments and rebuttals from Con in the next round.
"I know D-Day was in France but it also took part in Italy as well."
D-Day took place at Normandy, not in Italy.
"So Fascist strongholds in France would still exsist so thus meaning that German Conscripts would still be alive so reinforcements would be more abundant."
Throughout WWII, there were few German soldiers in France.
"Yes defeats in the Eastern Front helped greatly in the Fascist defeat but D-Day opens Europe to foreign forces to invade."
Foreign forced (Red Army) were invading long before D-Day ever happened.
"With out UK & American soldiers the Rhine and the low countries would still be held by Fascists and give Soviet forces a harder time by pushing through the east..."
Sure it would have been harder and would have taken much longer, but this fact does not prove that Germany could have won the war.
Con seems to think that just because there were German forces in France, the USSR would have lost. The fact is that there were so few German soldiers in France, that at D-Day the allies outnumbered Germany 15:1. He has not stated any real arguments. I await more...
"The USSR would have been pushed back to the Polish border..."
These are empty words. My opponent has said nothing that can prove this and he has provided no sources for support.
"And the Croats would have also had a stringer chance..."
The Croats barely had an army during WWII. They couldn't possibly do anything against anybody.
"So the Fascists would have a advantage in the alps and also in the Balkens pushing the Soviets back to Poland-Belorussia and Moldova."
With what army? Like I said earlier, Germany was heavily outnumbered by the Soviets. They were low on supplies and the German army barely had any tanks/planes left. These are once again, empty words.
"So Vichy soldiers would have supported the Fascists in France and Fascists also drafted citizens in occupied nations so the US and Other western nations not invading and Soviets on Germany's front door the Fascists would have drafted far more French,Belgian, and Dutch soldiers."
Vichy France was nothing during WWII. Many of the French soldiers who fought alongside German forces didn't even have a wish to fight against the allies. This argument makes no sense. Vichy France could not possibly have effected the outcome of the war by 1944.
I don't think there is any reasons for me to reply to any more of Con's arguments considering the fact that Con did not bother to reply to any of mine. I shall therefore conclude.
I proved that by 1944, Germany was all but defeated. They no longer had sufficient tanks/planes left. The Soviet Union was outproducing Germany by at least 3:1. My opponent replied to my arguments by stating that if the Western Allies had not invaded France, Hitler would have gone to France and continued the war from there. Con did not say anything about how he would do this. Also, I showed that the German population was not in France, but in Germany. Con also made the mistake of assuming that D-Day took place in Italy as well as France. I'm not sure where Con learned his history, but here is a source that proves that what Con is assuming is compltely incorrect.
My opponent did not prove that Germy had a chance of winning the war by 1944. I, on the other hand, showed how Germany was heavily outnumbered and could barely produce sufficient material to keep its army fed. By 1944, Germany was down to boys and old men. Germany no longer had any chances of winning the war and that is the reason that D-Day had no effect on the outcome of the war.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.