I’m watching a documentary about D-Day and had the thought if it hasn’t been an option to invade France from the South. The allies knew that the Germans had fortified the Atlantic coast and even deployed troops from the Eastern front to the West. Frankly, I have no idea about German military presence in the South of France, but I doubt that it was comparable to the 1.3 millions at the Atlantic (I learned that figure from the documentary I’m watching). The biggest argument for the invasion from the North is certainly the fact that the troops could be quite easily gathered in England. But the allies had invaded Italy in 1943 from North Africa with sufficient troops too somehow. I also think that the terrain at the Mediterranean coast is usually much easier for an invasion than the Atlantic coast. I’m sure I’m missing crucial points, but is my idea really totally wacky?
Just to be clear, does Operation Dragoon not count?
They did invade southern France in Operation Dragoon, although after D-Day.
As with Italy, it would have taken much longer to reach Germany if the D-Day landings hadn’t taken place.
They considered it so much they did it on 15th August 1944. 
Operation Dragoon. So it happened.
However there are a variety of reasons, mostly geographic, why going in from the south made little sense as the main avenue of attack. Most of the important stuff - like Paris, the low countries, the main river crossings to industrial Germany and the like were on the other side of the Massif Central. No point in slugging through that when the Atlantic coast was a far, far, FAR more direct route.
A rare triple-simulpost, there.
Edit: Quadpost!
Quad!
It could have been a quintipost, but I previewed and realized I was way behind the invading army of ninjas.
Well now I’m embarrassed, I somehow never heard about Operation Dragoon. And of course I considered the smaller distance to important targets (and the German mainland) from the Atlantic coast, but somehow thought that the smaller resistance by Germany in the South would’ve made up for that. But the fact that the South was invaded in a somewhat coordinated operation with Overlord makes those points, well, pointless.
Interesting to notice that the ones who I would consider as real ninjas, took part in the Champagne Campaign.
It’s not really all that well-known, to be honest. The landings were very successful, with relatively few casualties, and the clearing out of the German garrisons in the southern French cities similarly so. If you are ever forced to pick a WWII beach assault to go back in time and participate in, then Dragoon is the one I reckon.
442nd Lt and MOH winner, the late Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii is a hero for all time.
Many of the French soldiers in Dragoon were from the French colonies of Algeria and Morocco
A French film, Days of Glory, about these soldiers and they challenges they faced is well worth watching.
Ooh, I’ve never heard of this, and it’s only a couple of quid to watch on Amazon. Thanks!
Operation Dragoon type thing was seriously considered in ‘43. But
- In ‘43 sufficient landing crafts did not exist, and the first major shortage of troops had started. Italy was a simpler operation, in theory at least.
- The build up of troops was just getting under way.
- The Allies, as alluded to above, felt that they would have to attack in N France regardless.
Still, I sometimes feel that the Allies should have gone for it. The Germans in France for most of ‘43, were in abysmal condition. Most of the crack troops in France had been sent to N Africa in late ‘42 and been captured there.
Air support would have admittedly been as issue, while 4 engined heavies could easily reach, fighter support was out, and in ‘43, unlike ‘44, the Luftwaffe was pretty strong.
Still carrier a/c could have supported the landings, this happened with some regularity in the Med, for example in Operation Torch.
Just to add to the above, in 43, when the Allies went historically into mainland Italy, at Salerno, the Germans were able to quickly mobilise reserves to go and take over most of the country and then opposed the Allies for two years.
This would have been difficult in South of France since,
a. The troops historically came from Germany and E Europe, garrison troops and those undergoing refit after Russia. France is several hundred km further travel, through areas under Allied AirPower.
b. South of France would need armoured and mechanised troops, not just legs infantry, who could dig in behind cover and obstacles in a area with good defensively oriented terrain and blast attacking allied troops, see Rapido River. You would also need to bring guys from Russia, for the mechanisation.
c. Most importantly, the Germans were expecting a mainland Italy assault. They were prepped. South of France, not so much.
Yeah I remember reading a history book that stated any serious invasion of France in 1942-43 no matter how inexperienced would have probably been wildly successful due to the sheer lack of manpower and defenses in France around then. Even if the initial landings only made limited gains the Allies could have deposited exponentially more men there than the Germans could have countered with and just overwhelm the Germans with numbers.
So, there was a 1940s style Dragoon operation?
The stuff that Audie Murphy is most famous for was in the follow-up battles after Dragoon.
Murphy was one of the most decorated US soldiers in WWII. probably would have had a very different life if there wasn’t an Operation Dragoon.
One thing I’m impressed with: On June 5th, 1944 if you drove from Cherbourg to Marseille it would be entirely thru German held territory. As of September 10th, you could make the trip thru Allied held territory.
It’s worth realising that there’s the argument that Churchill thought until quite far on that the winning strategy in the West was going to be lots of separate invasions all round the margins of occupied Europe.
His worry with Normandy was that that might just bog down into a repeat of the Western Front in WWI. Hence he was always open to and advocating alternatives as a way of avoiding an “all the eggs in one basket” trap.
His critics at the time thought he was just wanting to justify Gallipoli, but Norway, southern France, Italy, Greece, the Balkans were always the sorts of ideas he was open to. In practice, it was which he could get Washington to go along with.