Allied Military Strategy In WW II Case Analysis

Allied military strategy in WW II had changed since the battles of WW I and faced new challenges that required coordination and cooperation on levels never seen before. This paper will discuss identifying the strategic problems, differences in the types of strategy to employ, cohesion between land, sea, and now airpower, and how those decisions were accomplished.
Eikmeier gives four basic questions that must be answered to frame strategic problems. The first question, “what is the current state or environment,” is critical in identifying as many factors as you can that will affect the outcome. Stark gives his assessment of the situation in the Western Hemisphere with expansion of Germany and their allies. Stark focuses on the importance of Britain defeating Germany as a necessity for US victories in the World War. Stark explains the current state of the US Navy which lays the ground work for the development of requirements to meet the needs of the war. Wedemeyer uses the requirement of securing the Western Hemisphere for determining the size Army and Air Corps needed to assist Britain in defeating Germany and Italy in Europe and North Africa. These assessments provide leaders the information needed to have a clear
The Allied Naval strategy favored Corbett in application of forces to establish “command of the sea.” Corbett’s definition of command of the sea details the importance of controlling the lines of communication rather than the conquest of territory. The use of naval power to provide blockades and defense of supply lines was outlined by Stark in his “Plan Dog Memo.” The land forces were reliant upon the Navy for movement across the Mediterranean as the Allied advanced moved from North Africa. The D-day assault of beach positions, and transport of the massive Army formations, demonstrated the power of the Navy to command the