Plausability question - WWII "Commando" raids into fully hostile nation

From fairly soon after Dunkirk, Churchill ordered the creation of the Commando brigades. Their exploits, successes and failures are well known, however, most of the time they operated in countries with friendly, or at least not hostile, local populace where at some basic support could have been had when needed.

However, let's say that for whatever reason country X, which has an accessible coastline to the raiding party is fully hostile to the raiding force and let's assume they are expecting, however unlikely at this point, a hostile invasion, how feasible would a raid against a fixed point without air or naval support be?

If at all? I think I have a pretty good idea of some of the obstacles they would face on infiltration, air and sea patrols while in transit, troop patrols once, (if), landed, potential discovery by local population, Murphy's intervention, etc, would it actually be worth it, even just for propaganda?
 
'Penetrating the Reich' by Perisco has some insight into this. He examines the US OSS operations in Germany & has a few hints about British ops.

On the entertainment side the 1950s movie 'Decision at Dawn' fictionalizes one of the OSS ops into Germany.
 
Not sure if the RSI counts, but wasn't there a raid into northern Italy in the last weeks of the war?
 
OK, then what you have to look at is Libya.
The Bardia raid was infiltrated by sea, but the Navy assets weren't directly committed. The outcome was more in the field of propaganda and morale, but the commandos did force valuable frontline assets to be diverted to guard the rear areas.
In December 1941, the LRDG attacked nearly simultaneously several air bases in the Axis rear, and destroyed some 130 aircraft. That's military value, a high-yield outcome in asymmetric warfare, not just propaganda.
Operation Flipper was an attempted decapitation strike, but it was a failure.
 
Top