WWII trivia/opinion - biggest contribution.

[miko2d]

Which person on the allied side made the biggest contribution to victory on the allied side in the WWII?

 I am not talking about obvious choices like Churchill, Stalin, Zhukov, nuclear scientists, etc. - any one of those occupied a slot which would have been filled by a person of comparable talents anyway. I am asking about unique, individual contribution that made a major difference that would not have ever happened if that particular person would not have been around.

 I have my opinion which I will post later.

==============================================
 That was fast,

Bingo!
 And the prize goes to Regurge.

 Alan Turing was a genius personally responcible for breaking the german Enigma codes.
 That is what won the war of Athlantic which contributed greatly to Britain's and Russia's ability to conduct the war by allowing the convoys to get throug german's volfpacks - among other things.
 That is what allowed allies to conduct D-Day offencive knowing where germans did not expect it.
 That is what allowed success of many major allied operations and disruption of german operations of which we may never know. Allies were carefull to credit the success to other causes (radars, etc.) where they just knew what was coming in advance - just to prevent germans from guessing they had the codes.

 Even if victory could happen without his contributions, the lives he saved are counted in tens of millions.

 He is also the father of modern computing and contributor to several other sciences.

 BTW, he was convicted of "gross indecency" because at that time homosexuality was considered a crime in Great Britain. He was sentenced to massive hormone treatment in lieu of jail term.
 In fact as a convicted criminal and known homosexual he had become ineligible for security clearance. He was eventually driven to suicide in 1954 at age of 41.

 miko

[narsus]

Patton in ETO - Germans definately respected him and moving him around after getting in trouble and the Germans guessing.

Halsey in PTO - One balls to the walls sailor

Doolittle in PTO - Tying down many Japanese fighters in the homeland.

Zhukov in ETO - Sorry but had to mention him

Sorry for sp. mistakes if any rushing to complete post and get back to work

[Kratzer]

Reginald Mitchell certainly made quite a contribution... but single greatest? That's impossible to call...

[Hortlund]

Hitler

Those brainy "not a single step back, defend to the last bullet" -orders, combined with the *brilliant* counterattacks at Kursk, Falaise, The Ardennes, Hungary etc etc sure gave Germany the upper hand in the strategic sceme...not

Combine the above with lots of small flashes of genius...such as "I want bomb racks on that jet fighter", "Halt before you get to the beach at Dunquirk", "Lets declare war on the us just because Japan did" or "We have certainly won the war now, switch production back to preacetime priorities"-in 1940 <-- my favourite...one month in 1940, cant remember which one, there were more pianos produced than the combined number of fighters and bombers...

Id say he is the given winner...

[babek-]

Churchill.

[Nifty]

I concur with it being impossible to call.  All mentioned so far had a good deal to do with the outcome.  

Hitler would have been my pick though.  The war was fought on too many fronts.  He should have pressed England OR USSR, not both simultaneously, and definitely not USSR in the winter.  

[Curval]

It wasn't one person....it was the whole of the British Isles....civilians and military.

Without them holding on the Second World War would have been a very different kettle of fish!!

[Regurge]

Alan Turing

He designed the computers that rapidly decoded Enigma messages. Pretty huge individual contribution and pretty irreplaceable.

[midnight Target]

The guy who invented the British radar.

[miko2d]

OK, guys, I did not think you would be citing Hitler, so I specifically did not mention that only allies are subject to the post. I made a correction to that effect.

 Narsus - the fact that you named so many is a clear indication that none of them can confidently be named the one. Each one of the people you've mentioned was great, but it would be indication of their and their countries failure if they could not be replaced with a capable subordinate.
 There are many more smart people then top positions. Capabilities are not always the guaranteed way to advance, even if they could be clearly defined. Many generals had more capable persons as their subordinate officers which they freely admit.

 Churchill was responcible for his country getting in and staying in war despite Hitlers peace offerings (like letting brits at Dunkirk to evacuate), not for personally bringing victory throuh some mighty feat. I read memoirs of a celebrated brit general who had very low opinion of Churchills involvement in military metters.

 Curval - that is not a trick question and it deserves real answer.
 If you think that a nation wins a war because it is "worthy" of winning a war, that is fine. Many geniuses in history believed that to be true - Chengis Khan, Napoleon and Hitler foremost among them. But that is not an answer to the question I posed.

 It is a specific question about an individual that has specific and instructive answer.
 I bet that if the previous US administration knew the answer they would likely have conducted a different policy in some matters which could have affected us all greatly.

 miko

[Charon]

I would still have to say Churchill for providing the initial backbone of the British people after some shocking setbacks. There might have been others who could have filled his spot administratively, but he almost single-handedly changed the attitude of the British people at a very low point (post battle of France) and prevented a settled peace -- which was a definite possibility.

Some writers/historians would say a settled peace was a probability without Churchill saying (in so many stirring ways): This is unacceptable, never will be acceptable, and we will not allow it to come to pass. A settled peace in 1939 or 1940 would have been a disaster of unimaginable proportions for the free world.

Beyonf Churchill, I would have a hard time finding any individual contribution as being overwhelmingly significant -- from the combat engineer with the bazooka that slowed down the Greman thrust at the Buldge, to Enistein pushing for the bomb, to Patton.

[edit: on seeing your above reply, posted while I was posting mine, I assume you're looking for a more "hands on" action on the battlefield or lab, etc.?]

Charon

[miko2d]

Bingo!
 And the prize goes to Regurge.

 Alan Turing was a genius personally responcible for breaking the german Enigma codes.
 That is what won the war of Athlantic which contributed greatly to Britain's and Russia's ability to conduct the war by allowing the convoys to get throug german's volfpacks - among other things.
 That is what allowed allies to conduct D-Day offencive knowing where germans did not expect it.
 That is what allowed success of many major allied operations and disruption of german operations of which we may never know. Allies were carefull to credit the success to other causes (radars, etc.) where they just knew what was coming in advance - just to prevent germans from guessing they had the codes.

 Even if victory could happen without his contributions, the lives he saved are counted in tens of millions.

 He is also the father of modern computing and contributor to several other sciences.

 BTW, he was convicted of "gross indecency" because at that time homosexuality was considered a crime in Great Britain. He was sentenced to massive hormone treatment in lieu of jail term.
 In fact as a convicted criminal and known homosexual he had become ineligible for security clearance. He was eventually driven to suicide in 1954 at age of 41.

 miko

[Curval]

Originally posted by miko2d

 Curval - that is not a trick question and it deserves more then a BS answer.
 If you think that a nation wins a war because it is "worthy" of winning a war, that is fine. Many geniuses in history believed that to be true - Chengis Khan, Napoleon and Hitler foremost among them. But that is not an answer to the question I posed.

  miko

I do not view my response as a BS answer!

I did not view the British Isles as merely "WORTHY" of victory...

The whole nature of the second world war would have been different had the British Isles been defeated early in the war!  The whole county mobilised themselves to fight off Hitler and his cronies while the US sat and watched...although they did supply life saving resourses.

D-day would have been different had Britain fallen, don't you think?  It was complicated enough just crossing the channel, let alone an Atlantic crossing!

Supplies would have never reached Russia without having Britain as a base of operations.

etc, etc

I appeciate the fact that you asked for an individual and I didn't give you one...but, that is the ONLY fault you should find in what I said.


I'm interested to see who you found to be that individual..

[miko2d]

Sorry, Curval.
 It's just that I was so sensitized by "the soviet people are the best peope" that any reference to any people being more worthy then other one is likely to trigger a reaction.

 I guess I overreacted. I will remove the BS reference.

 miko

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by miko2d
OK, guys, I did not think you would be citing Hitler, so I specifically did not mention that only allies are subject to the post. I made a correction to that effect.

Thanks..now my post doesnt look stupid at all.

"Who is that guy who thinks Hitler was on the allied side"

ah well