Jump to content


Most important person in the Allied victory?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
114 replies to this topic

Chieftain WGA #81 Posted 04 August 2015 - 11:09 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 4 battles
  • 246
  • Member since:
    06-28-2013

Bill Knudsen.

 

[/thread]


 

Pretty much nobody else mentioned could have done what they did without him.



GroomingChief65 #82 Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:28 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10524 battles
  • 478
  • Member since:
    05-17-2014
I would have to vote for Churchill as I see the successful evacuation of Dunkirk was a big moment where maybe everything hung in the balance timing-wise. If Hitler doesn't halt there and show them mercy but instead just charged ahead to invade then I can't see the British holding together at that time,  If Germany takes Britain then it's a single front war with Russia, that's a huge change in the dynamics of the war as initially even with Hitler holding back a lot of forces Stalin was in a panic as the Germans were rolling. Germany likely gets it done against Russia on a single front war then goes on to join up with the Japanese in a possible invasion of the US.

Edited by GroomingChief65, 05 August 2015 - 01:29 AM.


DStegCat #83 Posted 05 August 2015 - 06:11 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25012 battles
  • 2,031
  • [BACON]
  • Member since:
    05-24-2014

Learned something.  Thanks.  Bill Knudsen is a cool read.

No doubt the man leading the most powerful industrial machine has an incredible impact.  It truly is incredible the output sent world wide for the war effort from the U.S.A.


nam et ipsa scientia potestas est (for knowledge is itself power)  Francis Bacon - 1597

More Bacon


Ace Man 7 Delta #84 Posted 05 August 2015 - 07:50 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostChieftain WGA, on 04 August 2015 - 06:09 PM, said:

Bill Knudsen.

 

[/thread]


 

Pretty much nobody else mentioned could have done what they did without him.

 

Yes the man who turned GM into a military production power house. That's a good one.. 

But I'm going to try to 1 up you with your own logic and go with Henry John Kaiser.. Another industrial giant..  Without him all of that fancy new equipment would have sat in port somewhere. And the arsenal of democracy would have ground to a halt.

 

A plus 1 to you sir.  Most people don't think about all the people behind the the war effort.


"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

WidowMaker1711 #85 Posted 05 August 2015 - 08:13 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostAce Man 7 Delta, on 05 August 2015 - 07:50 PM, said:

 

Yes the man who turned GM into a military production power house. That's a good one.. 

But I'm going to try to 1 up you with your own logic and go with Henry John Kaiser.. Another industrial giant..  Without him all of that fancy new equipment would have sat in port somewhere. And the arsenal of democracy would have ground to a halt.

 

 

Lord Beaverbrook. 


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


Sqn Ldr B #86 Posted 05 August 2015 - 08:45 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 6141 battles
  • 18,352
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014
Still think its Churchill. That man was one of the main reasons (aside from Pearl Harbour obviously) that the USA entered the war. He personally went to the US several times during 1940-41, even when his own country was in peril. That shows some commitment. He tried a lot of things to get the US to join in. He even offered to give the Americans the original Magna Carta to get them to help us out. Then there's the story where Churchill ''exhibited himself naked'' to Roosevelt because ''The British Prime Minister has nothing to hide from the American President''. :confused:

Edited by Sqn Ldr B, 05 August 2015 - 08:46 PM.

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life" ~ Cecil Rhodes

Click For a Compilation of My Ideas


Ace Man 7 Delta #87 Posted 05 August 2015 - 08:45 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostWidowMaker1711, on 05 August 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

 

Lord Beaverbrook. 

 

The father of modern journalism.  And a huge allied asset during both world wars.

  

A plus 1 to you too sir.  Most don't think about all the people behind the the war effort. 
 
The reason I said Henry Kaiser is because of him taking a huge risk.. The lend lease agreement was possible and kept Britain fighting on against the Axis powers.  
Britain was fighting alone and all over the world and keeping the european theater open was key to stopping the Axis.. 

"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

WidowMaker1711 #88 Posted 05 August 2015 - 08:55 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostAce Man 7 Delta, on 05 August 2015 - 08:45 PM, said:

 

The father of modern journalism.  And a huge allied asset during both world wars.

  

A plus 1 to you too sir.  Most don't think about all the people behind the the war effort. 
 
The reason I said Henry Kaiser is because of him taking a huge risk.. The lend lease agreement was possible and kept Britain fighting on against the Axis powers.  
Britain was fighting alone and all over the world and keeping the european theater open was key to stopping the Axis.. 

 

Dont forget his move to Minister for Aircraft Production then Minister of Supply and finally Minister of War Production

 

But then the Germans had Albert Speer


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


Ace Man 7 Delta #89 Posted 05 August 2015 - 09:02 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostSqn Ldr B, on 05 August 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

Still think its Churchill. That man was one of the main reasons (aside from Pearl Harbour obviously) that the USA entered the war. He personally went to the US several times during 1940-41, even when his own country was in peril. That shows some commitment. He tried a lot of things to get the US to join in. He even offered to give the Americans the original Magna Carta to get them to help us out. Then there's the story where Churchill ''exhibited himself naked'' to Roosevelt because ''The British Prime Minister has nothing to hide from the American President''. :confused:

 

You could say Roosevelt was just as import in that role..  Old Teddy had to fight tooth and nail with the congress and the house just to get the lend lease agreement started..  Roosevelt was one of the very few people who could see the writing on the wall about the on going war in europe. And took every step he could to ramp up the U.S. war effort before the Pearl Harbor attack.  
"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

Ace Man 7 Delta #90 Posted 05 August 2015 - 09:42 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostWidowMaker1711, on 05 August 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

 

Dont forget his move to Minister for Aircraft Production then Minister of Supply and finally Minister of War Production

 

But then the Germans had Albert Speer

 

I'm still going to go with Henry Kaiser because he gambled his company, his reputation and his own personal financial wealth on the " liberty ships"  Bill Knudson was guaranteed by the U.S. government and Lord Beaverbrook was appointed to office.

If Henry Kaiser failed he would have lost his entire fortune. And the liberty ships were one of the key reasons the allied shipping never stopped during the war.

 


"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

WidowMaker1711 #91 Posted 05 August 2015 - 09:51 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostAce Man 7 Delta, on 05 August 2015 - 09:42 PM, said:

 

I'm still going to go with Henry Kaiser because he gambled his company, his reputation and his own personal financial wealth on the " liberty ships"  Bill Knudson was guaranteed by the U.S. government and Lord Beaverbrook was appointed to office.

If Henry Kaiser failed he would have lost his entire fortune. And the liberty ships were one of the key reasons the allied shipping never stopped during the war.

 

I still rate both Beaverbrook and Speer highly. When their respective countries were being bombed to dust they still managed to keep production rates up to replace what was being lost and then have reserves. Not going to take away from Kaiser and Knudsen tho. All those men were in the right place at the right time with the right personality


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


Ace Man 7 Delta #92 Posted 05 August 2015 - 09:59 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostWidowMaker1711, on 05 August 2015 - 04:51 PM, said:

 

I still rate both Beaverbrook and Speer highly. When their respective countries were being bombed to dust they still managed to keep production rates up to replace what was being lost and then have reserves. Not going to take away from Kaiser and Knudsen tho. All those men were in the right place at the right time with the right personality

 

Assuming the allies would have won the war Knudson and Beaverbrook would have been fine if they had failed. 
Kaiser on the other hand would have been living in a cardboard box somewhere mumbling "liberty ships" over and over..  And I think that was Speer's job during the war. Mumbling the words "liberty ships" over and over.
This is just my own personal opinion..  There are lots of names here that were all crucial to the war effort.

"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

IBROX 04 #93 Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:09 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20712 battles
  • 9,808
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    11-10-2014

Most important person in the Allied victory - Hitler appointing himself as commander of the OKH 

 


Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm

 

 

 


Ace Man 7 Delta #94 Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:14 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostROBYNHO MILANO, on 05 August 2015 - 05:09 PM, said:

Most important person in the Allied victory - Hitler appointing himself as commander of the OKH 

 

 

LOL Yes he was a very important part in the allied victory..  If he would have stayed out of the way who knows what could of happend. 
 
Plus 1 to you for making me laugh.. 

"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

IBROX 04 #95 Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:21 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20712 battles
  • 9,808
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    11-10-2014

View PostAce Man 7 Delta, on 05 August 2015 - 10:14 PM, said:

 

LOL Yes he was a very important part in the allied victory..  If he would have stayed out of the way who knows what could of happend. 
 
Plus 1 to you for making me laugh.. 

 

you need to read history books 

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm

 

 

 


Ace Man 7 Delta #96 Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:41 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4353 battles
  • 761
  • Member since:
    08-14-2013

View PostROBYNHO MILANO, on 05 August 2015 - 05:21 PM, said:

 

you need to read history books 

 

Yeaaaaa right.. And you need to read the whole thread before you just make a commet. Ok thanks for the advice..  LOL i'll try that sometime.. Look up at my posts I have no idea how I came up with all of that.  Maybee just a lucky guess.. 
 
I was laughing because it's kinda the truth.. Not because it's wrong.. 
 

"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds"
 J. Robert Oppenheimer, Trinity 1945
 

GroomingChief65 #97 Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:16 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10524 battles
  • 478
  • Member since:
    05-17-2014
If the Brits don't hold out and Churchill gave in to what Hitler was hopeful of post-Dunkirk i.e. to just cut an agreement ensuring him a single-front war before he turned Eastward then US war production is a non-factor except in the Pacific theater IMO. Without Churchill I don't see a Normandy invasion, and without that Hitler sits in 'fortress Europe' looking East. Of course later in the war there are all kinds of other factors which start to be fallout from the dual front war, inability of Germany to take Russia rapidly enough, the vastness of the territory, the bitter winters,, 20 million dead Russians get the credit and probably many miscalculations by Hitler along the way -- but then again hindsight is 20/20 for the armchair generals. I for one don't see where having a lot of M4 Sherman's sitting around was a factor until a certain point well into the war, I see the outcome of the war as more due to the timing of some key events. A couple of differences here and there and we could have seen a different result. That's hard to believe by the end of the war when Germany was routed and Japan got the bomb dropped on it. The US invading Japan would've been a bloodbath as the Japanese were pledging fight to the death, I have no confidence things turn out well without the bomb. The US fought well but the bomb literally changed everything and has to this day.    

IBROX 04 #98 Posted 06 August 2015 - 11:23 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20712 battles
  • 9,808
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    11-10-2014

churchill thought attacking italy could win him the war he called it the soft underbelly of europe, he didn't want the normandy invasion.,  


Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm

 

 

 


GroomingChief65 #99 Posted 06 August 2015 - 11:45 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10524 battles
  • 478
  • Member since:
    05-17-2014

View PostROBYNHO MILANO, on 06 August 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

churchill thought attacking italy could win him the war he called it the soft underbelly of europe, he didn't want the normandy invasion.,  

 

 

 

I don't disagree, my point really isn't one that Churchill wanted or conceived the Normandy invasion, but rather that it couldn't have happened if Churchill gave in after Dunkirk. Churchill was so steadfast even when Hitler could've charged across the channel after the evacuation and run through the Brits with a paperclip. A good article that I happen to agree with:


 

http://www.historytoday.com/patrick-wilson/dunkirk-victory-or-defeat


 

General Guderian later reflected, ‘What the future of the war would have been like if we had succeeded in taking the British Expeditionary Force prisoners at Dunkirk is now impossible to guess.’


 



IBROX 04 #100 Posted 06 August 2015 - 12:39 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20712 battles
  • 9,808
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    11-10-2014
yes i agree why did hitler halt the advance on dunkirk for 48 hours,, it was judged a bad decision, historians have been arguing about this for so long ,, 

 


Edited by ROBYNHO MILANO, 06 August 2015 - 12:40 PM.

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm

 

 

 





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users