Poll: Most significant death of WWII?

[evangilder]

There are a lot of what ifs in this. What if that British soldier had shot that wounded German corporal toward the end of WWI?

 

[cherry blossom]

wqually, if O'Connor had not been captured, the British may have been able to re-organise their armoured forces in the desert more quickly and neutralised Rommels brilliance more quickly
..snip......

If we are extending this from deaths to removal from the action, we might consider Yoshida Zengo. If he had remained healthy and had continued to block the Tripartite Pact, probably the Cabinet would have had to resign to remove him. They might have done that but, after just a month delay, it would have become clear that the Germans had failed in the Battle of Britain and that the USA was becoming more committed to helping Britain. Thus it is possible that the IJN and the Emperor, assuming that his spine had developed slightly, might block the pact (the Emperor's spine could sometimes be strengthened by personal dislike. He certainly disliked Shiratori Toshio, the ambassador to Italy, who was one advocate of the pact). No Tripartite Pact might have almost no influence on events or might leave the Burma Road closed and better relations between Japan and the Anglo-American Alliance.

 

[Hansie Bloeckmann]

There are a lot of what ifs in this. What if that British soldier had shot that wounded German corporal toward the end of WWI?

What if Hermann Goering had died from his stomach wound suffered at the BrauHof Putsch? What if Oberst Graf von Stauffenberg had decided to just detonate the bomb in the briefcase while he was standing next to Hitler? What if the Allies had decided to bomb to smithereens Auschwitz and the other Totenslagers in Poland? And my all-time favorite from WW11 history- What if Patton had restrained his temper tantrums and NOT slapped the two soldiers in field hospitals in Sicily? ?? like these, hypothetical of course, are, to my mind, the most fascinating part of World History, especially the WW11 era.

 

[Hansie Bloeckmann]

Though the war was over when Hitler comiitted suicide, if he had chosen to leave Berlin and hole up in the Alps somewhere, the war might have gone on for some weeks or months longer.....if he had tried to disappear to Sth America or somewhere, the world would still be full of rumours and nutbags trying to glanourize him. So IMO the death of Hitler was still the most significant death of the war.

An interesting what if is if Hitler had been captured.......would the Nurnberg trial still have proceeded????

Yes, I think it would have. Too many other SS henchmen had blood on their hands--and common decency demanded that they be tried, and if convicted of was crimes (Oberst Joachim Piper and his SS Panzers and the shooting of surrendering and un-armed American troops at Malmedey (sic) is a prime example of a war crime in the ETO.. The whole world, not just the European nations that Hitler laid to waste, would have wanted to see him hanged to his death.

 

[*SkyChimp*]

None of the above.

Franciszek Honiok.

 

[pbehn]

The poll is closed but my vote would be for Rooseveldt, I presume he had a vision and a plan for the world post WW2 but we never got to see it.

Strangest death would be Neville Chamberlain, the man who had such a part in the build up to WW2 and the declaration was dead six months after Churchill took over and his death hardly noted. Still reviled in history those who criticise him find it hard to say what else he could have done.

 

[pinehilljoe]

I vote for FDR, the outcome of the War was decided when he passed, the Post-War World would have been different with FDR, no telling how. I don't think there would have been any question of dropping the bomb. A weapon that could end years of unimaginable killing was going to be used.

I think if Yamamoto had lived, the War may have been even shorter. History isn't kind to his strategic and tactical decisions.

 

[Conslaw]

I also think Roosevelt's death had the most effect. Not on the war, but the world after the war. Roosevelt had a working relationship with the USSR. He or his heir-apparent, Henry Wallace, could have steered us away from the worst of the Cold War. See Oliver Stone's "Peoples' History of the United States". It has its flaws, but on this point, I think Stone is correct.

 

[michaelmaltby]

".. heir-apparent, Henry Wallace, could have steered us away from the worst of the Cold War."
Wallace: The best secretary of agriculture the US has ever had ... but .... a flaming communist ... and definitely not FDR's heir apparent in the final FDR campaign.
FDR's "working relationship" meant one thing to him and quite another thing to Stalin ... as Churchill well knew. And by Yalta, FDR was failing in all faculties.