Did Germany come closer to "winning" WW1 or WW2?

Is it not all a bit academic - as our cricket umpire used to say, if you want to know the decision look in the score book. Brian

 

You're right, this isn't a debate. I'm simply asking for a source out of personal interest. "Information sharing" typically means sharing information, not sharing "something I heard over the past 43 years".

But very well then, I'll leave it.

By the way, you'll never guess who I saw at the Walmart the other day working beside Elvis at the cash register. His name starts with a "A" and ends in a "dolf Hitler".... . Take my word for it....

 

Or did they? End in better shape that is. In the long run Germany turned out pretty good after World War 2. ( I am of course referring to the economic hub that they are today. Same with Japan).

 

I wasn't arguing with you. I had never heard about it and wanted to learn more about it. I was wondering what the Americans in France would do if the French surrendered

 

From memory it was to do with reinforcements yet to be committed, and the German high command preferring to surrender in France rather than what they thought would be Germany...However, statement retracted...That should satisfy everyone.

 

So Bruce Willis wasn't the one who arrived two weeks early and saved the allies ? All this debate for nothing :headbonk:

 

Now if you had said Oct 1917, I would have agreed.

The "Milner boys" who had great influence (Lord Lothian was one - Ambassador to the USA in 1940 and friend of Halifax) were pushing for a peace settlement with Germany which would leave them with an Eastern Empire (no use to us old boys) and hobble the Russian Bear\Soviet.

The Germans never believed that they finally had France on the rack but they did - although the numbers of actual mutineers was only in the tens of thousands, Petain stated that he only had two Divisions which could be relied on.

If Michael and the other Germans Offences had been launched at this date and made significant gains, there is a chance that the Allies would settle for a reasonable peace treaty.

 

If you make a rather exceptional claim and this qualifies you should be able to at least explain the logic or sources. It sounds like non of the rest of us have come across this so a request for sources is perfectly justified. Since this is a historical discussion the lack of any sources means that this is a completly unsupported opinion on your part and give the situation at the time very questionable. Thus your statment with is essentially worthless. This is especially true without any time frame.