You misread what he said.
He said of Britain itself is overrun or starved out, then he would rely on the New world.
However he also said he didn't anticipate Britain being overran or starved out.
I know he was willing to leave the British Empire alone, but give up all the occupied countries? I'd appreciate a source for that.
Atom bombs were expensive. Also much harder to get planes flying over land and avoid anti-aircraft guns and the local air force than if you send a plane from sea. Or so I imagine. Anyways, the British wouldn't be able to make a bomb in their own, if only because they were rather busy at the time and had other priorities. And the Germans invaded the Soviets for the food as well. Also probably helped cover up the embarrassment of not beating the British yet, though it wouldn't be a prime reason. I actually read somewhere that Hitler declared war on the US partially because it meant he could give a grand speech instead of talking about the failed expectations on the Eastern Front. Again, not a prime motive. It still helps us to look into people's mindsets.
I believe Mikestone8 is correct - the British were willing to talk, but Churchill expressed an opinion that any offers from Hitler after recent victories would probably not be reasonable. I understand there were tentative semi-formal feelers being extended in Sweden when Churchill publically declared the battle for Britain had commenced (technically ahead of time). Curiously after the war, the British initially sought to suppress the fact compromise was contemplated.Hitler basically made that proposal. He did actually make some EXTREMELY generous peace overtures to the British, but their position in July 1940 was there would be absolutely no negotiation with Hitler AT ALL.
Curiously after the war, the British initially sought to suppress the fact compromise was contemplated.
Here is one from Martin Allen. The Hitler Hess Deception. These were Hitler's terms in 1940.
"1-The British Empire retains all its Colonies and delegations 2- The fundamentals of Germany's continental sphere of interest must be recognized 3- All questions concerning the Mediterranean and its French, Belgian and Dutch colonies are open to discussion 4- Poland. A Polish state must exist 5- The former Czechos(slovakian) state will remain independent but under German protection"
It says it was assumed in this Germany would evacuate Western Europe.
This is VERY questionable to me in retrospect
Even before war's end, 1940 was becoming part of the national mythos - an important chapter in Our Island Story. Lots of important people, from the King downward, would have been very unwilling to have any rain on that parade.
Or alternatively, there is no grand conspiracy and things are just as they are known to be.
Who said anything about conspiracy?
Well, the post you were replying to mentioned "suppressing the facts". I read that as something that could be described as a "conspiracy", but then again English is not my mother tongue and I made interpretation mistakes on occasion.
I believe Mikestone8 is correct - the British were willing to talk, but Churchill expressed an opinion that any offers from Hitler after recent victories would probably not be reasonable. I understand there were tentative semi-formal feelers being extended in Sweden when Churchill publically declared the battle for Britain had commenced (technically ahead of time). Curiously after the war, the British initially sought to suppress the fact compromise was contemplated.
Wow. I like the definition given in a review about this book: Allen is "a distinguished exponent of the 'it is reasonable to assume' school of historical analysis".
That said, let's accept the above at face value, and scan it, not in order:
1. Well, yes. The Germans have the Channel Islands, so they are generously ready to give those back and not to demand anything they do not have and do not have the means to get to.
(i) The world to be divided into two economic spheres, one continental, organized by Germany; the other maritime and colonial, organized by the British Empire. (ii) The political independence of the European countries occupied by Germany to be restored, including 'a Polish State' but not including Czechoslovakia. The economic division of Europe, however, was to be brought to an end. (iii) The British Empire to retain all its colonies and such mandates as were needed for its political and military interests; Germany possibly receiving compensation elsewhere. (iv) Questions concerning the Mediterranean, Egypt and the French Belgian, and Dutch colonies to be open to discussion.
3. The Belgian and Dutch had no Mediterranean colonies. Somebody is making a crass mistake here. We have to conclude they're talking about colonies in general, at least the African ones, or maybe even farther afield. Now, if these are "open to discussion", and considering the Germans had no boots on the ground there, not to mention any ability to ever have any, what can this mean, if not that the Germans will have some demand on these? Demands that as of now they are not willing to set forth clearly?
5. Independent but under German "protection" is a contradiction in terms - very obviously. Note the place is already called the Protektorat - which means the Germans want things to continue as they are.
4. Given the above, what can we expect about the Polish state? My guess is an "independent but under German protection" puppet.
(no number) So it says there, in that fancy book, that it is assumed the Germans will withdraw from Western Europe. But they don't seem to say so, eh. What if, once the talks have begun, the Germans say, "Oh, BTW, we'll keep Alsace-Lorraine, Luxembourg, and a border swath of Belgium"?
2. Saving the key for last. The Germans want their sphere of influence, spanning the whole continent, recognized as such. That means, firstly, that if the Germans want to buy Danish cheese, Belgian uranium, Norwegian fish, Swedish iron etc. at 60% of the fair international trade price, and pay for it in five years, the aforementioned countries aren't allowed to look for a better buyer. Secondly, it means no interference in the planned conquest of the Lebensraum in the Soviet Union.
So the questions are:
- under what parameters are these starting terms "generous"? Yes, the Germans should withdraw from entire countries they have conquered; in exchange however they seem to want their colonies, and they certainly want to transform all or most of those countries into subservient satellites. They will also generously not demand things they have not laid their hands on. Oh well.
- why should the British accede to this? It's not just a war-frenzied oddball, Churchill, who would be against this. Any British Foreign Secretary in the past several centuries would tell you that it's not British policy to accept one power to have hegemony over the whole of Europe, for pretty solid and unchanging reasons. If someone else, say Halifax or Hoare or who-have-you, should accept to even just discuss this, he would be the oddball, not Churchill for not considering it.
You bet.
Look here at this under Edin Predicts Nazi Peace Offer, it describes how it was the position of the British government to never negotiate with Hitler. Where did you read these things?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?dat=19410705&hl=en&id=iJRaAAAAIBAJ&nid=860&pg=3423,2777027&sjid=FEsDAAAAIBAJ
This would necessarily mean these countries were not politically independent.
I was aware of the Amazon reviews.
The British were in no position to ask Germany to surrender continental Europe. None. At all.
No where does it say that the Western Europe will be a satellite of Germany, they say the opposite if anything.
This did NOT result in German hegemony over Europe, ...
You said
That means, firstly, that if the Germans want to buy Danish cheese, Belgian uranium, Norwegian fish, Swedish iron etc. at 60% of the fair international trade price, and pay for it in five years, the aforementioned countries aren't allowed to look for a better buyer.
This would necessarily mean these countries were not politically independent. It means that the Germans still have Vichy France and the occupied territories, and the economic exploitation that entails, which very clearly is not what the Nazis were purportedly saying in these texts