I know that's a popular talking point, but I’d think that the “war advances technology more than peacetime” narrative is compromised by the deaths of so many potential scientists, engineers, technicians, and other would-be innovators during wartime. A hell of a lot of money and economic productivity is also poured into waging wars rather than R&D ventures, not to mention how people’s priorities are elsewhere when they're managing refugee crises or rebuilding their rubble-ridden countries, rather than earning their PhDs or becoming the next Alexander Graham Bell, when so much of their infrastructure has been shelled or bombed into oblivion.No World Wars? Bloodier WW?
Besides, just because a technology was invented under a specific circumstance IOTL, doesn't mean it couldn't have been invented under a different one IATL. In fact, there may be cases where technologies that had roots in wartime applications are invented under more peaceful circumstances for civilian use, so I think it’s presumptuous to simply assume that radar or what have you couldn’t have arisen in a "No World Wars" world, for example (though it may go by a different name, despite essentially being the same thing).