@AndrewTwentyman @JacobHunt3r@DawkinsReturns he was insistent because - believe it or not - he would rather a swift victory over the Reich than drain all his manpower and resources. many things could have ended differently in the war, but a Soviet victory was inevitable, therefore D Day isn’t as consequential as you say.
@AndrewTwentyman @JacobHunt3r@DawkinsReturns Andrew the battle of Stalingrad was a more than a year prior to the Normandy landings. the Nazis we’re losing to the Soviets already your getting it mixed up. it was the Russians victory in the east which was the turning point in the war - and allowed for the Normandy landings.
@y13ddo@BenHanson1989 @WilliamMBHolmes @GaryLineker ‘norman the conqueror’ ahaha what the fuck are you on about. William of Normandy was an English King and is the ancestor of the current monarch; and ‘England’ wasn’t a country when the Romans invaded. proper dim you. statues clearly aren’t educational enough, maybe read a book.
@AndrewTwentyman @JacobHunt3r@DawkinsReturns you’ve said it yourself mate. they attacked Russia and that’s why they lost. the Soviets were beating the Nazis’ well before the Normandy landings and the Reich simply couldn’t compete with them to the later stages of the war. D Day was merely to stop a complete communist Europe.
@englishwarrior9 @bbcrb it’s hardly rewriting history when the British slave trade is never taught and hardly talked about in the first place you creepy looking bald headed weapon
@AndrewTwentyman @JacobHunt3r@DawkinsReturns your wrong. the likelihood of the German Reich winning WW2 is almost zero and this isn’t because of Churchill - you might want to actually pick up a history book before spouting such shite.