Michael, the issue is not whether Hitler fantasized about being dictator of the world, as I'm sure many politicians do at times, but whether he had the power to act on it, and the realistic intention that might have proceeded from that power. He needed pretexts to mobilize the nation to war just as much as our government does, and his pretext in Czechoslovakia and Poland was to liberate German majorities from non-German rule. He even went to the trouble of sending agents provocateurs into Sudetenland to stage a rebellion, so the Czech government's response could make invasion seem to Germans as urgent as the NATO invasion of Yugoslavia seemed to many Americans.

If he shared your fantasy, then the Allied invasion was his dream come true, an excuse to conduct war against anyone he chose. Nothing else could have justified the kind of aggression you suggest he had in mind. But the article makes it clear that he was not inclined in that direction, and if the Allies had not invaded 6 million Jews and 40 million others might well have been spared. Naturally the governments which chose to invade claimed afterward that many more millions would have died if they hadn't, but their opinion on the matter is extremely biased, especially in light of their conviction of the Nazi leaders to death for the crime of aggressive war.

Contrary to your assertion, my head is not thick. I'm an extremely thoughtful person, one who debates issues rather than casting schoolyard insults, and one who questions the government's story any time they tell me they need to kill people, especially when those people have oil or other resources desired by the wealthy who control government. I'm relieved to hear that you at least don't believe the Allied governments acted out of their love for the Jews. But I suspect that you think that's all changed now, and that love has blossomed and become the secret motivation for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the coming war in Iran. Is that true?