If one prefers diplomatic circumlocutions to the hard facts of reality (perhaps a war-aim that wants merely 'to teach Germany a lesson in civics' in itself makes it cynical to exclusively blame the German people and their evil top leadership in WWII for the extermination of Jews?) then I recognize the choice of propaganda - but it changes nothing.

Apparently, the apologists of the Allied side are unfamiliar with the works of Robert Morgenthau Jr. (FDR's Treasury Secretary) outlining an official plan for the post-war elimination of Germany.

I suspect they did not know about the Soviet wartime propaganda human meatgrinder machine which was led by the Russian Jewish groups whose genocidal spokesman was Ilya Ehrenburg (in Stalin's USSR post-1937 - the only relatively intact social segment with genuine intellectual elitism and even a modicum of political autonomy [!] was the powerful Soviet Jewry - the Volga Germans also enjoyed this status until 1941 when they were exterminated by the Soviet, be it said Jewish-commanded Soviet police apparatus or NKVD - evil genii, names such as Genrikh Yagoda and Lavrenty Beria).
Given that in the USA there were powerful Jewish cross-social/cross-sectional circles - it comes as no surprise that the Bolshevik mass-murderer Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) received a tour of the USA (and its money) in 1918 (starting with Brooklyn) or that the Rosenberg couple [a tip of the iceberg in this affair] betrayed the atomic secrets to the fellow Jews of Soviet Communism.

The Jewish affinity for Communist-style, anti-nationalist ideas and associated points of view was well-known (even if rarely spoken) and it contributed to the terrible choice of Hitler as the German leader. In UK - even Winston Churchill was so afraid of this influence that he did not allow his prepared article for the press (on the Jewish question) to be published (it only just recently was discovered and published in the British press).

There is no doubt that the international Jewish nation (the only active nation of this type [it led a separate existence during the Western Middle Ages] was a 1000-year old leftover from the Arabian Civilization which was itself conceived in this way - and even today the Muslims see themselves as an international nation) and it was in fact another, unstated, party to WWII - it is just peculiar that it had its presence in all the Western-style nations at war and thus its role got subsumed or marginalized (certainly it did not appreciate attention).

The process of cultural assimilation in the Western environment has devastated the Jewish community more than any genocide because with its identity lost - it ceases to be a political player. The secular state of Israel too is not helping because by re-defining Judaism to serve its own state interests - it contradicts the essence of the historical idea of Jewry as a God-blessed trans-national entity entitled to the entire Creation and not to its part - limited to a puny little territorial pocket no matter how grandly consecrated/conceived (as 'Holy Land') the little geographic 'homeland' is - it is still more a geographic and less spiritual entity (Hassidic and some Orthodox Jews of the Aramean cast still do understand this distinction).
The fact is that had the Jews practised the Israeli idea of Jewish nationhood for the past 1900 years - they would have as people long ago gone under in the upheavals of merciless historic time.
Even back then - there was this essential rift among the Jews - the Jesus "party" was for internationalization and the Pharisee "party" was for ever narrower racist tribalism. The Romans simply and unwittingly liberated the Jewry. Ancient Jewish historian Josephus understood that.

It feels like a jejune argument - the idea that "(the Allies) wanted to decisively defeat Germany in order to preclude anything like the aftermath of WW I, in which the Germans claimed they were betrayed politically" - because, for all we know, the Germans can claim that after ANY lost war!

I doubt however that in Germany such an attitude of blame and betrayal would ever turn into a French-style sore-loser 'chauvinism'. A slow national suicide is preferrable (in the manner of the ancient Greeks who committed gradual but deliberate national suicides thanks to Hellenism and in the presence of the Romans - handing them, in effect, the "world" dominion). Thus, the Roman Empire was not really conquered - but handed over for a lack of leadership or will to rule.

One is tempted to say the same about the American "imperium" today except for the fact that it offers no genuine political leadership of the Roman kind (unless one can call 'controlled chaos' in the manner of the inner cities or Baghdad - a leadership?). It feels more like a realm of profit than a realm of respect-generating control (back in their heyday, the British were superb rulers of the world with respect of the latter).

The Allies did essentially destroy Germany by 1945, spiritually and materially - whether they intended or not.

The fact that they never had the slightest intention of helping the substantial German wartime opposition to Hitler within the country is a highest condemnation and stain on the alleged justice of the Allied cause which reveals their practical intention in plain light.

The only reason Normandy invasion was even made (despite Stalin's pleadings for help) was to ensure that Russia does not get all of Europe as its spoils of war - but only that which a future treaty would specify, depending upon how far the Western Allies advance on the ground.

I suspect that the reason Italy (a geographic dead-end easily defended) was chosen for an initial invasion of the war - is to let the bloody course of events of the war on the Eurasian mainland play itself out for as long as possible weakening both Russia and Germany.

Germany was no longer a player at this point - but a servant of the Allies' ambitions - a geopolitical football whose deranged leadership became, ipso facto, the COG of the varied and conflicting Allied ambitions, without of course realizing it.

Militarily speaking, caught in a tremendous military vice between the Anglo-American bombs and the Russian human and industrial tidal wave - Germany had no way out regardless of the Normandy attack.

As long as Hitler was in charge of Germany there was no reason and no excuse to end the war. The only possible difficult outcome for Germany (that nobody on the Allied side wanted) was the self-liberation of Germany by a clever annihilation of the top Nazi echelon (which is what the unfortunate 'Operation Valkyrie' was all about - to stage an uprising using the dormant German 'home guard" army allegedly to prevent a "coup by Nazis against Hitler" in order to justify the annihilation of the Nazi power within Germany - which would work only if von Stauffenberg succeeded in murdering the vicious tyrant first so he could blame it, say, on Himmler, Goebbels or Goering). Then the self-liberated Germany would have had to open its borders in the West and close them even tighter in the East - a separate peace that leaves Germany still intact and forces Russians to either commit a separate peace or fight a war against the entire West.

Yes, my learned friend Seneca, I agree completely with your brief and somewhat hurried analysis of Jewish involvement in Marxist Internationalism. Not only were the leading exponents of Soviet Communism Jewish but across Europe and indeed in the USA, the leading lights of other 'Far-Left' political movements were also predominently but not exclusively Jewish. Just as various Jewish religious factions are externally at loggerheads over the correct interpretations of the Talmud and the Torah. So too are Jewish politicos often in conflict over the 'correct political stance' in terms of Marxist-Leninism as opposed to Trotskyism or International Socialism or the correct representation of Dialectical Materialism. The convulusions of the political Left on such matters are as legendary as they are tedious.
Hence the frequency with which the Soviets regularly purged their ranks between 1920 and 1960. Even major players like Trotsky himself and the unspeakable Beria fell victim to this political nihilism.
In terms of Winston Churchill, he was a political opportunist (a quarter Jewish on his mother's side) but almost pro-Hitler until the early 1930's. Then while his personal financial situation was in dire straits and he was politically 'in the wilderness'. Churchill was 'saved' and bankrolled by powerful emigre Jewish figures in London, principally the exiled Czech Jewish cabal around Sir Henry Straikosch ( my spelling here may be astray).
Churchill was re-floated financially and re-programmed politically - becoming belicose and completely anti-Hitler and anti-German.
The Allies were committed to 'unconditional surrender' for Germany from 1943 onwards and even if Stauffenberg had succeeded, neither Churchill nor Stalin would have turned away from the total defeat and dismemberment of Germany. Both for very different ideological and geo-political reasons.
The USA was very differently motivated and despite Churchill's bluster and denials, Roosevelt and the whole drive of US Foreign policy was to both defeat the Third Reich and to dismantle the British Empire. Stopping Stalin and the spread of Soviet Communism only became a priority after the Yalta Conference and especially in the light of Soviet policy towards Poland post summer 1944. The Soviet response to wards the beleagured Poles during the 1944 Warsaw Uprising and the suspicious death of General Sikorski and the complete betrayal of the anti-communist "London Poles" (the Polish Government in exile)
illustrates the massive shift in policies from late 1944v onwards.

The Allied propaganda of the late war period, particularly the movie propaganda aimed at American audiences reveals a committment to the total defeat of Germany as a military and economic power for generations into the future. The Allies in the West were certain that no power should exist in central Europe that they collectively could not control.

This subject is massive and there are still volumes of archives closed to researchers.
Thousands more volumes may never see light of day ever.
Why should that be ?