[jamaksin]

Interesting question - thank you.

Consider, for example, how Germany treated France - that is, Vichy in the south was quasi-autonomous (big grain of salt). Nothing in the French North Africa "colonies." Control of Suez was a bit different.

The Japanese were very different; their POW treatment of the Dutch say, was horrific! And yes, recall Naking. But recall also the treatment of the native peoples of the Belgium Congo under King Leopold.

And, the Brits bombed the Germans cities first.

[dfwgator]

And, the Brits bombed the Germans cities first.

Remember how the Germans bombed Rotterdam to pressure the Dutch into surrendering?

[lbryce]

And, the Brits bombed the Germans cities first.

These are the facts about Brits Bombing German cities.
Bombs were first dropped by German aircraft on London but was, as I've read, the result of a navigational error as it seems was an isolated incident.

The Brits took the bombing incident as an extreme provocation but had no way of knowing it was unintentional and began retaliating on German cities which of course had Hitler respond in exponential fury.

[rmlew]

Consider, for example, how Germany treated France - that is, Vichy in the south was quasi-autonomous (big grain of salt). Nothing in the French North Africa "colonies." Control of Suez was a bit different.
Germany did not seek colonies in Africa. I see you forgot to mention what happened to northern France, annexeation. The same was true for Poland, Moravia (modern Czech Republic) and other territories. Germany was more interested in creating a Germany whose eastern borders would have been the Ural mountains.

And, the Brits bombed the Germans cities first.
Your Nazi apologetics are pathetic. Perhaps you forgot or don't care about those dirty Slavs and Jews in Warsaw,