Eisenhower's secret message announcing WWII victory in Europe up for auction

By Ben Barry
President Dwight D. Eisenhower's top secret message announcing victory in Europe is set to fetch $30k at auction - alongside with other WWII artifacts.
The sale - run by RR Auction - will take place on June 11, 2025.
The top secret document signed by President Eisenhower, announcing allied victory in Europe, is expected to fetch $30k plus.
Another document, written by President Eisenhower on June 13, 1944, stated he was looking forward to the "destruction of the Nazi military machine".
The surrender negotiation document, signed by Reich President Karl Donitz and presented to allies by Col, Gen. Alfred Jodi, is expected to fetch more than $100k.
Speaking about the historic documents, Bobby Livingston, Executive VP at RR Auction, said: "The Dönitz authorization represents one of history's most dramatic ideological reversals.
"With Hitler dead, the Nazi 'fight to the last man' mentality-where every German was expected to die rather than surrender-was completely abandoned.
"These generals suddenly faced an entirely different mission: save as many German lives as possible by negotiating time for millions to flee from the Eastern Front to Western lines.
"While Eisenhower firmly rejected their request and demanded immediate surrender, the delay in announcing the capitulation created the crucial window that saved 1.5 million people.
"This document captures that extraordinary transformation-from a regime demanding mass death to leaders desperately trying to preserve life."
The post Eisenhower's secret message announcing WWII victory in Europe up for auction appeared first on Talker.
Copyright Talker News. All Rights Reserved.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Time​ Magazine

3 hours ago

• Time​ Magazine

World Leaders React After U.S. Strikes Iran: Gravely Alarmed

The world is reacting after President Donald Trump authorized U.S. strikes on three three key Iranian nuclear sites, joining Israel in its conflict with Iran. 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,' Trump said in an address to the nation on Saturday night. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Iran has since responded with a grave new warning, threatening 'everlasting consequences' and calling for an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council. Read More: Iran Delivers Furious Warning, Speaks of 'Unprecedented Level of Danger and Chaos' After 'Heinous' U.S. Strikes As the world awaits to see what Iran's next step will be, global leaders are reacting to the news of the strikes. European Commission European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen posted on social media, saying that 'the negotiating table is the only place to end this crisis.' Von der Leyen maintained that 'Iran must never acquire the bomb,' and said the Middle Eastern country should now 'engage in a credible diplomatic solution.' United Nations Secretary General of the United Nations (U.N.) António Guterres shared a strong statement on social media, stating that he was 'gravely alarmed' by the strikes. He called for de-escalation and shared concerns that the conflict could cause a 'spiral of chaos.' 'This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge—and a direct threat to international peace and security,' Guterres said. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate and to uphold their obligations under the U.N. Charter and other rules of international law. He continued by saying there is 'no military solution,' and that he believes the only way forward is 'diplomacy.' Argentina Argentina's President Javier Milei, a right-wing ally of Trump's in Latin America, has yet to comment specifically on the U.S. strikes, but he re-posted a message in the early hours of the morning on June 22. 'Today is a great day for Western civilization,' read the post, authored by Argentine billionaire and businessman Marcos Galperin. Australia The Australian government, led by Anthony Albanese, has called for de-escalation but its statement, issued by a spokesperson, did not reveal much of whether or not the government supported the U.S. strikes. "We note the U.S. President's statement that now is the time for peace. The security situation in the region is highly volatile. We continue to call for de-escalation, dialogue, and diplomacy." Chile Chilean President Gabriel Boric condemned the U.S. strikes, calling them a violation of international law. He went on to 'demand peace' 'We will defend respect for international humanitarian law at all times,' he said. 'Having power does not authorize you to use it in violation of the rules we have established as humanity. Even if you are the United States.' China China 'strongly condemns' the U.S. strikes, according to state media. 'The actions of the United States seriously violated the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and international law, and have exacerbated tensions in the Middle East,' a spokesperson said. 'China calls on the parties to the conflict, Israel in particular, to reach a ceasefire as soon as possible, ensure the safety of civilians, and start dialogue and negotiation.' France The French government released a statement clarifying that France was not involved in the attacks. The European country reiterated 'its firm opposition to Iran gaining access to nuclear weapons,' but also urged both parties to 'to exercise restraint.' 'France is convinced that a lasting solution to this issue requires a negotiated solution within the framework of the Treaty of Non-Proliferation. We remain ready to contribute to this in conjunction with our partners,' the statement read. Israel During Trump's address to the U.S., he thanked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, stating that the two of them worked as a team on the Iran strikes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin praised President Trump for conducting the strikes in a video address. 'President Trump and I often say peace through strength. First comes strength, then comes peace," he said. 'And tonight President Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength.' Israeli President Isaac Herzog also thanked Trump, calling the evening a 'decisive moment between the axis of terror and evil and the axis of hope.' 'This brave step serves the security and safety of the entire free world. I hope it will lead to a better future for the Middle East—and help advance the urgent release of our hostages held in captivity in Gaza,' he said. Iran Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi accused the U.S. of breaching international law and warned that the strikes will have 'everlasting consequences.' 'The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the U.N. Charter, international law and the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations,' Araghchi said. Russia Russia's Foreign Ministry shared a statement on Telegram condemning the airstrikes and calling them 'a dangerous escalation... fraught with further undermining of regional and global security.' The governmental body called the strikes 'a gross violation of international law, the U.N. Charter, and U.N. Security Council resolutions' and called for an "end to aggression and for increased efforts to create conditions for returning the situation to a political and diplomatic track." Saudi Arabia According to the Saudi Press Agency, the country has expressed 'deep concern' over the U.S. strikes and see them as a 'violation' of the sovereignty of Iran. '[The Kingdom] underscores the need to exert all possible efforts to exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and avoid further escalation,' read a statement attributed to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 'The Kingdom also calls upon the international community to intensify its efforts during this highly sensitive period to reach a political resolution that would bring an end to the crisis and open a new chapter for achieving security and stability in the region.' Spain Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said that he is mourning the civilian lives lost amid the conflict. He highlighted an 'urgent need for restraint and de-escalation, for diplomacy and dialogue.' 'Iran must never have access to nuclear weapons, but stability in the region can only be achieved at the negotiating table, with full respect for international law,' Sánchez said. 'We need a diplomatic solution that establishes a comprehensive framework of peace and security for all.' United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for Iran to 'return to the negotiating table' after the U.S. strikes and referred to Iran's nuclear programme as a 'grave threat to international security.' 'The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis,' Starmer said.

New York Post

3 hours ago

• New York Post

Trump and Netanyahu defied the diplomats — and saved the free world

The world was sleepwalking toward disaster. Again. Just like in the 1930s, a fanatical regime made its intentions crystal clear: Wipe the Jewish people off the map, destroy Western influence and dominate an entire region through terror and ideology. And just like in the 1930s, the so-called 'international community' looked the other way. Advertisement Except this time, two leaders didn't. Donald J. Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu refused to play dumb. They didn't beg. They didn't blink. And they didn't apologize. They acted. Advertisement Because Iran — the world's No. 1 terror regime — was on the brink of going nuclear. Let that sink in: A regime that burns American flags, funds terrorists across four continents, murders women in the streets for not covering their hair, and chants 'Death to Israel' and 'Death to America' was about to get the bomb. And the usual crowd of diplomats and talking heads said: Let's be patient. Let's negotiate. Let's wait. Six B-2 Stealth Bombers dropped 12 bunker-buster bombs on the Fordow nuclear site. Rob Jejenich / NY Post Design Advertisement Sound familiar? That's exactly what Europe said to Adolf Hitler. We all know how that ended. But this time, history didn't repeat itself — because Trump and Netanyahu made sure of it. They didn't wait for another Munich. They acted before the mushroom cloud. Advertisement Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters And thank God they did. Make no mistake: Iran with nukes would be far worse than Nazi Germany. Same genocidal hatred. Same dream of world domination. But this time, with 21st-century weapons. If the ayatollahs had gotten there first, no one would have been safe — not in Tel Aviv, not in New York, not anywhere. Every terror group in the world would have felt untouchable under Iran's nuclear umbrella. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gives a statement during a visit to the site of the Weizmann Institute of Science, which was hit by an Iranian missile barrage, in the central city of Rehovot on June 20, 2025. POOL/AFP via Getty Images Instead, in a matter of hours, Iran's nuclear dreams turned to dust. Advertisement And with it, so did the illusion that this regime can be 'contained' or 'reformed.' Let's be real: You don't negotiate with fanatics who want to kill you. You stop them. That's what real leadership looks like. Advertisement Not fancy speeches. Not hollow threats. Action. Of course, the critics are losing their minds. They say it was reckless. They say it might provoke Iran. News flash: Iran's been provoking the world for decades. The regime in Tehran has been attacking oil tankers, launching rockets at civilians, sending drones to hit US bases. Advertisement The real danger wasn't action. The real danger was doing nothing. Trump and Netanyahu weren't willing to wait and see. They pulled the handbrake before the train went off the cliff. We may never know how many lives they saved. How many cities they protected. How many wars they prevented. But we should all know this: Without them, we'd be living in a far more dangerous world today. Advertisement They changed the game. And they proved that when you stand up to evil — instead of appeasing it — you can actually win. The free world owes them a debt of gratitude. Dan Illouz is a Member of the Israeli Knesset for the Likud Party.

Politico

3 hours ago

• Politico

How Germany Changed Its Mind About America, Thanks to Donald Trump

Five days after his election victory in February, Friedrich Merz's world collapses. That's how he will describe it later. That Friday evening, he steps off the stage at a large conference center in Hamburg's port, where cruise ships usually moor. He has just been hailed as 'the future federal chancellor,' and more than a thousand party supporters have cheered on their chairman at a rally of the local chapter of the Christian Democratic Union, Germany's main center-right party. At around 8:15 p.m., he shakes a few hands in farewell, then drops into the backseat of his official car for the three-hour drive home. It is February 28, 2025. Merz checks his phone and notices a message from his spokesperson. He should watch a video, preferably immediately. Merz pulls out his iPad, opens the link, and recognizes a room familiar to anyone who follows politics. Two armchairs upholstered in gold damask sit in front of a fireplace with no fire burning. In front of the fireplace is a table made of fine wood inlaid with an oversized seal. It's the Oval Office in the White House. To Donald Trump's right sits a small, bearded man in a black military sweater embroidered with a stylized trident, the national symbol of Ukraine. It is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, a country invaded by Russia. Merz holds him in high esteem. Merz has visited Zelenskyy twice in Kyiv and, just a few days ago, accepted Zelenskyy's congratulations on his election victory. Ukraine has high hopes for Merz. The new chancellor is expected to finally provide the Taurus, a German cruise missile capable of penetrating bunkers, which Merz's more liberal predecessor as chancellor, Olaf Scholz, refused to provide throughout his time in office. In the video, Zelenskyy looks tired. Tired and helpless. Merz is dismayed as he watches the U.S. president humiliate his Ukrainian counterpart. Trump accuses him of endangering millions of lives and risking a third world war. When Zelenskyy retorts that it was Russian President Vladimir Putin who started the war, Trump interjects harshly. In front of the cameras, Zelenskyy is scolded like a naughty child for several minutes. 'Did you ever say thank you?' Vice President JD Vance asks Zelenskyy, hurling this question at him several times. 'That was good television,' Trump says at the end of the meeting. The subsequent talks, which were supposed to be about security guarantees after a ceasefire, are canceled. A fully negotiated raw materials agreement is not signed. The celebratory lunch is canceled. Zelenskyy waits another 20 minutes in an adjoining room. Then, an official appears and simply sends him away. Merz has just finished watching the nearly 40-minute scene when he posts a solidarity message to Zelenskyy in English on X: 'We must never confuse the aggressor with the victim in this war!' He is on the phone nonstop in the car until he arrives in Sauerland and then for half the night. He also speaks with Scholz, who would still be chancellor for another two months. Scholz and his designated successor agree that something historic happened that day in Washington. The Americans are threatening not only to abandon Ukraine but also all their allies. Is Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, which requires every member to come to the defense of every other member, still to be taken seriously? Would U.S. soldiers defend Germany against a Russian attack? Are American nuclear missiles still a credible deterrent? The two men agree that given these circumstances, Germany must rebuild its national defenses. As quickly as possible and at whatever cost. And it will cost a lot, between 1 and 1.5 trillion euros over the next 12 years — double the previous amount. Spending that much money on defense isn't easy. In Germany, the 'Schuldenbremse' or 'debt brake' is a fiscal rule enshrined in the Constitution. It is designed to limit the amount of new government debt to a maximum of 0.35 percent of gross domestic product. Before the elections, Merz campaigned on keeping the debt brake and insisted as chancellor he could do without extra debt. But in the coming days, Merz will flip his position and agree to this new borrowing. The humiliation of Zelenskyy has changed everything. This account of the election of Merz and his first days as Germany's incoming chancellor is based on more than 50 conversations with sources, some close to Merz, who were granted anonymity to speak freely. Merz's doubts about his prior convictions had been building for weeks. A few days before the general election, Merz met with Vance in Munich. Merz wanted to dissuade the American vice president from publicly urging Germans to vote for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. 'These are not friends of America,' Merz said, 'but partisans of Putin.' Vance nodded in apparent agreement. Just a few hours later, during his speech at the Munich Security Conference, Vance stunned the audience. He declared that restrictions on freedom of speech in the EU are a greater threat than Russia or China. He called for firewalls to be torn down across Europe and for right-wing populists to be included in politics. The vice president did not mention the AfD by name. However, a few hours later, reports circulated that Vance had met with not only Merz, but also with AfD leader Alice Weidel at his hotel before the speech. He had not told Merz about this meeting. Even then, two weeks before Zelenskyy's humiliation in the Oval Office and one week before the Bundestag elections, Merz had begun privately considering the need for Germany to take on additional billions in debt. 'What the new American president, Donald Trump, has said in Washington these last few days…' he told the audience from the campaign stage in Hamburg, 'Ladies and gentlemen, we are witnessing a fundamental shift in the global political landscape.' Following the Munich Security Conference, Merz discreetly asked former Constitutional Court judge Udo Di Fabio to explore whether it would be possible to amend Germany's Basic Law with the votes of the outgoing Bundestag. The 'Basic Law' is Germany's equivalent of a constitution. It can only be changed by a two-thirds majority in parliament. That also applies to the debt brake. Getting a two-thirds vote would be possible with the old Bundestag, but not the new Bundestag that was expected to have a higher representation of AfD and other fringe parties. Shortly afterwards, Di Fabio sent him his expert opinion. Amendments to the Basic Law with the votes of MPs who had already been voted out of office were possible up to 30 days after the election. That would be March 25, the same day the new Bundestag would be seated. Merz would have less than a month to execute an about-face. On the day of the election, Merz gave the first public signal that his thinking was changing when he appeared with other candidates on the Berliner Runde, a television program in which party leaders comment on the election as soon as the polls close. 'For me, it will therefore be an absolute priority to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA,' he said. Independence from the USA? Scholz, sitting right next to Merz on TV, could hardly believe it. Until now, European politicians had carefully avoided suggesting that Europe could manage its defense without the Americans. Germany, which has neither its own nuclear weapons nor a robust army, needs American troops and their nuclear umbrella more than anyone. Merz, considered a staunch transatlanticist, was giving up on the USA? 'Since U.S. President Donald Trump's statements last week, it has been clear to me that this administration is largely indifferent to the fate of Europe,' Merz continued. A summit of the transatlantic military alliance is scheduled for the end of June. 'Will we even be talking about NATO in its current form then?' he asked. 'Or will we then have to establish an independent European defense capability much more quickly?' The next day, when the election results had been tallied, Merz praised the outcome in a press conference: 29 percent was much less than the Christian Democrats had hoped for, but Merz argued it was a success if you look at the number of votes rather than percentage points. The Christian Democrats gained 2.5 million votes compared to the previous Bundestag election, and the Christian Socialists gained 500,000, he noted. What he failed to mention is that the AfD gained over 6 million votes. After an election campaign more polarizing than any in decades, more people turned out to vote than in previous years, and the AfD was the beneficiary. Merz was genuinely outraged by the scene in the Oval Office. But he also knew he could use this indignation to his advantage. After all, he would need a credible narrative to justify the political turnaround, the astronomical increase in defense spending, that will take place under his leadership. The election results meant that, for the first time since World War II, centrist parties no longer have a two-thirds majority in Parliament. Without a two-thirds majority, centrist parties cannot elect judges to the Federal Constitutional Court, declare war on an invader or amend the Basic Law. For example, to reform the debt brake. The situation is reminiscent of the late phase of the Weimar Republic. At that time, the National Socialists and Communists together held over 50 percent of the seats in the Reichstag, preventing the Social Democrats, Liberals and Christian Democrats from governing effectively — thus fueling growing frustration with democracy. This created a vicious circle that led to the collapse of the first republic at the beginning of the 1930s. Is this a bold comparison? The AfD and other fringe parties already control a blocking minority in the state parliaments of three German states: Saxony, Thuringia and Brandenburg. The same will be true in the Bundestag when the new MPs are seated March 25. Scholz also played a role in urging Merz's turnaround. In meetings unnoticed by the public, Scholz and Merz met several times in the chancellor's office after the Bundestag elections, sometimes with other center-right politicians present. At one of these meetings, Scholz presented intelligence service findings on the immense scale of the Russian arms buildup. Despite the enormous losses in Ukraine, Putin would have considerably more tanks and missiles in just a few years than before the invasion. The intelligence suggested he is preparing to wage another war, this time against Europe. Scholz, who campaigned as a peace chancellor, advised his successor to do the opposite: to massively rearm. Germany's new government coalition joined Merz's Christian Democrats with Scholz's Social Democrats. In the days after the election, the coalition partners convened private negotiations to reach a spending plan they could implement before March 25. In those talks, the sums involved increased by the hour. On March 4, when the partners reappeared in public to announce their deal, there was great astonishment. There were no longer any limits to rearmament. Merz secured special funds for a defense build-up over the next 10 years that were five times larger than an increase Scholz negotiated just three years ago. An additional special fund of 500 billion euros had been agreed upon for rebuilding the country's infrastructure. Why was Merz, the avowed debt hawk, now so willing to push Germany so deep into debt? 'In view of the threats to our freedom and peace on our continent, the same must now apply to our defense: Whatever it takes!' Merz said at a press conference. The saying was a quote from Mario Draghi, the former head of the European Central Bank, who used this slogan in 2012 to scare off speculators who wanted to bet on a breakup of the eurozone. Now Merz used the same quote to explain his rearmament plan. At a parliamentary group meeting later that day, Merz reported that he would be traveling to Brussels to take part in the meeting of the heads of state and government of the EU Council. And then he said something curious: 'If Trump announces his withdrawal from NATO tonight, then we, the Federal Republic of Germany, will be the first to have reacted correctly in advance.' There was horror among the MPs. Merz was deadly serious. The total turnaround in financial policy began after the shock appearance by Vance at the Munich Security Conference. Merz justified it by pointing to the humiliation of Zelenskyy at the White House. But now he was talking about an imminent U.S. withdrawal from NATO. How did Merz get this idea? Trump was set to give his first speech to a joint session of Congress that same night. Merz explained to close allies later that he had received information from an American source indicating that Trump would use the speech to announce a U.S. withdrawal from the Western defense alliance. He had reason to trust his source. Two weeks earlier, the source had provided him with advance information on Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference. Merz held a conference call the night before the speech and warned Christian Democratic leaders that Vance would shake the transatlantic friendship and launch a rhetorical attack on Europe. That is exactly what happened. Merz and his allies were prepared. Warned once again, Merz expected the worst from Trump's speech to Congress. During conversations and phone calls with confidants, he made it even clearer than he had in the parliamentary group meeting that if Trump announced a NATO withdrawal that night, Putin might react immediately with an attack on the Baltic states. During those hours when he agreed Germany should take on a trillion-euro debt, Merz was acting on the belief that a new war in Europe was possible and NATO was on the brink of collapse. His vote in favor of the record debt came against this dramatic backdrop. As we know, things turned out differently. Trump delivered his congressional speech but did not mention a withdrawal from NATO. To this day, Merz does not believe that his Washington source misinformed him. The NATO withdrawal announcement had been prepared, he believes. Trump changed his mind at the last minute. (POLITICO Magazine asked the White House to respond to the assertion that Trump had considered using his March 4 speech to a joint session of Congress to announce a U.S. withdrawal from NATO. In an emailed statement, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said, 'Such an announcement was never included in any draft of any speech.')