3. I disagree with the assumption that: "If the German armed forces were in a better position militarily and able to hold out longer and inflict more casualties on the Allies then it's possible a negotiated peace might have been arranged instead of the unconditional surrender which Roosevelt and Churchill insisted on. ", for the simple fact that, regardless of Roosevelt and Churchill insistence on an unconditional German surrender, Hitler himself wasn't willing to negotiate peace. Even if the allies had promoted negotiations for peace, Hitler was not willing to consider such option. So, in no way was there going to be a negotiated peace.
You can disagree all you like but you are dead wrong. Hitler was willing to have a negotiated peace. It is well documented in this thread Hitler's Peace Offers vs Unconditional Surrender - viewtopic.php?f=20&t=10192
Hitler was wary of the Allied powers because during WW1 Germany surrendered based on Wilson's 14 Points but was then hit with the Versailles Treaty which blamed that country solely for the start of WW1 - viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7937
Despite this Hitler was still willing to have a negotiated peace.
There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.