Dresden was a civilian town with no military significance. Why did we burn its people?

[Karmadillo]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/11410633/Dresden-was-a-civilian-town-with-no-military-significance.-Why-did-we-burn-its-people.html

Dresden was a civilian town with no military significance. Why did we burn
its people?
If there was no good strategic reason for it, then not even the passage of time can make it
right

By Dominic Selwood
11:14AM GMT 13 Feb 2015

Today marks the 70th anniversary of “Operation Thunderclap”, one of the twentieth century’s most controversial military actions.

From 13 to 15 February 1945, British (and some American) heavy bombers dropped 2,400 tons of high explosives and 1,500 tons of incendiary bombs onto the ancient cathedral city of Dresden. In just a few hours, around 25,000 to 35,000 civilians were blown up or incinerated.

Victor Gregg, a British para captured at Arnhem, was a prisoner of war in Dresden that night who was ordered to help with the clear up. In a 2014 BBC interview he recalled the hunt for survivors after the apocalyptic firestorm. In one incident, it took his team seven hours to get into a 1,000-person air-raid shelter in the Altstadt. Once inside, they found no survivors or corpses: just a green-brown liquid with bones sticking out of it. The cowering people had all melted. In areas further from the town centre there were legions of adults shrivelled to three feet in length. Children under the age of three had simply been vaporised.

<edit>

Supporters of Britain’s “area bombing” (targeting civilians instead of military or industrial sites)
maintain that it was a vital part of the war. Churchill wrote that he wanted “absolutely devastating, exterminating attacks by very heavy bombers from this country upon the Nazi homeland”. In another letter he called it “terror bombing”. His aim was to demoralise the Germans to catalyse regime change. Research suggests that the soaring homelessness levels and family break ups did indeed depress civilian morale, but there is no evidence it helped anyone prise Hitler’s cold hand off the wheel.

Others maintain that it was ghastly, but Hitler started it so needed to be answered in a language he understood. Unfortunately, records show that the first intentional “area bombing” of civilians in the Second World War took place at Monchengladbach on 11 May 1940 at Churchill’s orders (the day after he dramatically became prime minister), and four months before the Luftwaffe began its Blitz of British cities.

more...

[MannyGoldstein]

1. I studied this a little some years ago

Last edited Sun Feb 15, 2015, 02:50 PM - Edit history (1)

The Allies wanted to totally break the Germans to acheive an unconditional surrender. It was felt that this was the only way to end the war permanently, unlike WWI which flared up again 20 years after the armistice.

IIRC, neither Eisenhower nor Churchill mentioned the bombing of Dresden in their memoirs, rather it seems to have been one of many cities bombed in this way, but due to a variety of chance circumstances the entire city turned into a conflagration.

A horrible thing, but something like 20,000 people were dying each day from the war, I can't imagine or second-guess what the war planners were thinking.

[NYC_SKP]

3. Köln was similarly flattened

Dresden got the reputation and name connection for mass civilian bombing.

These bombings are evidence of the shift in the zeitgeist of warfare.

Somehow, with WWI, we decided germ and chemical warfare should not be publicly accepted, soon after we figured aerial bombing was A-OK.

Now its drones.

[rjsquirrel]

11. Ever heard of Carthage?

There is nothing new about Dresden or Hiroshima. War has entailed putting whole cities of non-combatants to the sword and salting their earth since time immemorial. We have more efficient tools. But mass killing of civilians, pfft, it was worse in the old days than in the 20th century!

[rjsquirrel]

12. Also

it really isn't true that Dresden had "no military significance." It was a railroad hub from which thousands of troops were being sent to battle and it was the location of some key military manufacturing (bomb sights, I believe).

[jmowreader]

13. Dresden had over 100 factories

[MADem]

52. Shhhhh---don't mention inconvenient facts.

We didn't start that shit, either. The poor German people chose their leader poorly, and they paid for it dearly.

[840high]

68. ...^ that

[CreekDog]

126. Hitler was not democratically chosen tobe leader

Might want to learn the history.

[MADem]

128. No, he just showed up out of the blue, and everyone HATED him...not.

Please, let's not get simplistic, here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_rise_to_power#Chancellor_to_dictator

Might want to apply "the nuance!!!"

[CreekDog]

138. You either own your wrong comment or you disown it

instead of either of those you decide to put words in my mouth.

[MADem]

139. Hey, you have a great day, now!!!!

Here is a deal for you--don't put words in my mouth, and I won't put words in yours. See how that works for you, mmmkay?

[CreekDog]

140. I didn't put words in your mouth and you repaid that by putting words in mine

So don't offer me any deal you already broke.

[MADem]

141. Hey, you have a great day, now!!! nt

[merrily]

63. A reason we flourished then was that WWII or "the peace" eliminated a lot of our competiton.

[former9thward]

90. Why weren't they bombed then?

Dresden's factories were in the suburbs and were not targeted. Military facilities were also in the suburbs and not targeted. The bombs fell in the middle of the city in the civilian areas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

[jmowreader]

92. The rail yards were more important to bomb, and they were the center of our attacks

Your link estimates 23 percent of Dresden's factories were destroyed in the raids. It also explains the raid planners didn't have good maps of Dresden.

If I wanted to be evil I would say they didn't want to bomb the factories in the suburbs because they planned to seize the technologies and patents held within after the war was over.

[hedgehog]

135. The factories were in the suburbs - the bombers took out the city center.

[Sanity Claws]

15. That's my understanding too

Among other things it manufactures lenses used in targeting.

[Major Nikon]

16. Zeiss had most of it's manufacturing there

At that time (and still to some extent today) Zeiss lenses were widely considered to be the best in the world.

[former9thward]

91. Yet they were not targeted.

Industrial areas and military facilities were all in the suburbs. The bombs were dropped on the civilian areas in the middle of the city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

[Major Nikon]

98. Jena, where one of the Zeiss factories was built was bombed several times

The Zeiss factory in Dresden itself was also bombed.

Production at Zeiss Ikon slowed to a crawl during World War II, and the bombing of Dresden caused severe damage to Zeiss Ikon's factory, including the loss of blueprints and prototypes of many Zeiss Ikon cameras, including the Contax.

http://elekm.net/zeiss_ikon/pages/history.html

[former9thward]

103. Funny how people try to justify what is now considered war crirmes.

[rjsquirrel]

104. Even funnier how

people with no knowledge of history tend to attribute impossible levels of foreknowledge to historical actors.

[Major Nikon]

105. Funny how people can't follow online conversations

This is what I was replying to.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026227664#post15

I really feel no need to justify anything. "what is now considered war crirmes(sic)" is meaningless when at the time it wasn't. It's as ridiculous as calling Sherman's march a war crime. Just like Sherman's march it's a page of history that is worth civil discussion which evidently you have no interest.

Just sayin'

[former9thward]

115. The typo police always on guard!

Good job!

[ProfessorGAC]

122. Bobbing And Weaving!

Nice job.

[leveymg]

59. Ever heard of the 20-million Chinese killed during the Japanese occupation, or the 15 million

Russian civilians the Nazis exterminated? The fact is, industrial methods of slaughter applied during World War Two were numerically far more lethal than anything the Romans could accomplish.

If the Cold War ever escalated, the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals would render Homo Sapiens all but extinct.

[braddy]

4. Napalm was used a fair amount in WWII. During the American Civil war we came up with the idea of

breaking the civilians.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Sherman's march to the sea

I'm under the impression that breaking the population's will to fight is necessary to truly defeat an enemy when fighting them on their home turf. This is always an ugly, ugly, horrible thing.

[aquart]

120. Oh, it didn't originate with us.

And Sherman's idea that it if the rich and well-fed war supporters could be made to suffer, they would sue for peace? I LIKE that idea.

[leveymg]

40. You might want to read C.P. Snow who explained how strategic bombing probably prolonged the war

Snow was on the Scientific Committee that advised Churchill, and was a dissenting voice against terror bombing, which is what he called it, as well. He stated there was an inherent anti-working class bias behind the allied strategy of intentionally targeting the residential neighborhoods in German cities surrounding plants and railheads.

He argued that bombing of working class neighborhoods of large cities was only marginally effective in breaking German civilian morale. Furthermore, construction of hundreds of heavy bombers -- useful against civilian targets but largely ineffective against troops in the field -- also had a steep opportunity cost. Snow pointed out that the same resources if put into production of a larger number of fighter-bombers, far more effective against troops and armor, would have destroyed the German Army much faster.

So, the strategy of strategic bombing actually ended up costing many Allied lives. See, Science and Gov't, The Godkin Lectures.

[MannyGoldstein]

78. I love C.P. Snow

I read his Two Cultures way back when. Thanks for the tip, I'll try to check it out.

[Karmadillo]

89. Extremely interesting. Thank you for posting this.

[Journeyman]

2. In part, it was to serve as a warning to Stalin of the capabilities of Western air power. . .

[guillaumeb]

29. same reason nuclear devices were dropped

on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That and the opportunity to field test nuclear bombs and get real world experience with them.

[leveymg]

54. Not to mention, America's willingness to use them.

[guillaumeb]

60. whatever weapons are needed by the Empire

will be used by the Empire. Thanks for the addition.

The real definition of American Exceptionalism: the exceptional ability of Americans to excuse actions that they commit against others that they would never excuse if done to them by others.

A necessary corollary is that all actions taken by the US are good and always done for good reasons.

[leveymg]

67. Extinction is Us

Perish any who might forget that.

[Wounded Bear]

6. Another reason, and it kind of sucks...

They had run out of viable military targets. All of the industrial towns had been destroyed to a large degree. It wasn't much more than spitballing:

"Hey, we've pretty much destroyed the country. Where do we go next?"

"Oh look. We haven't hit Dresden yet."

"Yeah, but there's not really much to hit there."

"So what? Send in the planes."

[MisterP]

81. interestingly the same process happened in the Korean War: they started to run out

of other targets but the war was still continuing, so every hut at a crossroads was targeted--they still have plaques for "Prewar Trees" on both sides of the DMZ ...

one of the first real things we've learned with WWII is that weapons have their own logic: first carpet bombing and then the big Bomb--the "winning side" wasn't the Allies but the weaponry and willingness to use them on all sides

saying "they shortened the war" is milspeak, just like saying "Diem is a reformist and a democrat" or "Cuba is a threat to our way of life"

[Cali_Democrat]

7. At that point in the war...

all conventions were thrown out the window.

The faster you could level their towns, the better. Also it had to do with demonstrating Anglo-American air power to the Soviets.

Actually the firebombing of Tokyo was worse than either Dresden or the nuclear attacks in terms of deaths.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. Friedrich Nietzsche

[Lint Head]

9. Slaughterhouse Five

Kurt Vonnegut was part of a group of American prisoners of war who survived the bombing in an underground slaughterhouse meat locker used as an ad hoc detention facility. The German guards called the building Schlachthof Fünf ("Slaughterhouse Five&quot , and the POWs adopted that name. Vonnegut said that the aftermath of the attack on the defenseless city was "utter destruction" and "carnage unfathomable." The experience was the inspiration for his famous novel. Wiki reference.

[burrowowl]

99. I read it in high school

a must read!

[mobeau69]

143. My dad had a book titled The Complete History of a WW ll. He must have acquired it in the late 40's or the early 50's

after he returned from the war. It was a big green book about 4” thick with photographs, maps and a complete index. It sat on a shelf in a closet for years. Sometime in my late teens or early 20’s I read Slaughterhouse V. After reading it I pulled Dad’s book out of the closet to read about the Dresden campaign. I remember how stunned I was when I discovered there wasn’t an entry for Dresden in the index and no mention of it anywhere in the book. I began to question everything a lot more from that point on.

[McCamy Taylor]

10. Don't look for logic in war.

War is intrinsically illogical. Probably some left over bit of aggressive DNA that we needed when we were competing for mammoths during ice ages but which is totally inappropriate for the modern age.

[treestar]

14. Seriously?

Now we're supposed to be angry at the US for defeating Germany after WWII?

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

21. Apparently, we've cycled through the other

reasons to hate America.

No, I'm not proud of certain things my country has done, but defeating Germany is nothing we have to be ashamed of.

[treestar]

25. seriously. Vietnam, Iraq, etc are there

Even Hiroshima, Nagasaki. Going there with Germany is almost trolling to push the envelope and see how far it will go. I wonder if anyone will try that the Germans had to attack because of something the US did. Probably trying to find a way to make it our fault. Or Obama's, lol.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

26. Not everything posted is an attack against the US, at least to the non-paranoid

One could make good arguments in both directions on the bombing of Dresden. It's a topic worthy of, you know....DISCUSSION.

[treestar]

28. you have to have USDS

to think attacks on Germany at the end of WWII and whether they should or should not have been done warrants discussion.

Germany was the one that started the war, remember? And had concentration camps where they exterminated people.

[CJCRANE]

32. The article indicates it was mostly British bombers involved

so it's not necessarily a case of blaming America for everything.

[treestar]

34. Wow, even more absurd a discussion then

The Germans bombed Britain itself.

[CJCRANE]

39. It was controversial at the time and there was disagreement about its effectiveness:

Professor Frederick Lindemann (later ennobled as Lord Cherwell), appointed the British government's leading scientific adviser with a seat in the Cabinet by his friend Prime Minister Winston Churchill, in 1942 presented a seminal paper to Cabinet advocating the area bombing of German cities in a strategic bombing campaign. It was accepted by Cabinet and Harris was directed to carry out the task (Area bombing directive). It became an important part of the total war waged against Germany.

Harris said at the start of the bombing campaign that he was unleashing a whirlwind on Germany.

...

However at this time many senior Allied air commanders still thought area bombing was less effective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet#Second_World_War

[treestar]

42. Discussing that or anything at that time made some sense

But it is difficult to sanction questioning the British over their decision at that time without going into the realm of the absurd. I know today people object to civilian casualties of drone strikes. That makes some sense given the nature of the "war on terror" and the blowback. But Germans at the end of WWII - at that time, seeing them as innocent would have been difficult for the British or French, Polish, etc.

[gladium et scutum]

36. Bombers involved

About 720 RAF Bombers and 520 USAAF Bombers carried out the bombing raids on Dresden.

[CJCRANE]

41. Thanks. See my post #39 about the origin of the policy and discussion of its effectiveness. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

37. I'd bet good money that I know a great deal more about that war than you do.

Of course, I'm not bragging, given that you're hobbling yours and others' knowledge by attempting to stop the discussion at hand. An event that kills one hundred thousand people or more is worth discussing. You're way too deep into the censorship movement to have any understanding of how this looks from the outside. Hint: go back to your high school Orwell to get a sense of the thing.

[treestar]

43. That has to win the internet for absurdity today

Ad hominem, claims of superior knowledge we are to bow too, irrelevant references to other issues. This was Germany at the end of WWII. The British had had enough.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

44. You're trying misdirection. You lost. Enjoy your Sunday.

[treestar]

48. If a declaration of "you lost" is all we need

Then you lose. Your post was ridiculous.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

53. If you need it spelled out...

You tried to change the subject. But before you did, you argued that this topic was not worthy of discussion. But then you added your own rationale for your point of view on the topic of Dresden, and you did it multiple times, while chiding that the subject should not be discussed. If that's what they call winning where you're from, I'm glad I'm not from there. Again, go back to your Orwell and try to step outside of yourself to see how ridiculous this looks.

Do you happen to recall the Republican talking head on tv sometime toward the beginning of W Bush's attack on the wrong country? She didn't like something she was hearing from the other side, and she covered her ears, closed her eyes, and started babbling, "la la la I can't hear you...", or words to that effect, over and over again. I wish I could find that video and show it to you.

[treestar]

62. You you you

Quit talking about me and go back to the subject.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

65. The one we're not supposed to be discussing, because treestar said so?

You're going to need to stop offering your opinion if you don't wish for the subject to be discussed. You really can't have it both ways, treestar.

[MADem]

58. It's Obama's fault!!!

Or better still, Hillary's!

Amazing how all you need is a post blasting a Democrat to become popular around here....

[treestar]

66. thanks Obama!

Among his other superpowers are his pre-conception antics!!!!! Probably planning to hide his true place of birth even then!!

[muriel_volestrangler]

109. You could, of course, notice that it's a British article

which concentrates on British decisions and responsibility. Not everything in the world is about the USA. Questioning whether Dresden was necessary, or justifiable, was, and remains, a valid question, as the article notes Churchill himself acknowledge. On the 70th anniversary, yes, we seriously discuss such things.

[Lurks Often]

117. Might want to deep digger into our actions prior to WWII

While FDR was morally right to support England prior to the United States entering the war, legally we were in the wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_against_the_United_States_(1941)

For all intents and purposes the US Navy was already in a shooting war with Germany for at least 6 months prior to Germany declaring war on us.

Here are some instances of the U.S. violating the international laws of neutrality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_neutrality_(international_relations)#Rights_and_responsibilities_of_a_neutral_power
We were routinely repairing and refitting British warships here in the United States (search HMS Warspite and HMS Illustrious for 2 examples) when they should have be interned.
We supplied 50 surplus destroyers to England in exchange for some basing rights, supplying war materials is also a violation

None of this changes the fact that Hitler was a monster and Germany needed to be defeated, but it's also dishonest to think the U.S. obeyed international law in all respects prior to the official declaration of war.

[whatchamacallit]

35. This is how we get away with murder

The lazy conflation of population and ideology is the surest excuse for mass atrocities. Kind of a sociopathic way of thinking IMO.

[treestar]

46. Like the Germans did, you mean?

If ever a people deserved it, here it was. Geez. And yet I'm sure you'd have no problem blaming us for the deaths of Al-alwaki and his son.

[whatchamacallit]

55. Having difficultly parsing your post

probably because you're having difficulty forming a cohesive thought.

[treestar]

61. No, I have a very cohesive thought

Civilian casualties are to be avoided. They can't always be. If there is an example of their being right and good, it's Germany at the end of WWII. Questioning that decision now is just a bit much. It is too easy 60 years later to claim the British should have worried about German civilian casualties at that point in time.

If you want to go on about our drone casualties now, have at it. At least it's an issue. But a decision of 60 years ago against the most evil nation that ever was in living memory? Dumb.

[whatchamacallit]

71. Glad to know

having been along for the ride, you accept personal responsibility for our actions in the world. Of course that's an easy position to take from behind the defenses of the world's most powerful military.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

75. These deaths were right and good. So you have to stop talking about them now. nt

[hedgehog]

136. Did you miss the part about civilian casualties being an

objective of the Dresden raid?

The theories were that it would cost the Reich time and material taking care of bombed out civilians, and that the civilians would force an end to the war.

After war reports indicated that by bombing out civilian factories and shops, more labor was freed up for the munitions plants.

[Matrosov]

50. You're supposed to be angry..

..at the deliberate killing of civilians.

Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and other such attacks, that served no purpose other than to raise the civilian body count, were not acts of war but of terrorism.

[treestar]

56. There must be a point where even terrorism is called for

I mean, seriously? I know civilians and children were killed, but looking at the circumstances, the civilians were responsible for what their country did, as they had supported it. These were the two most aggressive, unapologetically so, in the world. They had no scruple at killing women and children themselves, or having other countries' civilians killed. There's a point where you have to look at the country and what it has done.

If we could have defeated germany without bombing Dresden, we could m make that argument, but then we are disagreeing with British officials who at the time were fending off their second German attack of the century and had been bombed themselves. And had the Holocaust been discovered by then? Collective punishment is rarely called for, but nothing is black or white. If anyone merited it, it was germany WWI. They had no problem with collectively killing a people who deserved no punishment.

[ND-Dem]

69. "There must be a point where even terrorism is called for" So say terrorists everywhere.

[MADem]

74. Yeah...like these terrorists!

One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter....asymmetrical warfare is asymmetrical warfare, even if one calls it by another "frightening" name.

[ND-Dem]

77. thanks for making my point for me.

[MADem]

82. Well, if I had any point to make, I suppose it would be that Dresden did have military

significance as an allied target--in contravention to the post that started this goofy "Hate America First" pile-on thread.

http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/aerialcampaigns/p/World-War-Ii-Bombing-Of-Dresden.htm

Why Dresden?:

The largest remaining unbombed city in the Third Reich, Dresden was Germany's seventh-largest city and a cultural center known as the "Florence on the Elbe." Though a center for the arts, it was also one of Germany's largest remaining industrial sites and contained over 100 factories of various sizes. Among these were facilities for producing poison gas, artillery, and aircraft components. In addition, it was a key rail hub with lines running north-south to Berlin, Prague, and Vienna as well as east-west Munich and Breslau (Wroclaw) and Leipzig and Hamburg.

War is war, and it sucks. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all get along?

[Rex]

97. "There must be a point where even terrorism is called for"

Thanks, I will quote you on that from now on.

[JonLP24]

123. First they came for the Communists

and sure enough they did. In fact countries came for them since, Nazis were recruited to be spies by the CIA.

Anyways, the guy who said that didn't oppose Hitler until he started meddling with the church's affairs, one in which he noted his neutrality prior to it (which came after the Catholics opposing his mass murder campaigns) the lefties, Jews, and the sick were the initial targets. Trade unions. Why would a "working class bias" bombing campaign which targets working class neighborhoods when the main opposition from German civilians, most of it was underground black market opposition.

Anarchist Resistance To Nazism- The FAUD Undergound in the Rhineland

The anarcho-syndicalist union the Freie Arbeiter Union (FAUD) had a strong presence in Duisberg in the Rhineland, with a membership in 1921 of around 5,000 members. Then this membership fell away and by the time Hitler rose to power there were just a few little groups. For example, the number of active militants in Duisberg-South was 25, and the Regional Labour Exchange for Rhineland counted 180 to 200 members. At its last national congress in Erfurt in March 1932, the FAUD decided that if the Nazis came to power its federal bureau in Berlin would be dissolved, that an underground bureau would be put in place in Erfurt, and that there should be an immediate general strike. This last decision was never put into practice, as the FAUD was decimated by massive arrests.

In April or May 1933, doctor Gerhard Wartenburg, before being forced to leave Germany, had the locksmith Emil Zehner put in place as his replacement as FAUD secretary. He fled to Amsterdam, where he was welcomed, with other German refugees, by Albert de Jong, the Dutch anarcho-syndicalist. At the same time the secretariat of the International Workers Association (the anarcho-syndicalist international) was transferred to Holland in 1933, though the Nazis seized its archives and correspondence.

In autumn 1933, Zehner was replaced by Ferdinand Goetze of Saxony, then by Richard Thiede of Leipzig. Goetze reappeared in western Germany in autumn 1934, already on the run from the Gestapo. In the meantime, a secret group of the FAUD was set up, with the support of the Dutch section of the IWA, the NSV. A secretariat of the FAUD in exile was set up in Holland.

Up to the rise to power of the Nazis, the worker Franz Bungert was a leading member of the Duisberg FAUD. Without even the pretence of a trial, he was interned in the concentration camp of Boegermoor in 1933. After a year he was freed but was put under permanent surveillance. His successor was Julius Nolden, a metalworker then unemployed and treasurer of the Labour Exchange for the Rhineland. He was also arrested by the Gestapo, who suspected that his activity in a Society for the Right to Cremation(!) hid illegal relations with other members of the FAUD.

<snip>

Nolden and his comrades set up a secret escape route to Amsterdam and distributed propaganda against the Nazi regime. Albert de Jong visited Germany and via the FAUD member Fritz Schroeder, met Nolden. De Jong arranged for the sending of propaganda over the border via the anarchist Hillebrandt. One pamphlet was disguised with the title Eat German Fruit And You Will Be In Good Health. It became so popular among the miners that they used to greet each other with: ”Have you eaten German fruit as well?” As for the escape route, the German-Dutch anarchist Derksen, who had a very good knowledge of the border zone, was able to get many refugees to safety. Many of those joined the anarchist columns in Spain.

http://flag.blackened.net/af/org/issue65/faud.html

With the mass murders of members of leftist political parties, union members, and non violent groups such as White Rose it was very risky to engage in this kind of opposition those who were brave enough to do something were largely people from working class backgrounds. It is one thing to discuss how long ago it was, another to argue a "deserve" or collective punishment in this context.

[Pooka Fey]

124. First you eliminate the intellectuals and free thinkers

I always point out that Hitler started by eliminating the free thinkers and Intellectuals from his society. My mom pointed it out to me decades ago, she was an avid amateur historian. Good post.

[MADem]

70. Yes, angry--isn't this AWFUL????

But wait...!!!!!! These pictures were taken in .... LONDON.....

[hedgehog]

137. I don't think anyone on this thread has said the bombing of London was an

acceptable act. But - when we engage in the same uncivilized behavior as the enemy, what is the difference between us and the enemy?

[MADem]

142. When people suggest that the bombing of Dresden was unprovoked, had no military

utility, etc. they may as well say that.

I hate revisionist history and I find it insufferable. Very few people are alive today who remember firsthand the effects of that war. At that stage of the conflict, the only goal was to finish it, once and for all. And to put it as bluntly as possible, no one gave a crap about "the enemy." They just wanted it done.

[Rex]

96. Well you are lol...the rest of DU are supposed to talk about it and maybe have a discussion.

I bet you didn't even know that now did you?

[Telcontar]

17. Um, war.

You know, that place beyond law and reason.

[GreatGazoo]

18. Went to Dresden back in 2004

They were rebuilding a church which was destroyed in the bombings and they used computer modeling to put as many of the original stone blocks back into their original positions. You can tell which are the original stones by the soot on them



The city has many buildings with very thick facades. Layers were added as architectural styles changed. There were many buildings that used a lot of wood, like opera houses and older churches that were easy fodder for the phosphorous bombs. Even as fires raged and buildings were destroyed the city's archive of building plans (submitted over hundreds of years to obtain permits for the modifications or original construction) survived allowing buildings to be reconstructed in an exacting way.

The firebombing was the single most destructive bombing operation of WWII and that includes Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 135,000 were killed.

There was graffiti on a wall there, in English: "All war is terror."

[catnhatnh]

22. Not Quite...

"The Operation Meetinghouse firebombing of Tokyo on the night of 9/10 March 1945 was the single deadliest air raid of World War II;[2] greater than Dresden,[19] Hiroshima, or Nagasaki as single events.[20][21]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

[Recursion]

19. To stop the war

The more violent the attack, the sooner the war ends.

[whatchamacallit]

31. So philosophical

Unless your kids are part of the expediting. The only thing I hate more than war is armchair warriors.

[treestar]

38. There is a point where people are responsible for what their country does

They supported it. They believed they were the master race and had a right to the lands of the neighboring countries. They sent their soldiers and supported them. They as a people pretty much supported the most evil thing on earth that ever happened. I know a lot of them claim they knew nothing of the actual Holocaust, but they had to have known and supported the Jews being deported.

This is why I disagree with crediting the troops with everything. The entire country supports them and is responsible. Would you dodge responsibility for Iraq? Or all the other things objected to here regarding the war on terror?

At that point the planet was fed up with Germany and was squelching its second attack on the world at large in the same century. Anyone who claim the US is the big terrorist today cannot seriously claim Germany of that era was not worse and in fact the example for the worst for any other would be terror-nation.

[whatchamacallit]

45. Well

Let's say Iraq had the means to bomb us back, and they decimated an american city that had no military significance because of Herr Bush's aggression... All's fair in love and war? It's so easy to pontificate from the safety of a straining La-Z-Boy.

[treestar]

47. So you're not OK with that

As fair blow-back?

And Churchill, etc. were not arm chair at all. They made that decision.

[whatchamacallit]

49. And if it was your town

you are ok with it? Like I said, so easy to philosophize with other people's lives.

[treestar]

51. So you're criticizing Churchill for the decision?

If my town was in Germany in 1945, I would expect some bad things to happen.

After what I'd supported for the past ten to fifteen years, it'd be hard to expect real liberal people of the countries my country had bombed to worry about my civilian status.

anyone who opposed Hitler had gone or been killed by then.

[whatchamacallit]

57. Confused, what have you supported for the last ten to fifteen years?

[treestar]

64. You know what I'm talking about

Pretending you don't is silly.

If I were German in 1945, you know what I'd have supported in the last 15 years.

[whatchamacallit]

72. You supported Bush's illegal wars?

[Telcontar]

106. I have to ask, are you being deliberately obtuse or genuinely mistaken

He wasnt talking about Bush, he was talking about 15 years of Nazi rule in Germany.

[Recursion]

84. Huh?

What exactly do you think is my relationship with the Iraq war?

[rosesaylavee]

20. War is hell ... reasons for this

can be inferred tho by what had been happening to the UK ... civilians were targeted as a matter of course by the German Luftwaffe for years before this raid happened.

War is hell and to be avoided. There is no rationality behind it. That's the key to why it is insane. It drives us away from our civilization ideals, it destroys who we are - no matter which side is winning or losing... it makes us all lose in the end.

Extinguishing even one life for any cause is wrong.

[Lurks Often]

23. One of the premises of strategic bombing was break the will of the citizenry,

which came from the pre-WWII theories of several people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing

I'll note that the Germans tried to break the will of the Britsh citizenry as well, but through the bravery of the RAF, the stubborness of the British and the lack of any heavy bombers, Germany failed.

Looking at both countries, the British sent most of the children and enough adults into parts of England, Wales and Scotland that was beyond the reach of German bombers and spread out their industries in those areas within the range of the German bombers.

To a degree Germany learned to spread out their industries, but all of Germany and many of the countries conquered by Germany remained within range of the British and American heavy bombers operating out of England and North Africa

[treestar]

27. I learned about that via fiction

As a kid, reading C.S. Lewis' The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. The four protagonist children had been sent to their uncle's in the country for that reason.

[Dreamer Tatum]

24. Oh, are we asking why persons of non-military significance were burned? Please, carry on.

Because I have a retort.

[tabasco]

30. No, it wasn't

Why would you post something that isn't true?

[Vattel]

33. Dresden was bombed because most people are willing to commit mass murder.

There is little difference between us and them.

[KitSileya]

73. As the granddaughter of a Nazi soldier,

all I can say is that I think the Germans forfeited their right to civilian protections when they became Hitler's willing executioners.

For another controversial opinion: I think Americans are and have been skirting very closely to doing the same thing - there are countries in the world today that have the moral right to Dresden bomb American cities, except I doubt it would have any positive effect for them. And if it would not lead to something good (the USA stopping its interference in and overthrowing of democratically elected governments, the end of Guantanamo, The US submitting to the World Court in Ter Hague) then it cannot be morally right no matter what. You can only use such extreme measures if there is a substantial chance of something good coming out of it.

[Pooka Fey]

86. 26 German and 1 Polish assination attempts on Hitler over 10 years - this was a Resistance

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_attempts_on_Adolf_Hitler

To add to the discussion tonight, I must ask also why many villages in Normandy, those with no strategic significance, were equally bombed to rubble by the Allies, since the French civilians were not our enemies, and certainly NOT wartime accomplices to the Nazis.

There are many elderly French still alive today in Normandy who lived through this. The French people are eternally grateful to the allies, I hope no one questions this. To this day, French schoolchildren place flowers on the graves in the American cemetery in Colleville, and that will never stop. Look at the splendor of the 70th Anniversary of D-Day celebrations in Normandy, attended by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, I might add.

The French are grateful to the Allies for their liberation.

I just finished reading the memoirs of a downed American pilot, Ted Fahrenwald, called "Bailout over Normandy". Great book. He speaks of how much he admired the French civilians who welcomed the Allies while trying their best to hide their tears and grief over the bombings of their towns and their families.

French resistors risked their lives and that of their families to help the Allies. But many of the Normandy towns bombed by the Allies had NO strategic significance. The French Resistance was so horrified by this, that they started to question what was happening.

The French are a very practical people, they say "C'était la guerre" (It was war). But after 70 years, historians are finally daring to examine this question.

Cheers

[Zambero]

76. WWII "Collateral damage" had a much broader interpretation

The rationale to justify horrific attacks on civilian populations from Roosevelt, Churchill, and generals under their command was that the level of popular support for Hitler (and Tojo for that matter) from their citizens made them wartime accomplices, and that any and all means possible to shock and demoralize the citizenry into submission would likely result in a surrender sooner rather than later. Dresden as a target was intended to rub salt into the German psyche, as it was an artistic and cultural center with priceless treasures, presumably "safe" from attack because it was not militarily significant. The numerous unsuccessful attempts on Hitler's life, aided and abetted by high-ranking Nazi brass after things started to go badly for Germany, suggests that the "shock and awe" had set in and many wanted Hitler gone and the war to end. At any rate, the scorched earth strategy on the part of Allies did not take into account the morality of such actions, as war in and of itself can never be considered to be a moral act, given the innocent loss of life that invariably occurs while a select few profit from tragedy.

[MADem]

79. Also "cannon fodder" was considered part and parcel of war.

Post - Vietnam, we Americans lost our taste for huge battlefield losses. Now, if even one person is killed in 'battle,' we (or other nations) conduct what amounts to a national news cycle of mourning.

Other peoples aren't so squeamish. The martyr videos/posters are displayed, the family award/ stipend is paid out/established, and they move on.

[JonLP24]

125. I doubt much of that

Regarding battles you must not mean troop casualties. Our unit casualty received a brief mention on the AP wire.

Much to my surprise someone at DU posted it.

BAGHDAD (AP) — Three U.S. soldiers and two Iraqi translators were
killed in two attacks south of Baghdad, the military said on Friday.
Eight soldiers were wounded.

In the worst of the two attacks Thursday, two soldiers were killed
and seven wounded in an attack on their base south of the capital.
The two Iraqi interpreters died in that attack.

The military statement said U.S. forces dispatched a quick reaction
force and attack helicopters to relieve the unit.

In a second attack Friday, the military said, one soldier was killed
and one wounded in a roadside bombing, also south of Baghdad.

The names of those killed and wounded were withheld until family
could be notified, the military said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2806262

The name was later revealed so it was easy to locate the time frame for a DU posting. It was actually an EFP that struck the passenger side door. A typical roadside bomb is very different and a M915A2 can easily absorb the blast. At first beginning in July '06, a gun truck was lead vehicle but odds typically favor the first vehicle striking it, they switched the lead vehicle to M915A2 just-in-case. In the case of the above the article, it was the Assistant Convoy Commander's vehicle who operates a Bobtail with only the maintenance bobtail & rear gun truck behind him. A 30 truck convoy drove by before the EFP was fired.

Probably the best & real friend I ever had was a HHD tasked to fill the slot for the convoy. His Mos was 88N but never did the tasks trained for it. Just was in a Batallion supply unit. He never talked about it, but he was dragged his corpse out of the vehicle and it probably had an effect on him in he was very supportive & defensive of friends. The ACC also suffered long term leg injuries which the company 1SG later accused him of malingering (everyone is accused of malingering at some point for having a profile)

I think other people are far more squemish to the violence that goes on. TCNs have lost their lives, in fact delivered most of the supplies to various bases. Military convoys had 5 truck & trailers, 2 bobtails, 3 gun trucks, and about 25 TCNs driving fiberglass Mercedes Semis. No armor or weapon & with the exception of Taji slept in the staging area while 2 troops had to be detailed to "watch the TCNs". There are thousands of mourners of deaths that we aren't even aware of.

[MADem]

129. I am getting the sense you aren't taking the point I'm making.

In WW2, the death of a servicemember or two wouldn't even make the paper.
We lost 58 THOUSAND in Vietnam. In that conflict, the Department of Defense sent out a blurb and a boot camp picture to the local papers--they looked a lot like the recruiting blurbs you see nowadays (so-and-so graduated from boot camp on such-and-such a day and will be assigned to this-n-that command), except the guy in the picture was dead. We've been at war in the middle east for-EVER, and we haven't lost anywhere near those numbers. Part of the reason that body armor has been so much improved, and prosthetic medicine has advanced so much, is because we don't have that tolerance for death like we once did.

We, today, have no taste for casualties on a massive scale, whereas before, notwithstanding individual, familial grief, the nation as a whole regarded casualties as an expected byproduct of war--cannon fodder. Nowadays, we don't. In fact, we, as a nation, have made it a habit to mourn with strangers on a regular basis over all sorts of tragedies--little children falling down wells, people being killed as a consequence of crime, people dying from incurable diseases, and yes, people dying in battle. We learn every details of the lives of these victims and become personally enmeshed in their life stories.

I wish this kind of compassion would extend out into other areas--like, say, funding for the poor and needy, improvements in education, housing, medicine, etc., but I don't hold my breath. I think the whole "feeling in the moment" engagement in national mourning appeals to people, but writing a check (to include a taxpayers' check) to change a bad situation isn't as appealing.

[MADem]

129. Sorry, everyone--for some strange reason, my post repeated itself with the same post number

a half dozen times....I wasn't trying to be insistent, there was apparently a glitch in the system!

That used to happen on occasion on DU2--I've rarely seen it here!

[Pooka Fey]

83. With 70 years passing, there are questions that can be asked

Last edited Mon Feb 16, 2015, 07:08 AM - Edit history (1)

I am a passionate WWII buff.

I think, after over 70 years, it might be time to keep in mind that not everyone who fought in the German Army was a committed Nazi. The SS divisions were certainly were Nazis. Those in the Wehrmacht, the German regular army, may or may not have been committed Nazis.

Some of older career Wehrmacht officers might NOT HAVE BEEN committed to the Nazi cause, but simply were forced to go along, in order to keep their positions in the military and of course to avoid execution and the brutal consequences that would follow for their family members.

The officers who attempted to assassinate Hitler were Wehrmacht who knew that the war was lost, and that Hitler was destroying Germany. At least in France today, these men are now referred to as German Resistors, not Nazi brass.

I am too busy to add to the discussion by asking why many villages in Normandy, those with no strategic significance, were equally bombed to bits by the Allies, since the French civilians were not our enemies, and certainly NOT wartime accomplices to the Nazis.

Cheers

[Telcontar]

107. Bridges, rail hubs, and road junctions

Deny their use to the enemy to protect the flanks of advancing units or to prevent enemy escape in order to pocket them.

[Pooka Fey]

113. I used to say that too, with deep conviction. Then I learned to speak French and hear their side

Last edited Mon Mar 9, 2015, 06:33 AM - Edit history (1)

and I forced myself to watch an excellent documentary on French TV last summer made for the 70th D-Day celebration. If you like, I can look for the name of the documentary, and see if it has been subtitled into English. After seeing it, I was shocked, and I could no longer refuse to see what the historical evidence shows. The film was made by serious historians, who are grateful to the Allies for the Liberation of France. As I said, some people feel enough time has passed, after 70 years, to be able to ask certain questions.

I need to add here that the French are deeply grateful to the Allies for their liberation, and they are committed to decorating the tombs of those Allied soldiers who fell defending France unto perpetuity, as if those soldiers were their own sons. The French know that the American and Allied soldiers didn't control the actions of their governments.



Peace

[PumpkinAle]

80. Those that should answer that are long gone

but we can learn why somethings do take place......


“Dresden, the seventh largest city in Germany and not much smaller than Manchester, is also far the largest unbombed built-up the enemy has got. In the midst of winter with refugees pouring westwards and troops to be rested, roofs are at a premium. The intentions of the attack are to hit the enemy where he will feel it most, behind an already partially collapsed front, to prevent the use of the city in the way of further advance, and incidentally to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do.”
RAF January 1945
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/bombing_of_dresden.htm

There is absolutely no doubt that the people of Dresden suffered terribly.

There is a huge lesson to learn, but will those that need to learn from it do so?

Remember - The road to hell is paved with good intentions

[still_one]

85. Because it was war, and that didn't stop Germany from attacking civilian

Targets in Britain or other places in Europe

The same can be argued about hirishama or Nagasaki, but in that case it ended the war, and saved troops that were going in for a land invasion of Japan

There is no morality in war, and both Germany and Japan should not have started it in the first place

[cwydro]

87. Google "Coventry."

Nuff said

[cheapdate]

88. Seriously? Why did we bomb German cities?

It was an all-out war against Germany with the future of Western civilization at stake. We bombed Dresden to destroy the city.

[Special Prosciuto]

93. US and Britain wanted to slow the Soviet advance on Berlin.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

94. No cause justifies the deaths of innocent people. Albert Camus

[Telcontar]

108. Albert Camus is an idiot who wasnt responsible for the survival

of his own civilization. Rather than resist Nazi occupation of France, he instead wrote a couple of books. Excuse me if I totally discount anything he says.

[Pooka Fey]

114. Camus in French Resistance Intel unit "Combat" from 1941, & published a clandestine journal

He and his entire family were at risk of pubic execution by the Nazi occupier for 4 years.

Since you are spouting outright lies and slander about Camus, I won't bother translating the link for you.

Your entire commentary on the subject of Camus is worthless.

http://mael.monnier.free.fr/bac_francais/etranger/viecamus.htm

[Telcontar]

116. No evidence he participated in any active resistance

Yes, publishing a subversive newspaper was an act of courage. Doing so did place him in mortal danger. I still don't see where he had to make any decisions regarding defense of his people.

[Pooka Fey]

118. Gathering Intel & disfusing it to Resistance & Allies made him an enemy combattant of Nazis

I would have to read his biography to know exactly what he did during the Resistance. Intel plays a major part in war, I think we can agree. Did Camus kill Nazis directly with his own hands? Maybe. Did his Intel activities kill Nazis? Certainly. That's the point of Intel. The French Resistance wasn't nice to Nazis. You should read up on it. I've read things that have turned my stomach.

Your post makes no sense, at all. Good of you to acknowledge your error, it's a step in the right direction.

[Rex]

95. Why did we kill a million Iraqis in Iraq?

What did they do to us? Why did we imprison Americans of Japanese ancestry during WWII? Why didn't we detain and imprison people with German ancestry too? Why did the Germans pick the Jews and Gypsys to exterminate?

Why did we give the native man lice ridden blankets and small pox?

Why why why...good luck ever getting a rational answer to the reason humans kill each other or imprison each other - but I bet you the true answer is this - because we can and nobody can stop us.

Sounds shitty, that humans would be that fucking immoral - yet it seems to follow us throughout history like a best friend in need.

[tblue37]

100. It is the same tactic General Sherman used in his burning of the South

during the Civil War. The intention is to force the population as a whole to turn against the leaders who get them into a war and keep them in it.

[oneshooter]

101. Why did the Germans bomb London? n/t

[TexasTowelie]

102. In Memoriam Dresden - 1945 by Daniel Bukvich

[Orrex]

110. To allow hind-sighters to cluck their tongues righteously 70 years after the fact.

What other possible reason could there be?

[One_Life_To_Give]

111. Why did Fighters Strafe fleeing civilians?

The ensuing disorder greatly hampered the coordinated movement of troops and materials. This type of bombing would lead to more general chaos making many ordinary activities more difficult.

[malaise]

112. Bro we in the West are the biggest LIARs in history

Truth be told, we're the real barbarians, but when you control the narrative you can make shit up as you go along.
It was ghastly - and the same is true for Japan.

[aquart]

119. Thank you for assuring me they suffered.

I like knowing that the feeling of being burnt alive might keep them from starting fires. Fifty million dead because of them, was it?

And you believe the punishment was too harsh?

[JonLP24]

121. I don't know the details of this -- but similar examples are the problem with war

the noble intentions can be marketed very well, rescuing the people from the Viet Cong who were fighting leaders who seized power with a corrupt referendum. Operation Iraqi Freedom. ETC.

Elements of the military campaign take things to far. Distant Land of My Father tells a story about an American business in Shanghai and the book really sells Shanghai as like the greatest place on earth pre-war that never was the same, even in the 80's when it isn't like it was. He was locked away in a harsh prison by the Japanese, released than detained for years in harsh prison conditions by the Communists.

It didn't mention politics of the international & civil conflicts, just mentions rumors of Japanese aggression, bombs dropping, Japanese troops on what grounds they locked him away for.

Then mentions Communist take over, the grounds he was locked away over in brutal inhumane conditions. I can't oversell the vivid picture of pre-war Shanghai, the conditions, to how the prison was ran and guarded. Just offers a perspective not only of Shanghai & the prisons nearby before and since but also of LA during and post war because his daughter & wife were living there. Basically it tells a story of loss that can never be returned.

Massive unemployment & WWI resentments were key to Hitler's rise in power. While these debates reportedly rage on, I'm interested on the perspectives from those bombed and this is closest it comes in the article

Not everyone was convinced by city bombing. Numerous military and church leaders voiced strong opposition. Freemason Dyson, now one of Britain’s most eminent physicists, worked at Bomber Command from 1943-5. He said it eroded his moral beliefs until he had no moral position at all. He wanted to write about it, but then found the American novelist Kurt Vonnegut had said everything he wanted to say.

Like Gregg, Vonnegut had been a prisoner in Dresden that night. He claimed that only one person in the world derived any benefit from the slaughterhouse — him, because he wrote a famous book about it which pays him two or three dollars for every person killed.

Germany’s bombing of British cities was equally abhorrent. Germany dropped 35,000 tons on Britain over eight months in 1940-1 killing an estimated 39,000. (In total, the UK and US dropped around 1.9 million tons on Germany over 7 years.)

Bombing German cities clearly did have an impact on the war. The question, though, is how much. The post-war US Bombing Survey estimated that the effect of all allied city bombing probably depleted the German economy by no more than 2.7 per cent.

[Nevernose]

127. Henry V Act 3

Butchering innocent women and children used to be how all wars were one (as opposed to now, when it's just most wars.

How yet resolves the governor of the town?
This is the latest parle we will admit;
Therefore to our best mercy give yourselves;
Or like to men proud of destruction
Defy us to our worst: for, as I am a soldier,
A name that in my thoughts becomes me best,
If I begin the battery once again,
I will not leave the half-achieved Harfleur
Till in her ashes she lie buried.
The gates of mercy shall be all shut up,
And the flesh'd soldier, rough and hard of heart,
In liberty of bloody hand shall range
With conscience wide as hell, mowing like grass
Your fresh-fair virgins and your flowering infants.
What is it then to me, if impious war,
Array'd in flames like to the prince of fiends,
Do, with his smirch'd complexion, all fell feats
Enlink'd to waste and desolation?
What is't to me, when you yourselves are cause,
If your pure maidens fall into the hand
Of hot and forcing violation?
What rein can hold licentious wickedness
When down the hill he holds his fierce career?
We may as bootless spend our vain command
Upon the enraged soldiers in their spoil
As send precepts to the leviathan
To come ashore. Therefore, you men of Harfleur,
Take pity of your town and of your people,
Whiles yet my soldiers are in my command;
Whiles yet the cool and temperate wind of grace
O'erblows the filthy and contagious clouds
Of heady murder, spoil and villany.
If not, why, in a moment look to see
The blind and bloody soldier with foul hand
Defile the locks of your shrill-shrieking daughters;
Your fathers taken by the silver beards,
And their most reverend heads dash'd to the walls,
Your naked infants spitted upon pikes,
Whiles the mad mothers with their howls confused
Do break the clouds, as did the wives of Jewry
At Herod's bloody-hunting slaughtermen.
What say you? will you yield, and this avoid,
Or, guilty in defence, be thus destroy'd?