Allied Terror bombing of Germany

Goebbels made much of the Allies' demand for unconditional surrender in his propaganda, but the German leadership, both Nazi and anti-Nazi, doesn't seem to have taken it seriously. The anti-Nazi plotters went right on plotting in the expectation that they could make peace with the Allies, the western Allies at least, after they deposed or disposed of the Fuhrer. The best-known bomb plots occurred after the unconditional surrender proclamation in January 1943. The July 20 conspirators expected to form a new German government and negotiate satisfactory peace terms. On the other side, Himmler, Goring, and even Donitz thought they could make a deal with the British or Americans even with Germany on the verge of collapse.

 

But Italy was being treated differently than Germany. Italy was also different because Mussolini did not have the similar ultimate power than Hitler - as already have been explained here.

The only option the Germans were offered was the unconditional surrender.

A "reasonable treatment" by the soviets? Don't think so.

Don't think surrendering to the Western Allied would have been that impossible. On the other hand surrendering also to the soviets was unthinkable.

The difference is, that if the option "get rid of the Nazies and get a peace deal" would have been available, that most likely would have encouraged more and perhaps more successful coup attempts. Now (too) many officers most likely reasoned, that because the unconditional surrender was the only possibility - whether with the Nazies or without them - the best bet was to stay with them, regardless of their own liking.

 

Others have supplied enough data to strongly suggest your opnions are ill founded. I'll leave it at that.

 

Sorry, i am more of a lurker in this forum but as a german i am afraid i have to correct you:
The Text translates to: "The Holcaust never existed" and beneath that it says:
"There are still People who claim that. In 20 Years there could be more. Please donate for the memorial for the
murdered Jews of Europe."

 

But you must be aware of difficulties of translating German to English and that there are different ways to translate that sentence. Perhaps the best translation is by the native speaker, David Irving, The Master Denier:

"The Holocaust had never happened"

My translation was clumsy but your's isn't that better. Where have you seen the verb "existieren" in the original text?

Interestingly, there is another version of that poster, without the small print for a trap for the unwarry. And who reads fine print in a car driving on an Autoban over 130 kmph. The most of wiser Germans just nodded as they drove by and said "Told you so". (D. Irwing)
There is yet another awkward aspect of that poster but I will avoid mentioning that.

 

Jeez, it´s the fact that this sign, shield or whatever it was, had just one aim and that was to shock People so they read the rest of it. And maybe
they even donate for the memorial. You pull that thing completely out of context! And the last caption of yours is exactly what a Holocaust Denier would do:
Only see what is convinient and deny (or cut out like in your last Pic) the Facts and pull everything out of context.
If you want to rant about that Sign feel free to do it at: https://www.holocaust-denkmal-berlin.de/ they did it.
Be aware they might be all Holocaust deniers! /s

 

Thanks for the link.

But you wanted to correct my translation. As a native speaker, please tell me which translation is correct now:

1. The Holcaust never existed (you)
2. The Holocaust had never happened (David Irwing)

 

"..never happened" is probably the better translation, but that was never the point of my posting. Back to Topic, please.

 

Agreed.

Let's get back to: Allied Terror bombing of Germany

 

Question: Is it not appropriate to call the strategic bombing of Civillian Areas a Terror? I can tell you in behalf of my Grandma, that it was terrifying. She shakes still today, if
i try to talk with her about it. Yeah, i know my forefathers did start the whole shit, but as a young German i find it difficult to find a reasonable Viewpoint on all of this.
War is so fucked up!

 

Civilian Areas? Where were these "civilian areas" clearly delineated? Would that be the labour force located in the Concentration Camps? Or the dwellings of the factory administrators at IG Farben?

Call it a terror if you will. Quite frankly, by the time the bombing was a serious threat (post summer 1944), every sane person in Germany knew the war was lost. Yes, it sucks that Germany had at its head a murderous regime hell-bent on self-destruction.

But given the eradication of 6 million "undesirables" across Europe, I'd be careful in using the word terror.

 

So, you expect your oponment to delinate the places of your "not so military " targets? I never ever would play down the atrocities the Generation of my Grandfathers did!
So, how you would like to call it? Justified Mass murdering? Funny killing of Families? Revenge? You kill hundreds of my people, now iam gonna kill thousands of your people!
Please, be aware that my english is not perfect and therefore some things could sound more harsh as they intended to be.

 

I don't see any point in renaming things because renaming doesn't change the essence. But, in this particular case, an attribute "terror" entirely denigrates intentions of the Allies and at the same time presents the Nazi Germany as a victim. That word is simply an insult to the crewmen who did their job.

If there is anyone to blame then blame those who challenged the Allies. Quite recently you've send me to "rant" at the Holocaust Memorial Site. Now I could have send you to rant here. But I wouldn't.

 

Taking into consideration the final sentence I'm not completely sure what you meant by the first one. At least according to the conventions of war in effect at the time the allies didn't bomb "civilian" areas intentionally. Their targets were military and industrial and logistics structures that supported the military. A city was only considered to civilian and not subject to bombardment if it was undefended for instance and had no military facilities or support facilities within it. Whiche pretty much means every city in the world was a legitimate target. Of course there was also the lamentable accuarcy demonstrated during the war that meant even targets that shouldn't have been hit and weren't targeted got hit occasionally.

 

War is terryfying :ask the people of Coventry,Nanking,Warsaw,etc,etc

 

There were legitimate military facilities in and around Dresden. Also the city had fixed fortifications and AA installations. The ordnance used to bomb the city were similar to cities of similar size. IMO there was no attempt at destroying a cultural Hub of Germany. It was considered justified due to its location and munitions factories. What happened was horrific, but, as you said above, "War is f 'd up". The Allied bombing campaign had it's lows, this was not the best call, but it was militarily justified given the scope.

 

Also if I'm not mistaken but wasn't Dresden a rail hub as well? Didn't 4-5 rail lines intersect the city? Many war munitions made their way through here, many on their way to the Eastern Front. I've read that Uncle Joe himself asked the Allies to pummel Dresden for this very reason. Let it be known that I'm not big fan of Stalin or his policies, but in this case, if it happened the way I read it then he was right in his request. War is hell. Especially for the innocents.

 

Correct. High rail traffic.

 

As the matter of fact, Germans ( and Japanese too) were lucky that that the Anglo-Saxons had destiny of Germany in their hands. Just imagine such a powerful force in hands of more aggressive nations.

 

Thanks for all the Answers! And i mean it!
So bombing the shit out of german civillians is not as bad as everything else done by other Combatants.
And by the Way: I never quenstioned the Heroism done by the Crews of the Bombers.
This Forum seems to be definatley an American/English one. So i should expect that kind of
critizism. But i still dont understand that kind of low value for german live ( Children, Mothers, Grandfathers).
I know about the shit the Germans done in that Timeframe, but does it really justify this slaughter?