Dresden still divided over blame for WWII bombing

BBC News - Dresden still divided over blame for WWII bombing

Sixty-six years after the bombing of Dresden a debate about who was to blame for the conflict still rages...

...both demonstrations were tiny compared to the human chain of thousands of people marking the anniversary by linking hands across the city, over the bridges of the Elbe, and back to the Altmarkt, the old market square where 6,865 corpses were cremated in the open in 1945.

 

I think you bring up one more topic to debate: British war crimes in WWII. The Germans weren't the only bad ones.

 

If the Germans are still angry about what happened at Dresden, then they need to take a small trip to one of the many death camps built and operated by their countrymen. Go ask the ghosts of all those people slaughtered by them if they think it was a criminal act for Dresden to be bombed.

Those people have forgotten about just who started the war and who commited some of the worst atrocities in history. They should be greatfull that the victors punishment on Germany wasnt as severe as what many of the victims of the Nazi's wanted.

 

The word 'Dresden' appears in a thread heading and off we go again.....

 

Id hazard a guuess Norwegian partisans in civies killing German soldiers would have been a war crime if we lost the war..so too Norwegian forces who carried on thee fight after norway succumbed..Certainly by todays standards of course.

 

When is hiroshima due to pop up by the way....bad ones....remind me who were the bad ones..

 

Please read the article first. It´s more than Dresden...OK?

 

Im sure we all read it Kai. Particularly like the quote..just because you fire the first shot doesnt mean you started the war...really..And its worse than Dresden..churchill a war criminal...really...AtLeast one member here may agree with that But Ill leave the war crinimals to others to defend. Ill say one last thing before this degenerates further..to Our Norwegian member..after ww2 when Norway re introduced capital punishment and executed some of its war criminals..they still didnt have a fully fledged judicial system or government..today wed call that a lynching in civilised society..bad guys would be at the hague with millosavich...

 

And that automatically excuses anything done by any other person and or nation? I don't want to get into a comparisions discussion nor am I adding any fuel to either side of the Dresden debate but if someone did something they shouldn't have I don't see why it should be given a free pass simply becasue someone on the other side managed to one up them.

 

Dresden was a valid military target. An important communications center. It had to be destroyed so as to help the Russian army advance.

And since the German govt had long before decided that this was going to be a war of anniliation, then that was a tacit approval for the allies to use any force neccesary to end it.

 

Yet the Allied policy was in fact to take as much territory before the Red Army did, so "helping the Red Army" was counter-productive.

A valid military target? In 1944 perhaps. But by Feb 1945 there was no doubt about the outcome of the war, so it's unlikely that the deaths of 1,000's of civilians had any substantive effect on the outcome of the war.

Misdeeds by one side doesn't make similar tactics right by the other side

 

I hate to take Syscom3's side on this; but, if there was no doubt as to the outcome of the war then the most resonable course of ation would have been for Germany to surrender prior to the bombing of Dresden?

 

It's worth pointing out that in one week of February 1945, 71 V2s detonated in the Greater London area. From the civilian perspective I guess it's reasonable to doubt the outcome of the war when, after over 5 years of war, you could still be blown to bits at any moment without warning.

 

Some will say that technically France and Britian declared war to Germany FIRST. Of course I don't support this statement.
Also why focuss on Dresden only, many other German cities were targetted , and 22% of allied bombs were dropped over France. There are no hard feelings about this , so why Dresden? Because of the civilians ?
(50.000 thousand civilians died during the battle of Normandy vs 30.000-40.000 in Dresden)
Because it was not "strategic":Ya right and certainly more than le Havre.

Also have some forgotten that the axis bombed defenseless cities as early as 1939 and 1940 (Warsaw and Rotterdam).
It was in way strategic,as they convinced the French to leave Paris as an open city in June 1940 in order to save it from he same fate. (not to mention that it was almost destroyed by von Choltznitz in 1944)

 

Sure you may have been killed anonymously and indiscreetly at any moment, regardless of your proximately to any target of military value; but, V2's sure were cool. I guess maybe the rub with the German's is that we didn't have 'sirens' on our dive bombers.

I just don't think the German's are in any position to condemn or accuse anyone of a war crime.

 

Actually Stukas weren't fitted with sirens, it was a hollow tube on the undercarriage below the propellor that made this legendary noise.

 

in any case the WW 2 generation sadly is passing every day the youth of today really don't care and memories of war: Dresden, London bombings have faded away. Memorials are being put up monthly and in 85 % plus the German folk anyway pass by without a look. Life is good now lets leave it where it is as I have heard in conversations then and still today.

Dresden had rid itself of it's importance as a military center except for it's central railway center reliveing the German populace as it entered from the east to escape to the west. there are many first hand witnesses that have attested to this............. not wishing to prolong a painful recourse of what we have talked through for many years on this forum and elsewhere.

 

The war of annihilation was largely fought in the East and I don't think the Nazi's were very public about the specifics of what they were doing either. Infact, it took the world quite a while to figure out the extent of what had happened in the East so I doubt this played much into the Allied train of thought.

Again, that shouldn't invalidate any legitimate claims from "the Axis".

Your original post was worded in such a way where you basically said the victims have no right to complain simply because their governments were doing something worse to other people. This doesn't excuse what the Nazi's did by any means and I believe those responsible should be questioned, but I also don't think we should turn a blind eye to other victims who many have legitimate claims of their own.

Well I'm sure the direct family members impacted by have had some hard feelings at some point. I think Dresden is a point of interesting in such discussions simply because of the timing of the bombings, even when the bombings occurred there were questions in Allied countries about the purpose of them at that stage of the war.

 

Point being that it was still a purposeful addition that had nothing to do with Aerodynamics.

 

Dresden isn't the only case, it's the most discussed , other martyr cities are never mentionned, possibly because there were "less" dead. History has almost forgotten the fate of Royan (bombed by mistake in 1945) for example.