Allied Terror bombing of Germany

Generalplan Ost would have been implemented regardless of how long the German-Soviet war went on. It was part of the Great Germanic Empire of the East. The plan involved the mass deportation of Slavs and undesirables to Siberia to be systematically starved and worked to death (the plan was for 10 million deaths in this fashion) and they still were going to deal with the Jews in a brutal manner, Hitler just sped it up because the US entered and there was the setback and Moscow, so he wanted to get that going so it could progress as much as possible for however long the war went on.

 

Yes...A matter of principle...Harris should have lied through his teeth instead of being so honest.
So, I presume that the "principle" you are arguing for is that it is better to lie than to be truthful.

3. If Germany had not started the war in the first place, all lives could have been saved.

4. Hello wall...Neither man stated that all civilians were targets too. And you have yet to post any credible evidence that they did...
Please post some hard evidence that they did, or kindly cease and desist from repeatedly posting this same passage over and over again, when shown evidence to the contrary. Repetition does not make your statement fact...Or are you following the principle that a lie repeated often enough eventually becomes the truth.

5. Dresden, likely made the war shorter for the Soviets, if only, at least, by a few days. Did Nagasaki make the war shorter, almost certainly so, and the Soviet entry into the Pacific War sealed the deal.

Very few wars have been won by a single battle alone. Instead, victory or defeat is the culmination of the outcomes of all the battles that have taken place during said war. So, it is impossible to say that battle/bombing raid so-and-so was a waste.

Whether the leaders of the UK & USA knew that the war was almost over is irrelevant to the situation and does not matter - Hell, they thought the war would be over by Christmas 1944. The only thing that mattered was that the leadership of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan knew the war was over. Regretfully, both to much convincing before they reached such a conclusion.

5. Given the level of accuracy of World War II high altitude bombing, it also means that the cow pasture 5 miles north of the city is being targeted. The there is the farmer's fields 6 miles east of the city that is being targeted, and the lake 4 miles south is also under the bull's eye.

6. German civilians were killed intentionally, at least by the British. True, but only the ones working in the war industries.

 

Gaza is nothing like what we have in this discussion.
It is tantamount to Germany occupying France.....and then complaining when the indigenous "terrorists" fight back.

 

True statement. We have the ability of hindsight and have the luxury of debating this topic which has been hotly debated here for some time. There are some influential moments during the war that one can pin great achievements/turning points (Barbarossa, Stalingrad, Hiroshima, German failure in the west in '40 and '44...the list is endless). The true nature of the war is the sequence of events.

 

Not to deviate from the intended topic.

But Gaza was "occupied" by the Egyptians after the '48 War. So would not a fair comparison would it...
Maybe, at the end of WW1 Britain "occupies" France, moves in military forces and threatens war with Germany. Germany responds by attacking France and Britain, defeating both and occupying France.

But, then again, matters are much more complicated than can be described using such simplistic comparisons.

 

The comparison between Gaza and Dresden/Hiroshima and other cities is that the civilians were used as hostages : Hamas was attacking Israel from Gaza,if Israel would reply,civilians/children would be killed,and Hamas would whine about the barbarous Israelis .

In Dresden were a lot of factories which were making things who were killing Allied soldiers and civilians/children.In Dresden were also living a lot of German civilians and children .If the Allies did not attack Dresden,Allied soldiers and civilians would be killed by the things that were made in Dresden .If the Allies attacked Dresden,this would result inevitably in German civilian casualties.What was more important for the Allies : the lives of their own soldiers and civilians,or the lives of German civilians ?
And,of course,since the end of the war,the neo-nazis are whining about Dresden,but are remaining silent about Warsaw,Rotterdam,Coventry,London,Liverpool,Antwerp (which was attacked by V1/V2),etc.

 

I guess one question is...how do you fight a war that has no "front".?
Pre June 6 1944, the Allies did not have a Western Front per se.
I am sure some cities were much more crucial to the war effort than others.

I have no idea what was in Dresden.
Lots of refugees from Silesia, and points East no doubt...but what else.?
I have heard that a lot of German troops were in that vicinity on there way to and fro. Maybe it was a Rail and Road hub for the Eastern Front...maybe Flak Batteries...supply points...important staff officers.?
I really have no idea.
The way it was bombed, the Allies obviously wanted the place gone for some reason.

I really do not know what to think. In 1943-1945 Germany, were there city's bombed that were "just" civilians.
I can see bombing
NYC
San Francisco
Houston
Seattle
etc etc.....and accepting all the dead civilians.
But what about all the other places that grow food, store food, store supplies, manufacture steel and rubber.?
I can see where you would bomb places of import, and all surrounding areas back then.
Where and how to draw the line.?

I have heard a few times that General Doolittle complained when he was given orders to bomb "Berlin".
It was contrary to his understanding of strategic bombing.

I THINK the feeling a lot of people (military and civilian) had was that we were at war with The Countries of Germany and Japan...not just the armies of...but with The Countries themselves...so you just laid it all to waste until they said enough.

It is a complex issue. Bob McNamara said he would have been tried as a war criminal if the Allies had not won. Fire bombing Tokyo was his reason.

I am not so sure that bombing/killing civilians was the intent.....just that they were of no consequence if they got rolled up into a target of "concern".
I do not know how to dissect all the possibilities.....or what I would have done in some of those shoes...or how I would have felt circa 1945

 

Dresden was a pass-thru town for Military, and apparently the Germans were going to bring in troops and weapons to make a defensive position out of the city (that could have been propaganda after-the-fact as well), but ultimately it was supposed to be a show of support for the Russian Army that was about to reach the area, and a way to show them the power the Western Allies had to destroy cities and its population from the air alone.

 

There is at least one thread here on Dresden I wouldn't be surprised if there were several. From what I recall Dresden was a major rail hub and contained a fair amount of military and industrial targets.

 

If you could cite a source, it would be helpful.

IIRC, he never complained about bombing Berlin in "that" way.

He complained because he was not allowed to fly over and bomb Berlin, he was going for the trifecta, having already bomber Tokyo and Rome.
He complained about B-24s bombing Berlin, because they flew at a lower altitude and would likely be slaughtered in the attempt.
I think he may have complained about bombing Berlin, instead of being allowed to hit more important oil refinery targets.

Still, he was dead set against taking up area bombing as practiced by the British.

 

Takao -
Let me check, I do not think it was a book.....
I could have sworn I just heard Tim Piggot Smith remark on a shelved bombing mission of Berlin that Doolittle protested because of the vague target of "Berlin".....but that it was taken up again, later in the war.
But I am also browsing some old library books.
Let me see if it was more than the Battlefield series of videos that I am recalling.
Thanks

 

Check "Winged Victory: The Army Air Forces in World War II" by Geoffrey Perret, pg. 369. Unfortunately Google Books, only has a small snippet of the passage, and I do not have the book.

 

Oh Man.....I am sorry...I hate it when a guy is trying to help me, but I do not understand what with.
Are you saying that Book/Page contradicts what I am recalling..... or that it substantiates what I think I have read/heard.?

BTW...I still cannot find a source for what I am saying. I know I have heard this Doolittle thing once before, and then just recently (within the last several days) I have either heard or read it again. Maybe it was a discussion on the radio.?
The gist was (I think) that Doolittle ( was he with the 8th.?) got an order(s) to bomb "Berlin". It was either that the order was so vague, or maybe because it was so specific in its vagueness as to a target, that Doolittle formally complained to a higher-up ( I want to say Spaatz) in writing. Maybe because of Overlord/D-Day, those orders were postponed...but then later he was told to carry out the plans against his conscience.
As I recall, he felt the mission was to just drop bombs on a city of people for no other reason that to make a good showing of support for the Russians.
I am not trying to push a false point, I was just commenting on an event that kind of ties into the whole "terror bombing" thing.
Thank You

 

No,no, no. It has the Jimmy Doolittle quote we are looking for. So, yes, I believe what you said about Doolittle. However, since the page is not part of the preview, all I can see are about 2-3 sentences with a word search.

 

No Problem.
I was fine with being wrong....but I had heard/read it so recently.
You are an awesome librarian my friend. :goldmedal:

 

Your not wrong...You are right!

The book has the passage that proves you are right, however, the page is not part of the Google Book preview, so all I can read is a few sentences. I was hoping to read the entire paragraph, if not a several paragraphs, to put everything onto proper context. But I don't have this book in my coleection, nor does the local Barnes & Noble have it on their shelves.

 

Thanks, Slip!

That is what I was looking for.

 

Again...sorry.....I did realize you were "vindicating" me.
I was just commenting that IF I were wrong, I was fine with it. But IF I had been wrong, I was wondering how I could have screwed up so badly...with having just heard it so recently.
I was starting to doubt myself, was all.
But you proved me right .....as far as my memory goes
Thanks for all the info

 

NP, it's all good.