Dresden- Justified or Not?

[Boleslav]

This comment is hilarious, anybody who believe Nazi Germany to be the victims in World War 2 is wrong, flat out. What would have made me proud is if they hadnt allowed Hitler to become powerful in the first place.

I believe that German people were as much victims of WWII as anyone else.

Hitler might have been stopped earlier if Britain hadn't been following a policy of appeasement. So British people are also to blame for WWII.

 

[Immortal]

Yep, those merry children playing in Berlin wearing their childrens SS uniforms sure were as much a victim as Anne Frank was, yep you sure as hell got me.

SImply put, I stare at that picture of the burnt bodies piled on top of each other, and do you know what I feel:

NOTHING.

Dresden apologists are a shameful lot.

 

[Esckey]

If I was PM I would apologize for Canada's involvment in Dresden, Cologne and the other cities we bombed for the sake of bombing. What's so shamefull in that?

 

[Zardnaar]

Several points to make. I earlier stated that I disagreed with the bombing of Dresden but not with bombing campaign on Germany.

1. Germany bombed England 1st. Rightly or wrongly England and later the USA retailiated.

2. At the time it was thought it could win the war when the western Allies had no other option due to being kicked out of Europe.

3. Bombing Refineries. The WW2 bombers didn't have the range or accuracy to hit them. Later in the war when they did Ploesti and the refineries did get bombed. Also WW2 was the worlds 1st mechanised war. With hindsight you need fuel to fight but perhaps the Allies didn't know how vulnerable Germany was for fuel.

4. The bombing gutted German war production. True production peaked in 44 but how much higher could it have gone if there was no bombing? An extra 500 King Tigers (with the required fuel), 1000 Panthers???? Both of these tanks statisically killed 5 Shermans and 9 T34s each. How many allied soldiers should die in place of enemy civilians.

5. Germany had lost the war in 43. By 44 it was obvious to everyone. They could have surrendered or got a peace treaty before the allies insisted on unconditional surrender. They didn't

6. At the time of the Dresden raid Germany was firing V1 and V2 missiles at England. Although militarily useless they did cause mass panic and children wer again evacuated to the countryside.

7. With hindsight even the Allies and most of the world realised carpet bombing cities was wrong. It has never been repeated since. However at the time people were scared and they thought it would work. Its easy to sit at our computers and judge our Grandfathers and Great Grandfathers.

8. It was total war like it our not. Civilians were targeted by all sides.


I don't see what other options the western allies could have taken. What were they supposed to do? Sit in England and what for the war to be over, let the reds overrun europe, or invade anyway and let the Germans have uninterrupted production? Without the bombing would every German city have been fought over a'la Stalingrad and Berlin? Without a surrender the German cities were probably going to be wrecked anyway. The Marshall plan did help rebuild Europe including Germany. Although not perfect compare allied motivations and occupations to German or USSR occupations. The average Geramn civilian must have known or at least suspected what happened to the Jews.German soldiers on leave talked about what they got up to in the USSR. The Wehrmacht fought on for an extra week after Hitler died to give the civilians time to flee the Russians- they knew what Russian treatment would be like and why.

 

[Zardnaar]

If I was PM I would apologize for Canada's involvment in Dresden, Cologne and the other cities we bombed for the sake of bombing. What's so shamefull in that?

Admit you're wrong and you could have a legal lawsuit for compensation.

 

[amadeus]

So in other words rmsharpe, suicide bombings, the WTC attacks, and beheading of civilians in Iraq is all justified?

No, becuase they're on the wrong side.

 

[Zardnaar]

No, becuase they're on the wrong side.

The Jews were on the wrong side (According to Hitler) to.

 

[amadeus]

This again?

It's incredibly exhausting to hear the constant chanting that Bush is equivilant to Hitler.

 

[Zardnaar]

This again?

It's incredibly exhausting to hear the constant chanting that Bush is equivilant to Hitler.

I really don't give a rats fart about Hitler/Bush comparisons. Comparing Bush to Hitler is like comparing aples to oranges and is stupid-regardless of what one may think of Bush. Bush at his worst in infinately better than Hitler at his best. Your post seemed to condone any civilians casualties inflicted by US forces but US civilians are off limits. Terrorism is different than a decleared war between 2 industrial nations.

In the Iraq war, if Iraq had the capability to bomb America in retaliation of America bombing Baghdad it would have been fine by me. In total war you take your chances and that includes targeting civilians if needed. Is it right no, is it fair no, is it the way the world works yes.

 

[Boleslav]

Yep, those merry children playing in Berlin wearing their childrens SS uniforms sure were as much a victim as Anne Frank was, yep you sure as hell got me.

SImply put, I stare at that picture of the burnt bodies piled on top of each other, and do you know what I feel:

NOTHING.

Dresden apologists are a shameful lot.

I feel that some people on this forum seem to equate holding an opinion that the firebombing of Dresden was wrong with being a holocaust-denier or being a holocaust-belittler. I'd like to point out I'm neither of these things.

I also feel that some people are confused about the terms 'German' and 'Nazi'. I differentiate between them.

I am not ashamed to apologise for Dresden.

 

[Reno]

And if you think that was the only or main thing the allies did during WWII then there's something you need to read about

Yeah Yeah they landed in algeria in 1942 *Torch* Suplied russians with tanks in 1941-44 landed in France in 1944 *Overlord* then the Failed airborne assault on Holland *Market Garden* bla bla bla... The topic is not about what the allies did during WW II but about the bombing of Dresden.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I believe that German people were as much victims of WWII as anyone else.

Hitler might have been stopped earlier if Britain hadn't been following a policy of appeasement. So British people are also to blame for WWII.

Us is also to blame for falling to be part of the league of nations
Us is to blame for great depression
Harsh terms place on Germany at Versies treaty
Stalin for the non-aggression pact
Stalin for helping Nazi germany aquire tanks

and so on ...........

actions and conequnces of these actions. Like I said before dresden was a war crime but the allies had no other choice.

 

[Adler17]

It is said that it was good to kill German civilinas as they were enemies. This is the same level as Nazis have. The very same level. The unnecessary death of civilians is not justifieable.
As I mentioned before the Germans were equipped to lead a tactical war. No strategical. The Brits had strategical weapons and so they were the first who really thinked of those crimes they commited in ww2 when it was unneccessary to think about. Also I concur that Ploesti was out of range, many other refineries like Hamburg or Leuna were in range. Also the big rail stations. They weren´t bombed until the last month. Even a thousand Panther are useless if you can´t bring them to the front. And for breaking the morale it was useless.
Dresden neccessary? It was in the last days of the war. The city was undefended. There was no Flak. Only masses of German refugees from Silesia and Bohemia. It was clear Germany lost the war. But now the Brits any US bomb Dresden, which was without any industrial or military target. Just the "Florence of the Elbe". Tell me, firendly fire what was necessary to bomb Dresden?

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

It is said that it was good to kill German civilinas as they were enemies. This is the same level as Nazis have. The very same level. The unnecessary death of civilians is not justifieable.

Which is irrelevant since the allies believed that the bombing raids over Germany were necessary to defeat the Germans. On the other hand, no level of logic can be forwarded to suggest that the Nazi acts of barbarity were likely to bring WWII to an end sooner. Comparing the entire allied air campaign to the Holocaust is just ludicrous Comparing Dresden to the holocaust is closer, but still there's a vast gulf between them. The holocaust was years of planned slaughter, where the choices to do so were numerous, Dresden was one or two occasions.

The fact that they may or may not have been right doesn't escape from the fact that they believed it to be the best way to take the fight back to Germany at that time.

As I mentioned before the Germans were equipped to lead a tactical war. No strategical. The Brits had strategical weapons and so they were the first who really thinked of those crimes they commited in ww2 when it was unneccessary to think about.

The British and others believed that WWII could be won through using air power to attack the enemies ability to wage war, mostly through attacking her industries and so on. The notions about attacking civilian targets were mostly not planned prior to WWII, in fact there were many in the RAF and Air Ministry who were against that kind of role. Planning strategic warfare is not the same as planning an anti-civilian role for your airforce. The British may have been the first to commit the crime of attacking civilians as a purposeful target, but the Germans were certainly doing this anyway, planning/doing, not sure if there's any point to discussing this frankly.

Also I concur that Ploesti was out of range, many other refineries like Hamburg or Leuna were in range. Also the big rail stations. They weren´t bombed until the last month

Wrong on the railways. The allies attacked the railways in a number of ways, and especially around the front. Proof of this is in Normandy were the Germans were often reduced to using trucks to bring fuel and supplies to the front just prior to D-day and after it because the allies, between the Resistance and the air campaign had mostly destroyed france's rail capacity. However there would be little point in doing this prior to D-day as it's effect would be minimal and quite possibly detrimental. To say it happened at the end of WWII though is just plain silly.

Personally, because of it's timing I deeply regret that the allies launched the raids against Dresden as it was certainly not going to end WWII any quicker. Trying to present the entire allied air campaign in the same light though is silly.

 

[ellie]

I believe that German people were as much victims of WWII as anyone else.

Hitler might have been stopped earlier if Britain hadn't been following a policy of appeasement. So British people are also to blame for WWII.

Dresden aside i do find the current practice of re-writing history on
the continent quite shocking. Suddenly germany was a victim (and we are
to pretend hitler did not have massive support and that the massacre of
an entire people was un noticed). And articles in eminent french papers
now claim france liberated itself, sugesting vichy collaboration had tiny
amounts of influence and talking up the size of the resistance.


Its all in the past, and there should be no hard feelings between
european nations now

But the re-writing of history really annoys me.

 

[tossi]

Of course they knew! How couldn't they know? "Oh yeah, all the Jews have been deported, and I was told I'll never hear from them again, but it's no biggy." Signs of Holocaust were everywhere. Those that deny they had any knowledge are liars, and you believe them.

Everybody knew something, but how could you even imagine something like Auschwitz, built for the very reason to mass kill people. No I don´t think a normal human who ahdn´t seen something like this before, would choose this answer when asking himself "Where did my neighbour go?" I would rather believe the propaganda constantly telling me that the jews now live in beutifull cities in the east. The people believed Hitler much stranger things, too.

 

[tossi]

Yep, those merry children playing in Berlin wearing their childrens SS uniforms sure were as much a victim as Anne Frank was, yep you sure as hell got me.

SImply put, I stare at that picture of the burnt bodies piled on top of each other, and do you know what I feel:

NOTHING.

Dresden apologists are a shameful lot.

People like you make me sad...

 

[Drakan]

I believe you're mistaken. As Adler17 has pointed out twice before in this thread, Desden was full of silesian refugees amongst others. The charred bodies formed heaps of up to 5 meters tall after the raids. If you don't feel sorry at heaps of dead civilian bodies you are heartless, my friend.

Now, I fully sustain and defend the way the R.A.F. and the U.S.A.F. bombed Germany during WWII. But in Dresdens case, the Venetia of the North of Europe, I just have to say it was a War Crime. It had no military interest whatsoever, wasn't vital at all. It was done out of revenge flat out. Now can you blame the British after the way in which the Luftwaffe had bombed Coventry just shortly before ? What military or strategical interest did Coventry have ? None. They just killed masses of innocent British civilians.

@Privatehudson:"The British may have been the first to commit the crime of attacking civilians as a purposeful target, but the Germans were certainly doing this anyway, planning/doing, not sure if there's any point to discussing this frankly"

I don't agree with you Privatehudson. The British didn't start bombing civilians in WWII. It was clearly the Germans who started this. What military interest might London have ? None, it was full of civilians at the time the first V1 and V2 fell. The Germans bombed sistematically civilian population in large cities. So it's little surprising why they ended being fed up and did what they did in Dresden.

Bombing Germany was neccessary at the time. And as someone has pointed out, unfortunately at the time the precision of bombers was very low. I believe I have read somewhere that only around 10% of bombs hit their intended target at the time.

As for Germans not knowing what was hapenning makes me laugh. Perhaps they didn't know that Auschwitz existed (or the other 30 concentration camps) albeit they certainly knew Jews were being sistematically erradicated. Now one can argue they closed their eyes to the truth or that they were under some sort of Hammelin's magical flute spell, but common....Germans were also to blame for what hapenned in Germany (and I'm making a distinction between them and Nazis).

We are all now Europeans, and we've gotten over it, but please let us not rewrite the past. Dresdens bombing was an awful War Crime. Right, I could point out a hundred war and not war crimes for it committed by the Nazis.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Us is also to blame for falling to be part of the league of nations
Us is to blame for great depression
Harsh terms place on Germany at Versies treaty
Stalin for the non-aggression pact
Stalin for helping Nazi germany aquire tanks

and so on ...........

actions and conequnces of these actions. Like I said before dresden was a war crime but the allies had no other choice.

The League of Nations failed, just like the UN as countries did not want to have to go to war over minor things like an invasion of Manchuria here, an invasion of Abyssinia there and who can blame them! Having the US and her insignificant military on board would have helped not one iota as Americans didn't want to lose young men in foreign wars they cared little for.

Comeon, Germany got away lightly at the Treaty of Versailles and through American loans and simply by not paying for very long didn't pay much back. Compared to what the Germans had lined up for the Allies and indeed what they put upon the defeated Russians and Rumanians they have a cheek to whine. The problem was that the treaty did not go far enough!

Stalin with the non-aggression pact was buying himself time and his country peace when the Western Powers failed to make a serious offer of alliance in opposition to Hitler.

As for Russia allowing Germany to train up tanks etc via the Treaty of Rapallo...it was a time when Germany was not Nazi (from 1922) and ended soon into Hitlers reign. It allowed Russia to copy German tactics and tanks and also to form a bond rather than be antagonistic. At the time it was a good move.


The sort of blame you and many are dishing out is the same blame some give to house owners who don't lock their doors and get robbed. Hell, it is a good idea, but the house owner shouldn't HAVE to lock their doors, the blame should rest with the perpetrator of the crime.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

FFS dude.

What military or strategic interest did Coventry have? It house factories and workers that helped supply the British economy and war-machine. Coventry wasn't a town that produced nothing but tea-cosies and hell, neither was Dresden.

Apparently Dresden contained:

"The Zeiss-Ikon optical factory and the Siemens glass factory (both of which were entirely devoted to manufacturing military gunsights).
The immediate suburbs contained factories building components of radar and electronics, and fuses for anti-aircraft shells. Other factories produced gas masks, engines for Junkers aircraft and cockpit parts for Messerschmitt fighters."

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Bombing-of-Dresden-in-World-War-II

(Interestingly enough, this website says a justification for the attack was that it was requested by the Soviets to counter a German Armour Division moving through and for the RAF to demonstrate its power to the Russians who were going to take the city.)

As for Coventry:

"Coventry played a pivotal role in World War Two, as a munitions centre and target for German air raids. The city's character, architecture and population remain forever entwined with war events.

The Blitz
In World War One, Coventry became established as a centre for the motor industry, a business which boomed with the war's reliance on transport. By the time war broke out again in 1939, many new factories had been built in and around the city, and a large number of local people were employed in the motor industry.

During World War Two these factories built cars, engines, armaments and aeroplanes, all of which contributed to the war effort. This industrial activity made it an obvious target for German air raids.

On 14 November 1940, 500 German bombers dropped 500 tons of explosives and nearly 900 incendiary bombs on Coventry in just ten hours. The city was almost destroyed and the bombs claimed many lives."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ww2/A1064648


Just for the record to posters in the history forum, don't just make **** up.