The Real Victors of WW2 in Europe

[Boethius]

I assume LT is alluding to this -


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contest_to_kill_100_people_using_a_sword

[BillyB]

From what I've seen/read...the Allies bombed the bejesus out of civilians (Women and Children) on purpose in Germany. 


Of course Germany did the same. 

Most of us have learned the horrific things Hitler did, one being bombing civilians in London but the truth is the Allies were no different when it came to this type of warfare. Regardless of who started this, it makes no sense to shoot bullets and drop bombs into a crowd of civilians and then pretend there is strategic value that the enemy and their war tools will eventually get hit. As I mentioned earlier, I'd be all for this type of warfare if it ends the war sooner, like the atomic bombs, which would save lives but area bombing was soon proven ineffective with German industrial output actually increasing.


In the below link is the story of the bombing of the German city Dresden. It is estimated the bombing killed 35,000-135,000 thousand people. It was Feb 1945 at a time Allies had air superiority and Germany was retreating. Dresden had little military or industrial value but orders came to level the city anyway. Can anybody name the famous/infamous KGB super spy that worked in Dresden in the late 80's?


http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/battle-of-dresden


Interesting article I read in the newspaper(yes, some people still read that). It is estimated that there are over 250,000 children born to German mothers and Allied soldiers in WW2. Some were due to romantic relationships and others due to rape. I remember reading about a Russian colonel who said as his troops took over a German city, his soldiers raped every woman in sight from little girls to women as old as 80. War is ugly but we can't learn from it and improve if we deny the wrongs even from our own side.

[lordtiberius]

I assume LT is alluding to this -


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contest_to_kill_100_people_using_a_sword

Bingo.

There are more graphic photos but the jailers in sin sin bin have WEAK tummies.

But by all means FT tell us what price of sh!t country we live that you never move away from.

[fathertime]

Bingo.

There are more graphic photos but the jailers in sin sin bin have WEAK tummies.

But by all means FT tell us what price of sh!t country we live that you never move away from.

Thus far I've mentioned that we *THE USA* were guilty of killing women in children in Japan.  This is not news, but it is interesting that you feel I should move out because I mentioned it!   


Here is what you said:
 

When you bomb women and children, you kinda loose your right to complain about it when the victims then bomb your women and children.

I guess we have lost our right to complain, by your logic. 




Fathertime!   

[Brasscasing]

Do you understand what area bombing is? It's bombing civilians. If displacing German industrial workers is so important, dropping a bomb on their area of work is more effective. No need to get rid of their home and family when you can just get rid of them.

Wrong. That's the subjective, emotive term you pedal and would like us to accept. The actual definition is as follows:

..."Area bombing is a form of strategic bombing. It can serve several intertwined purposes: to disrupt the production of military materiel, to disrupt lines of communications, to divert the enemy's industrial and military resources from the primary battlefield to air defence, and to demoralise the enemy's population (See terror bombing)."...

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

This is the internet, take a chill pill. No need to get worked up over something that contradicts what you once believed.

What I believe doesn't apply. What the historical record shows does.

Now, at this point I've pretty well established your understanding of events, as it pertains to allied bombing strategies during WW2, is wildly inaccurate. I'd even go so far as to argue you're being deliberately defamatory in your comments as anyone with a reasonable understanding of the subject would know them to be false.

Brass

[Brasscasing]

Most of us have learned the horrific things Hitler did, one being bombing civilians in London but the truth is the Allies were no different when it came to this type of warfare. Regardless of who started this, it makes no sense to shoot bullets and drop bombs into a crowd of civilians and then pretend there is strategic value that the enemy and their war tools will eventually get hit. As I mentioned earlier, I'd be all for this type of warfare if it ends the war sooner, like the atomic bombs, which would save lives but area bombing was soon proven ineffective with German industrial output actually increasing.

Now all you're doing is pasting different sentences together from previous posts. Most of this narrative has already been addressed and refuted up thread.

In the below link is the story of the bombing of the German city Dresden. It is estimated the bombing killed 35,000-135,000 thousand people. It was Feb 1945 at a time Allies had air superiority and Germany was retreating. Dresden had little military or industrial value but orders came to level the city anyway. Can anybody name the famous/infamous KGB super spy that worked in Dresden in the late 80's?

Wrong.

Background:

..."As the two fronts began to near, the Western Allies began to consider plans for using strategic bombing to assist the Soviet advance. In January 1945, the Royal Air Force began to consider plans for the widespread bombing of cities in eastern Germany. When consulted, the head of Bomber Command, Air Marshal Arthur "Bomber" Harris, recommended attacks against Leipzig, Dresden, and Chemnitz."...

..."During talks in Yalta, the Deputy Chief of the Soviet General Staff, General Aleksei Antonov, inquired about the possibility of using bombing to hinder German troop movements through hubs in eastern Germany. Among the list of targets discussed by Portal and Antonov were Berlin and Dresden. In Britain, planning for the Dresden attack moved forward with the operation calling for daylight bombing by the US Eighth Air Force followed by night strikes by Bomber Command. Though much of Dresden's industry was in suburban areas, planners targeted the city center with the goal crippling its infrastructure and causing chaos."...

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."...

These are excerpts from an historically accurate synopsis...

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

Interesting article I read in the newspaper(yes, some people still read that). It is estimated that there are over 250,000 children born to German mothers and Allied soldiers in WW2. Some were due to romantic relationships and others due to rape. I remember reading about a Russian colonel who said as his troops took over a German city, his soldiers raped every woman in sight from little girls to women as old as 80. War is ugly but we can't learn from it and improve if we deny the wrongs even from our own side.

Not the whole story...

..."University historians, in a German-language book title, "Bastards, the children of occupation in Germany after 1945" found that at least 400,000 children were fathered by occupying soldiers, with at least 300,000 of those children fathered by Soviet fathers. The researchers concluded that at least two million rapes were committed by Soviet Red Army soldiers. [24]

The Allied forces occupied Germany for several years after World War II. The book GIs and Fräuleins, by Maria Hohn, documents 66,000 children as born with fathers who were soldiers of Allied forces in the period 1945–55"...

This wiki article is fairly concise with a good reference and external link section to original source documents/articles.

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

Brass

[Muzh]

Well I guess the Japanese were cagey fighters then, but we did resort to killing women and children as a result. 

Fathertime!

I'm not sure. Why don't we ask the Chinese and Korean women and children from that era?

[Muzh]

Its good to see you smile.

Dman!! Looks like Billy B doing the same pose!! 

[lordtiberius]

I'm not sure. Why don't we ask the Chinese and Korean women and children from that era?

He is on roll!

[2tallbill]

I guess you didn't read the history links either.

I don't disagree with the history links, I disagree with your analysis
of what they mean and the conclusions you've made.

Udachi!


Bill

[BillyB]

Wrong.


This wiki article is fairly concise with a good reference and external link section to original source documents/articles.

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

Did you know the article you posted ends with the Dresden decision as being controversial? In your Google searches about "area bombing" you've read the word "controversial" probably every time. Why does the words "area bombing" and "controversial" go hand in hand? If you feel the way you do, then you have to agree Hitler's orders to fire bomb London was purely for strategically reasons. It didn't work, did it?


Interesting takes from people on this issue. Let's say you and 2tallBill are Air Force generals and you have the option of telling your pilots to focus on dropping bombs on strategic targets when they are flying over the designated city or just drop their bombs indiscriminately even if they're flying over residential zones. What would you choose? If you chose the latter I'm sure you'd claim dropping bombs indiscriminately is just as strategic as attempting to precision bomb pre-chosen targets. When plane are flying over a city, it takes longer to find factories, bridges, and military targets. It's safer and easier to drop bombs quickly with little regard on where they're dropped yet some will claim it's strategic.


Let's say you and 2tallbill are platoon sergeants or lieutenants leading a platoon and you come into a small town which is sympathetic to your enemy but you suspect they give food to the enemy and some of the kids will be shooting at you in a few years after they grow up so would you torch the town and kill the teenagers in a "strategic" move or leave the civilians alone? How about boosting up troop morale and letting your soldiers rape women since command hasn't given you guys R & R for a long time which would give the troops access to rent a woman?


Early in the war the British didn't want to do area bombing because it was morally wrong. They were right. Just because they ended up doing the morally wrong doesn't make it right and you excusing them for their actions will make many question your morals.


If I were in a leadership position in the military where tough life and death decisions under enormous pressure had to be made, I will remind those under my command there will be court martials for war crimes. No excuses.

[lordtiberius]

70 years ago, this warfare was new and to judge its moral efficacy with a 21st century lens is dumb.

[2tallbill]

False unless you consider all American aviators dumb as a box of rocks. If British airmen can navigate, so can Americans.

British pilots flew over Germany for years. They know where they're going.

[2tallbill]

If I were in a ............

Sybil BillyB

I'm unable to follow your disjointed logic or theories. You bounce all over the place,
just go back and reread what you wrote and you can see that you wanted to suppose
Brass and I were Air Force Generals AND platoon sergeants or lieutenants leading a
platoon and we should consider "How about boosting up troop morale and letting our soldiers
rape women?"

Do you even read the stuff that you write?

You've made a number of statements, they've been refuted and now you are just throwing
a large number of unrelated, irrelevant statements and suppositions up against the wall
hoping one of them will stick?

What's next? statements about the absence of air on the moon? or Ninja's vs Jedi's ?

[Brasscasing]

Did you know the article you posted ends with the Dresden decision as being controversial? In your Google searches about "area bombing" you've read the word "controversial" probably every time. Why does the words "area bombing" and "controversial" go hand in hand? If you feel the way you do, then you have to agree Hitler's orders to fire bomb London was purely for strategically reasons. It didn't work, did it?


Interesting takes from people on this issue. Let's say you and 2tallBill are Air Force generals and you have the option of telling your pilots to focus on dropping bombs on strategic targets when they are flying over the designated city or just drop their bombs indiscriminately even if they're flying over residential zones. What would you choose? If you chose the latter I'm sure you'd claim dropping bombs indiscriminately is just as strategic as attempting to precision bomb pre-chosen targets. When plane are flying over a city, it takes longer to find factories, bridges, and military targets. It's safer and easier to drop bombs quickly with little regard on where they're dropped yet some will claim it's strategic.


Let's say you and 2tallbill are platoon sergeants or lieutenants leading a platoon and you come into a small town which is sympathetic to your enemy but you suspect they give food to the enemy and some of the kids will be shooting at you in a few years after they grow up so would you torch the town and kill the teenagers in a "strategic" move or leave the civilians alone? How about boosting up troop morale and letting your soldiers rape women since command hasn't given you guys R & R for a long time which would give the troops access to rent a woman?


Early in the war the British didn't want to do area bombing because it was morally wrong. They were right. Just because they ended up doing the morally wrong doesn't make it right and you excusing them for their actions will make many question your morals.


If I were in a leadership position in the military where tough life and death decisions under enormous pressure had to be made, I will remind those under my command there will be court martials for war crimes. No excuses.

I agree with Bill. Your edit: narrative makes no sense to me as well. I'll simply refer you my comment up thread...

Howbout we stick to your fictionalized history of recorded British/US bombing policy and initiatives. I've no intention of widening this subject into some nebulous hypothetical argument with you over the morality of warfare. My interest is in correcting the historical falsehoods you've posted, which I've done.

Brass

[JayH]

70 years ago, this warfare was new and to judge its moral efficacy with a 21st century lens is dumb.

Exactly--making conclusions that do not meet the facts now is exceedingly dumb thing to do --but along with a few others -BB has no problem with repeatedly doing that. Brass says it perfectly upthread.

I am guessing BB has a German link in his history somewhere? In some obtuse way he is seeking justification for the damage to the world by Germans in that period.My personal experience with modern thinking Germans is to abhore that period-not rationalise it.

[lordtiberius]

What do you expect from a crypto-Putin praiser?  At least he is not a liar though.

[BillyB]

70 years ago, this warfare was new and to judge its moral efficacy with a 21st century lens is dumb.

You didn't read the history links either. British viewed bombing of German civilians as immoral at the beginning of the war, that's why they didn't do it. Decisions of bombing civilians were made in WWI. This warfare isn't new. People's morality then was no different than what it is today. Nobody chose to answer my hypothetical situations. I guess some believe demoralizing civilians through killing them, displacing them from homes, cutting off their food supply, and raping them are strategic moves.

[lordtiberius]

You're the morality police now?

Today aviation is over a hundred years old. Back then, it wasn't.  Back then being gay was a mental defect and illegal.  Today its not.  I am not interested in getting in a tit for tat with you. Brass already kicked your ass and I am not going to improve on his work.  There are lots of things I wished were different about WWII.  The Allied Bombing is not on that list.   But you keep telling us how we are all wrong and you are right, about how Putin is smart, about how everyone can't have the success you enjoy and all that.

I will say this about you Billy.  You are a lot of things, but you aren't a liar .

[fathertime]

You're the morality police now?

Today aviation is over a hundred years old. Back then, it wasn't.  Back then being gay was a mental defect and illegal.  Today its not.  I am not interested in getting in a tit for tat with you. Brass already kicked your ass and I am not going to improve on his work.  There are lots of things I wished were different about WWII.  The Allied Bombing is not on that list.   But you keep telling us how we are all wrong and you are right, about how Putin is smart, about how everyone can't have the success you enjoy and all that.

I understood all the points Billyb was making earlier.  I think I must have lost track of where the disagreement lies, but what he has said makes sense to this point.


Fathertime!   

[BillyB]

You're the morality police now?

No, one doesn't have to be the morality police to accept some of the wrongs committed by the allies. Some would like us to believe they didn't do any wrong even arguing their every move is strategic with a good outcome.

I will say this about you Billy.  You are a lot of things, but you aren't a liar .

Can you help me by telling this to my wife so she doesn't beat me everyday? There are trust issues in our relationship that have to be sorted out. I lied.


Most of what I said in this debate is repeating what reputable history sites have wrote. People have offered their opinions and then accused me of making stuff up. Go figure.

[lordtiberius]

No, one doesn't have to be the morality police to accept some of the wrongs committed by the allies. Some would like us to believe they didn't do any wrong even arguing their every move is strategic with a good outcome.



Can you help me by telling this to my wife so she doesn't beat me everyday? There are trust issues in our relationship that have to be sorted out. I lied.


Most of what I said in this debate is repeating what reputable history sites have wrote. People have offered their opinions and then accused me of making stuff up. Go figure.

I am not calling you a liar Billy.  I just believe Brass more.  Sorry.

Do me a favor.  If by chance you were to friend me on facebook or PM here, just don't say publicly that you didn't.  I can't stand liars especially dummies that lie about stuff that doesn't matter.

[Muzh]

You're the morality police now?

Today aviation is over a hundred years old. Back then, it wasn't.

Hey Yogi, got anymore of those?


 

[lordtiberius]

Hey Yogi, got anymore of those?


 

For a very old man, you have a lot of problems, but you aren't a liar. 

[Muzh]

Please, don't tell me that when you get to a fork on the road you take it.