75 Year Anniversary of the Bombing of Dresden, justified or not?

[Sasaferrato]

Pathetic.

No Frank, it isn't. Of course, you have never been in a war, have you?

 

[Sasaferrato]

The bombings of Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo should be regarded as war crimes.

I disagree.

 

[Cid]

So, y’know, just make sure you exterminate everyone capable of working in a factory. Seems sensible.

 

[Sasaferrato]

So, y’know, just make sure you exterminate everyone capable of working in a factory. Seems sensible.

The purpose of going to war is to win. Pointless otherwise. The victory inevitably means that non-combatants are killed, it is unavoidable.

Go to the Imperial war museum and see these:

The little one is a V1, the big one is a V2. They were unguided rocket weapons aimed absolutely indiscriminately at London. Consider the use of those weapons, then try and justify criticism of British bombing of Germany.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The purpose of going to war is to win. Pointless otherwise. The victory inevitably means that non-combatants are killed, it is unavoidable.

Go to the Imperial war museum and see these:

The little one is a V1, the big one is a V2. They were unguided rocket weapons aimed absolutely indiscriminately at London. Consider the use of those weapons, then try and justify criticism of British bombing of Germany.

Two wrongs famously making a right of course.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Two wrongs famously making a right of course.

Ummm... and your response would have been? Invite Herr Schiklgruber for tea and sandwiches to discuss it?

I don't think you quite grasp the concept of total war.

The V2 contained a 1000 Kg of explosives BTW.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Quite. As to Japan, when I was a boy I lived next to a Burma railway survivor. Japan treated POWs like animals, indeed, worse that animals. The people on the railway worked until starvation and exhaustion killed them.

When you say 'Japan' did that, were the civillian population of Nagasaki directly involved? Were the as yet unborn children who suffered and died as a result of these weapons also culpable?

Japan was prepared to surrender before the bombs were dropped, this is a matter of record. Even assuming those attacks were necessary to secure unconditional surrender, the 'unconditional' part was purely a matter of pride for the Americans, and had nothing to do with securing long term peace.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I don't think you quite grasp the concept of total war.

I do, and it's an economic descriptor not a moral one. It doesn't mean 'we can do whatever the fuck we like'. All the participants are still human.

 

[SpookyFrank]

And incidentally the V2 rocket was not 'unguided' at all, it had an automated guidance system.

 

[SpookyFrank]

So, y’know, just make sure you exterminate everyone capable of working in a factory. Seems sensible.

Schindler saving all those factory workers from the death camps, he was basically just helping the nazis.

 

[RTWL]

when I was a boy

would you advocate more war than there is or are you happy with the status quo... in otherwords ... is what we need another war?

 

[andysays]

My mother was manageress of the British Restaurant at Tate & Lyle in Clydebank, and was on duty the night it was bombed. The screams of those engulfed in molten sugar stayed with her for the rest of her life.

I hope you pointed out to your mum that

Workers are a legitimate, indeed necessary target. Destroying the enemy capacity for manufacture is a necessity.

 

[Idris2002]

Quite. As to Japan, when I was a boy I lived next to a Burma railway survivor. Japan treated POWs like animals, indeed, worse that animals. The people on the railway worked until starvation and exhaustion killed them.

The bleeding heart liberal view of Britain's actions in Germany and Japan fall on deaf eras here I'm afraid.

What do the apologists have to say about London, Coventry and Glasgow civilians being bombed? My mother was manageress of the British Restaurant at Tate & Lyle in Clydebank, and was on duty the night it was bombed. The screams of those engulfed in molten sugar stayed with her for the rest of her life.

Hang on a minute - are you saying those who find themselves disturbed by the bombings of enemy civilians in Germany and Japan are apologists for the wartime regimes in those countries? Because that's not on, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Sasaferrato]

would you advocate more war than there is or are you happy with the status quo... in otherwords ... is what we need another war?

No one who has seen war close up and personal is an advocate of further war.

I sincerely hope that this country is never involved in another war.

Gulf I was justified (and also a bit of a damp squib), Iraq and Afghanistan were not.

Having served in Northern Ireland and the Falklands (I was a medic, not a combatant) it isn't something I want to see again.

War might be glamorous on the big screen, but when you are trying to keep the shattered wreck of a human being alive, it is not. Paradoxically, you were sometimes glad that your efforts failed, because there was so much damage.

So, to answer your question. No, I don't want more wars.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Hang on a minute - are you saying those who find themselves disturbed by the bombings of enemy civilians in Germany and Japan are apologists for the wartime regimes in those countries? Because that's not on, as far as I'm concerned.

Fair enough, apologists was lazy use of language.

 

[redsquirrel]

The Nazis - and in a different way, the Japanese imperialists - represented an evil so extreme that normal ethics and morality might well be said to not apply in the case of the war against them.

Pretty surprised to hear that argument coming from you Idris. It's a pretty dangerous path.

 

[Idris2002]

Pretty surprised to hear that argument coming from you Idris. It's a pretty dangerous path.

I sing this song for it seems so wrong, why don't the GI love the Cong?

 

[Idris2002]

Pretty surprised to hear that argument coming from you Idris. It's a pretty dangerous path.

Seriously like. . . . the Second World War was probably the worst thing that ever happened. Really. That's why I think it's something apart. Maybe you could argue that if morality and ethics are universal, they're universal even in the most extreme and extraordinary cases (like WW2).

Maybe like Sasaferrato I wasn't expressing myself that well there.

As for dangerous paths, well are they the same as slippery slopes? Because the latter commit the logical fallacy of begging the question (a very different thing from raising the question).

 

[Idris2002]

I've been to Dresden, by the way.

It feels. . . different.

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

Because of the Holocaust people tend to look at ‘our side’ in WW2 as being morally correct, and therefore temporary immoral blips are excusable. But all warring states commit crimes on the same scale whenever they go to war, unless their opponents are relatively weak and feeble. If the German state had enacted the equivalent of Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima etc everyone would have called them crimes. So too the Bengal famine (thanks Mr Churchill) and the mass deportation and murder of the Chechens, Crimean Tatars etc (thanks comrade Stalin, our ally). WW2 only happened because Hitler went too far too fast in upsetting the balance of power. Our government did nothing to stop Hitler and Mussolni’s siding with Franco in the Spanish Civil War, or the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, or the invasion of Abyssinia etc, or the creation of concentration camps, or increasing ill treatment of Europe’s Jews. Every mass crime against civilians by any side is never necessary in strict military terms. Normally, in the past, it just happened and went unremarked.

 

[dylanredefined]

The problem with that is that every 88mm gun not firing at a Lancaster or B-17 is an 88mm gun firing at a T-38 or Sherman, and every FW-190 or ME-110 not chasing bombers is a pair of 500lb bombs falling on an allied troop column crossing the Rhine or Oder, every lunatic jet fighter program cancelled is resources poured into the V2 or tank production, thus prolonging the ground war.

I'm not going to sit here and say that burning a city full of civs is great, but when you say 'we shouldn't do this', you have to ask what the consequences of not doing it are going to be.

Probably something more useful to do with the bombers than burn Dresden.

 

[dylanredefined]

When you say 'Japan' did that, were the civillian population of Nagasaki directly involved? Where the as yet unborn children who suffered and died as a result of these weapons also culpable?

Japan was prepared to surrender before the bombs were dropped, this is a matter of record. Even assuming those attacks were necessary to secure unconditional surrender, the 'unconditional' part was purely a matter of pride for the Americans, and had nothing to do with securing long term peace.

Nahh the Japanese wanted things to go back to the way things were. Keep Korea and China and carry on as before.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I've been to Dresden, by the way.

It feels. . . different.

Me too, and will be back this year. The art gallery at the Zwinger is tremendous. We'll be visiting from Berlin.

 

[likesfish]

Japan desire to surrender was under terms which the Allies weren't interested in unconditional surrender was the only option due the Japanese government was batshit and evil and weren't getting a do over.
Certain segments wanted to continue the fight even after the 2nd a bomb.

 

[Detroit City]

Should it have been done?

all's fair in love and war

 

[Lancman]

The Flight Engineer was a fully integrated member of the Lancaster crew and they all went in to the briefing together. He would know just as much as any other member of the team and a very close knit team they were.

 

[Mation]

The whole idea of war crimes is bizarre to me. Makes it seem like there's some morally sound way, within a physical war, to inhibit state-sized enemies.

 

[toblerone3]

Some relatives of mine were in prison in Dresden due to be deported on the morning train to Auschwitz concentration camp. The prison in which they were in was bombed and they escaped. I believe this. Will try and find out the details.

Its probably not relevant to this thread though.

 

[krtek a houby]

I disagree.

If the Japanese (or Germans) had dropped a couple of A bombs on London and Glasgow, I'm sure you'd be calling that a war crime.

 

[likesfish]

The whole idea of war crimes is bizarre to me. It makes it seem like there's some morally sound way, within a physical war, to inhibit state-sized enemies.

you can look at ISIS and the "traditional" historical approach of a victorious army entering a city Siege of Badajoz (1812) - Wikipedia
to understand why we have rules of warfare.
They only really work when its state vs state and both sides recognize the rules. The Nazis were weird often they obeyed rules but when they broke them they really broke them.
Imperial Japan didn't but treated their own soldiers in a horrific manner as well.