Author Topic: Dresden (Read 2968 times)

Dowding · « **Reply #45 on:** March 06, 2002, 01:55:28 PM »

'Now this is getting rediculous'?

How ironic, Hortlund.

First of all, your last post assumes that BC crews were privy to detailed, accurate strategic information about their enemy. I don't see how they could know Germany was defeated or Dresden was a 'civilian' target. They were told little information and surely couldn't know Germany's status as a war machine at point in the proceedings.

And that's assuming Germany was beaten or that Dresden was of no military value. An assumption too far, IMO.

Secondly, you were not there, so to make a judgement on the 'them or us' attititude is irrelevant. It's purely a subjective matter. Many thought it at the time, something you cannot get away from.

Comparing BC crew (of which a great uncle of mine was a member) to SS guards at Auschwitz is the most ridiculous and offensive concept I've ever read. Short of Irving's insistance that Hitler had nothing to do with The Final Solution, of course.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #46 on:** March 06, 2002, 01:56:27 PM »

Quote

And I was not talking about the holocaust, I was talking about killing civilians using bombers.

No you weren't. You were talking about deliberately killing civilians during wartime. The weapon is irrelevant... unless somehow you can find a philosophical argument for how it is worse to kill someone from an aircraft than cyanide poisoning.

Germany and Japan both learned a hard lesson in regards to the destructive capabilities of the modern era. It was a major wakeup call via a slap in the face. It changed perspectives across the globe.

New technologies meant new stategies and capabilities. Some more ill conceived than others... but hindsight is super grand for most arguing in this thread.

One thing hindsight is promoting right now... a little bit of foresight.

AKDejaVu

Hortlund · « **Reply #47 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:25:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding

Secondly, you were not there, so to make a judgement on the 'them or us' attititude is irrelevant. It's purely a subjective matter. Many thought it at the time, something you cannot get away from.

[/b]
Well, you'll have to excuse me if I find the "them or us" notion rediculous when it comes to bomber crews and civilans.

Quote

Comparing BC crew (of which a great uncle of mine was a member) to SS guards at Auschwitz is the most ridiculous and offensive concept I've ever read. Short of Irving's insistance that Hitler had nothing to do with The Final Solution, of course.

How apropriate. Personally I lost famlily members at Dresden. But he was just a kid, 4 yrs old (My grandmothers littlebrother in case you were wondering, and yeah, she was there that night).

I just wanted to point out though, that I did not compare BC crews to SS guards. That all happened in your head. All I said was that I dont think any SS guards shed any tears over their victims...just as you said BC crews didnt over theirs.

Wotan · « **Reply #48 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:30:40 PM »

Simple harris and his cronies are war criminals for what they did......

v-1s and v-2s didnt have the capability to incinerate 40 square miles of london.

The quotes I provided were takin from the what was happening at the time.

Clearly they knew then that the targeting of civilians was terroristic.

The planners had known what was in Dresden and what wasn't there. The briefing notes sent to the groups were lies and the statements harris made after the attack are lies.

Area Bombing particularly in Febuary 1945 did nothing to end the war or save British lives.

You can cry and argue about exact numbers which will never be known and you can cry and moan about refugees mostly women and children who were fleeing from the soviet advance deserved to be fire bombed because you feel they somehow or at onetime supported their goverments war effort. You you could just come out and say which is probrably the truth,,,that targeting those civilians was for nothing more then to get a little pay back.

I could fill the thread with eyewitness accounts by women and recue workers and images as well. Theres no questioning the hell they went through. If you take the words from the mouths who planned it it is clear they had one thought, to kill civilians.

So all your speculation and guessing and rationalizing about their motives is a moot point.........

We are left with is what SHAEF's Psychological Warfare Division labeled "terroristic".

Even some folks in Britain saw it that way...............

Terrorfliegers............

Hortlund · « **Reply #49 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:34:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKSWulfe
"the moral/philosophical aspect of it"

Ah, well that's all subjective. You could debate my ear off, but that still doesn't make you anymore right or wrong than I am.

"the legal aspect of it."

If I am not mistaken, the legal side is that if you support the war, than you are part of the war and the means to end it lies in you being stopped.

Both of those issues can be debated ad nauseum, but you'd never get any closer to right than the next guy. Maybe in your dream world civilians aren't targets in a war, but in reality where I reside, civilians are very much targets in a war.

Right or wrong is determined by the side who wins.

But hey, I mentioned the Germans attacking London... they had no problem killing civilians.

What was your point again? To lambast Allied bomber crews? It's those very same guys who you have to thank that you aren't in Nazi occupied Sweden right now.
-SW

So if I have understood you correctly, you went with option C: None of the above?

Let me point out though, that you've got the legal side all screwed up. In the legal aspect, a difference is made between combatants and non-combatants. To further complicate things there are various laws and rules on what goes and what doesnt when it comes to killing off the other guys combatants (yeah, the non-combatants are generally off limits, something called "collateral damage" is accepted to an extent though...but not too much, because it is illegal to cause "unneccesary suffering") But this is getting all too detailed now huh, better leave it at simpler solutions such as "winner make the rules" or "kill em all, let God sort em out".

No, alot can be said about wwii Germany...having problems with killing innocent civilians is not one of those things though.

My point? Bring the criminals to justice, do not punish the innocent.

Silly notion really...

Fatty · « **Reply #50 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:42:59 PM »

Quote

My point? Bring the criminals to justice, do not punish the innocent.

You're right, I don't know why they didn't just bypass Dresden and make a few arrests. Would have been much cleaner, and required several million less soldiers.

straffo · « **Reply #51 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:48:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan
Simple harris and his cronies are war criminals for what they did......

v-1s and v-2s didnt have the capability to incinerate 40 square miles of london.

Dohhhhh ...

Just because the Nazy failed to build A-Bomb ...

Hortlund · « **Reply #52 on:** March 06, 2002, 02:49:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty

You're right, I don't know why they didn't just bypass Dresden and make a few arrests. Would have been much cleaner, and required several million less soldiers.

Yeah, well as I said, the idea in itself is stupid.

Yeager · « **Reply #53 on:** March 06, 2002, 03:05:52 PM »

Im smellin a ROTTEN egg and it stinks.

Im out of this Hitler worship thread.

Wotan · « **Reply #54 on:** March 06, 2002, 03:09:23 PM »

hitler worship thread lol......

grenaaaaaaaaaaade............

Dowding · « **Reply #55 on:** March 06, 2002, 03:11:04 PM »

Hortlund - you WERE comparing the reactions of BC crew to SS 'soldiers' - you know it, I know it, and anyone who cares to read this thread knows it.

Wotan - as an American, do you equally regard the orchestrators of the Japanese 'terror' bombings or the atomic attacks with the same disdain as Harris?

If not, then get ready to be called a hypocrite.

I've always found the controversy surrounding Dresden to be particularly puzzling. Especially when yanks express their distate for it, yet fail to mention Hiroshima. It's laughable, pathetic, ridiculous and stupid. In fairly healthy measures.

Hortlund · « **Reply #56 on:** March 06, 2002, 03:40:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Hortlund - you WERE comparing the reactions of BC crew to SS 'soldiers' - you know it, I know it, and anyone who cares to read this thread knows it.

Lets see what has been said so far:

Dowding:
I bet most BC crews could sum the situation up in one phrase: "It was them or us." I bet most didn't shed a single tear over those they killed

Hortlund:
I think you are right about one thing. I dont think any BC crews shed one tear over their victims.
...Neither did the SS guards at Auschwitz.

Dowding:
Comparing BC crew (of which a great uncle of mine was a member) to SS guards at Auschwitz is the most ridiculous and offensive concept I've ever read. Short of Irving's insistance that Hitler had nothing to do with The Final Solution, of course.

Hortlund:
I did not compare BC crews to SS guards. That all happened in your head. All I said was that I dont think any SS guards shed any tears over their victims...just as you said BC crews didnt over theirs.

---------
I compared reactions? Make up your mind did I compare BC crews to SS guards, or did I compare BC crew reactions (?) to SS guards reactions?

Dowding · « **Reply #57 on:** March 06, 2002, 04:00:55 PM »

Now let's see. Perhaps I should try to summarise the situation.

To compare any aspect of one thing to another is a comparison of the two.

To compare the reactions of BC crew to SS guards is still a comparison of the two.

I find that offensive.

It really is that simple, Hortlund. Not a single whiff of smoke or mirror in sight.

Hortlund · « **Reply #58 on:** March 06, 2002, 04:26:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Now let's see. Perhaps I should try to summarise the situation.

To compare any aspect of one thing to another is a comparison of the two.

To compare the reactions of BC crew to SS guards is still a comparison of the two.

I find that offensive.

It really is that simple, Hortlund. Not a single whiff of smoke or mirror in sight.

Uh?

First, if you find it offensive, then perhaps you should think before you type next time. I do believe that you are right though, that not many BC crews shed any tears for the women and children they killed.

Second, why do you find it offensive? The comparisson between BC crews and SS guards should only be offensive if the same results comes up for both categories no? If I were to compare SS guards to US marines and find that there are no similarities whatsoever between the two, what then is offensive in that comparrisson?

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #59 on:** March 06, 2002, 04:41:22 PM »

So if I have understood you correctly, you went with option C: None of the above?

I went with the option that you are trying to justify Germany's war crimes by stating the Allies did the same thing. I am telling you it's different.

Let me point out though, that you've got the legal side all screwed up. In the legal aspect, a difference is made between combatants and non-combatants. To further complicate things there are various laws and rules on what goes and what doesnt when it comes to killing off the other guys combatants (yeah, the non-combatants are generally off limits, something called "collateral damage" is accepted to an extent though...but not too much, because it is illegal to cause "unneccesary suffering") But this is getting all too detailed now huh, better leave it at simpler solutions such as "winner make the rules" or "kill em all, let God sort em out".

We can leave it at simpler solutions, since in your mind you somehow believe that we are either a) going to change the course of history, b) are going to try young men who were fighting on the side of a just cause through this thread, or c) you just want someone other than yourself to see the allies as criminals.

No, alot can be said about wwii Germany...having problems with killing innocent civilians is not one of those things though.

There's several thousand dead British, French, Russians, and many more, civilians that can't testify otherwise....

My point? Bring the criminals to justice, do not punish the innocent.

Silly notion really...

Yes it is a silly notion, considering the war crimes started the day WWII started. And coincendently, they were all on the behalf of Germany.
-SW