Germany marks 70th anniversary of Dresden firebombing

BBC ^ | 02/13/2015

[Kid Shelleen]

An estimated 25,000 people died in the British and American attack, which created a firestorm that left 33 sq km (12 sq miles) of the city in ruins.

Speaking at the city's Church of Our Lady, German President Joachim Gauck said the attack had "burned itself into the memory" of survivors.

The city was believed by Allied forces to be a vital Nazi command centre.

It was used by German forces to defend the country against Soviet forces approaching from the east.

[ExNewsExSpook]

Indeed...RAF bomber command lost 55,000 crew members during World War II, out of 125,000 who served. Forty-four percent were killed in action; more than 10% wound up as POWs. Overall, a bomber command crew member had lower survival odds than an infantry officer in World War I.

The “villianization” of bomber command over the past 70 years is nothing short of shameful. I was glad that Queen Elizabeth was present when they finally got around to dedicating the RAF Bomber Command memorial, even if a lot of other British dignitaries found convenient reasons to be absent.

[tahoeblue]

The article has a picture of the Church of Our Lady some time after the bombing. I’m told that the pile of rubble sat there through the entire Soviet era. After reunification, the church was rebuild, as seen in the second picture, and anywhere they could use one of the original bricks, they did. It’s very striking. A number of the old bricks have shrapnel scars.

The whole old town area around the Church of Our Lady is a beautiful area today. Spent many great evenings there dining and drinking and enjoying the rebirth of the area. It’s an interesting experience sitting in the history that is Dresden.

[tlozo]

Churchill himself thought the bombing of Dresden was wrong:

“It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land… The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests than that of the enemy.

The Foreign Secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle-zone, rather than on mere acts of terror and wanton destruction, however impressive.”

[miss marmelstein]

I do not believe Dresden was a war crime, terribly as it was. Do you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes as well?

[PAR35]

I lean toward ‘no’ on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, although it is a close case. It certainly preserved more Japanese lives than it took. There was a clear military objective there - end the war at the lowest cost to both the Americans and the Japanese. I am not sure that the fire bombing of Tokyo would not come down on the other side of the equation, however.

Clearly the fire bombing of Civilian areas would be a War Crime under current treaties. The bigger question is whether current standards should be applied to historical events.

I may disagree with the conclusions reached by someone else who has wrestled with the moral implications, but still respect them. The folks on here that I can’t respect are the moral relativists - those who say the events aren’t the determinant, it is the actors that matter.

[GOPJ]

If it was ‘glaringly obvious’ I wouldn’t have asked.

[wita]

The firebombing of Dresden was a war crime

War is a crime but I’m guessing before Nuremberg, went unprosecuted, and rightly so as if war is truly a crime then in reality the countries engaged should all be on trial, not individual soldiers. It is a pandora’s box that never should have been opened. How can justice come from such injustice?

The solution? World Court, I think not. Negotiation to avoid war? Probably completely ineffective in stopping what is driving people towards war. The only permanent solution I see is the end of enmity among men, the triumph of good over evil, and we do not know when that will take place, and so we are left with war as the open conflict between nations and peoples who can’t get along until one side or the other triumphs.

War is hell for all to see, and seeing we still cannot avoid engaging so...

[Colonel_Flagg]

Well stated and thank you for the post.

[beelzepug]

“How many of you think the Japanese would have surrendered if they had witnessed a test of the atomic bomb like that?”

“When you have to shoot, shoot. Don’t talk.” -Tuco

[Steve0113]

bookmark

[Gene Eric]

Well, I enjoyed Fury.

[schurmann]

“You might try studying a little history. Then you might be able to tell the difference between targeted bombing of strategic and tactical targets, which the Americans did at great risk and cost, and terror bombing, which the British used against the civilian population.”

Time out for laughter and applause.

PAR35 might profit from learning a bit more about which end of the airplane goes forward, before making pronouncements sounding consequential, about strategic targeting concepts, intelligence data collection, weapon system effectiveness, strike success assessment, priority assignment, route planning, defense countermeasures, and any number of additional specialized fields of study.

I’d love to add more detail, but since I spent more than a decade accomplishing “war planning” at classification levels beyond what PAR35 can even fantasize about, I’m finding the enitre exercise is becoming a mite tedious.

None of which says the first word about the scholarly dabbling I’ve toyed with, for a number of decades, researching the very advent, buildup, and application of Britain’s RAF and US air power; it has been my privilege to meet a number of the original participants personally, plus one or two of the leaders and architects.

All of which is very much beside the point.

The point is, long-range direct-attack air power was a critical factor in Allied victory in Europe, as any honest analysis will reveal in short order. Much of it came to light in the 1980s, when extensive research into Third Reich industry and air defense of the Vaterland showed the Nazis to have been near immobilized in fear, on six or seven separate occasions ... if the Combined Bomber Offensive had just mounted one or two more strikes at the one or two target complexes that had already been heavily damaged (far more than Allied intel collection could know), it would have been “Finis Germaniae”, right there. [with thanks to Robert K. Massie, for the Latin phrasing]

Opinions to the contrary are products of institutional jealousy, courtesy of the senior armed services, who still feel deeply insulted that the air arm came out of nowhere (as their doddering timelines reckon history) and won the war for them. Seven decades on, they still cannot set aside their sense of grievance. Egad, the cheek of those flyers! Daring to wage war without all the traditional pomp and ego.

I’m touched that PAR35 and that ilk are so concerned about our moral state, but it’s nothing more than preening, exhibitionism and over-prissiness. At best, they are clueless. One hopes they don’t know enough to harbor actual malice.

[PAR35]

dabbling I’ve toyed with

Thank you for your honesty as to your academic endeavors.

the air arm came out of nowhere (as their doddering timelines reckon history) and won the war for them.

That would be humorous were it not such a despicable insult to the 135,576 battle deaths in the ETO alone.

If you have any interest in the subject, you might start here:
http://www.anesi.com/ussbs02.htm

You might also compare the munitions production numbers - especially fighters and uboats - between 1940 and 1945. (You are aware that 1945 did not represent a full 12 months of production by the Germans, aren't you?)
http://ww2-weapons.com/german-arms-production/

[schurmann]

“...That would be humorous were it not such a despicable insult to the 135,576 battle deaths in the ETO alone.

If you have any interest in the subject, you might start here:
http://www.anesi.com/ussbs02.htm

You might also compare the munitions production numbers - especially fighters and uboats - between 1940 and 1945. (You are aware that 1945 did not represent a full 12 months of production by the Germans, aren’t you?)
http://ww2-weapons.com/german-arms-production/";

Thanks, but I’ve already been through the US Strategic Bombing Survey. More than twice. They were a good start, but better analyses have been done since: taking advantage of more complete information, some of it accessible only after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the (partial) release of Soviet records, and declassification of UK material.

“Munitions” production figures cannot tell us anything about how they get used in action.

Let us dispense with pretend indignation over this or that number of battle deaths. Confusion attends all wartime efforts; loss numbers cannot tell us much about the actual impact of one engagement, nor an entire campaign.

Unless, of course, PAR35 wants to argue that KIA in ground action mean more than KIA in naval or air combat. I’ve heard that before too; it stands the whole deadly business on its head.

[otness_e]

…

Look, whether Dresden is a war crime or not is probably going to be a matter of debate until the end of time (I’d personally say it’s not, mostly because there’s sufficient evidence to suggest that it was a major communications/transportation hub for the Nazis and thus was a valid military target, but nevertheless), but I actually get pretty irritated when people imply that the German people merely elected Hitler. He was never “elected”, he simply got appointed to the Chancellorship by Paul Hindenberg, and there was evidence he did it due to senility. And even if he WERE actually elected, to be fair to the German people, barely any of the parties that were competing were all that good. Even ignoring the Nazis, which were evil, there was also the German Communist Party which had they been elected would have proven to be just as bad as if not even WORSE than the Nazis, and the Social Democrats were basically Socialist lite, not much better than either other than maybe not being as overt about it. Not helping matters being that the SA brownshirts basically did voter intimidation as well, as well as beat up opposition. Just as an FYI, we had something similar occur with both elections of Obama.

In any case, that aside, I do ultimately agree that we definitely should teach more about Nuremberg or Tokyo (heck, especially Tokyo since the only post-war trials covered were the Nuremberg trials). Although personally, I think we should have tried to hold trials AGAINST the Soviets during the Nuremberg trials.