Archbishop apologises for Dresden bombings

[Exascot]

Archbishop Justin Welby 'says sorry' for bombing the Nazis in Dresden raids | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2952945/Archbishop-says-sorry-bombing-Nazis-Justin-Welby-attacked-bizarre-apology-Dresden-raids-makes-no-reference-RAF-heroes-killed-Hitler.html)

Discuss.

Personally I feel that with the greatest of respect that His Most Reverend should get back in his box on this one instead of standing on it.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Deep sorrow, yes.
Regret?..regret that it was necessary, yes.
Diminished all our humanity? Absolutely not.

I think he's interpreting Donne* (also a cleric) here.

Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

but I don't agree with the interpretation. To risk one's earthly life to put a stop to evil, as the bomber crews did, is one of the highest human virtues.
The necessity of fighting and killing, for any legitimate action by armed forces, diminishes one's happiness (which is another sacrifice made by fighting personnel), but not their humanity.


*For whom the bell tolls a poem by John Donne (http://www.famousliteraryworks.com/donne_for_whom_the_bell_tolls.htm)

[ShyTorque]

So was he a bomber pilot?

All such war losses are tragic and regrettable, but at the end of the day, it was us or them. Actually, it was us and them.

[Pontius Navigator]

Was this before or after they apologised for starting it?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Sins of the fathers
The Archbish did not use the word apologise. To do so would imply he had been guilty of an inhuman act. The argument over the act is irrelevent; the iniquity of the previous generation (if such were true) only leads to the punishment of later generations by God if those generations continue to abhor God, which he doesn't.

https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy/do-sons-bear-sins-fathers-or-not

Where's Keef when you need him?

[Wokkafans]

Peter Hitchens, from a very quick skim read, takes a pretty anti position in this Mail article published 20 mins ago. I'll have a full peruse later as I'm heading off out but thought it might be of interest to others in the interim.

The Bombing Files - Arguments against the RAF bombing of German Civilians summed up - Mail Online - Peter Hitchens blog (http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/02/the-bombing-files-arguments-against-the-raf-bombing-of-german-civilians-summed-up.html)

Horrible formatting BTW.

[Molemot]

I came across this some while ago: sadly, I have forgotten where! Could even have been on these august forums...thought it worth posting, after the BBC did it's usual hatchet job.

Since 1945, Dresden has been used to beat the RAF about its conduct of "terror bombing" during WW2. Many sources claim that Dresden was merely a quiet peaceable little medieval town going about its business and waiting for the war to end. In fact it was a major industrial centre and rail junction. As it was stated in the Dresden City Council Yearbook of 1942 - “Anyone who knows Dresden only as a cultural city would be very surprised to be made aware of the extensive and versatile activity that make Dresden one of the foremost industrial locations of the Reich”.

There were 127 factories in the Dresden municipal area, most of which were converted to war production from their former peace time use. Some examples: Zeiss turned out bomb sights, u-boat periscopes and time fuses. A former typewriter and sewing machine factory made guns and ammunition and a catering machine factory switched to producing torpedoes for the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe. Arts and crafts workshops in the old town were making tail assemblies for V-1s. Other factories were turning out searchlights, aircraft components and field communications equipment. From the Dresden Chamber of Commerce in 1944 - "The work rhythm of Dresden is determined by the needs of our army." (The famous “Dresden” China was, as it always has been, made 12 mile away in Meisen).


During the Yalta conference in February 1945, at the Chiefs of Staff meeting, General Antonov specifically asked that the Dresden railway junction be bombed. Records held at the Public Records office in Kew confirm this request. General Antonov wanted Dresden attacked because it was a German base of operations against Marshall Koniev`s left flank that stood in the way of his advance into Germany. The troop reinforcement and transport centre shifted 28 troop trains a day through the marshalling yards. This is also confirmed in intelligence reports held in the Public Records office in Kew. Besides the physical contribution to the Eastern front, Dresden was a communications centre through which most telephone and telegraph lines connecting High Command to the southern flank of the Eastern front passed.

Finally, and most convincingly, captured German High Command documents from Berlin in 1945 state that "Dresden is to be fortified as a military strongpoint, to be held at all costs." British wartime records that were only recently de-classified reveal that this was known to the British and Russian commanders, as the orders to the German local defence commander were intercepted and deciphered by Ultra at Bletchley Park.

[Roadster280]

They did something naughty and took over the Poles' bit of the playground, so we told them off and hit them with a stick. They didn't like that and pushed us back.In the meantime they've occupied the French, Belgian and Dutch bits of the playground too.

Then they thought they would come into our bit of the playground and started throwing stones at us. We didn't like that, and it turned out that our stone throwing was better than their stone throwing, so they kept in their bit.

The next year, one of our mates in the next school over got kidney-punched by the Japs, so they joined us. That was a big mistake by the Japs, the mate in question is a really big lad. We helped them in their playground, and they helped us in ours. By that stage, we'd got a damned sight better at throwing much bigger rocks at the Germans in their part of the playground. But then again, they'd managed to do a number on a couple of areas in our bit; Coventry, Liverpool, London etc.

Well the time came and we said enough of this, and gathered up a lot of our blokes and crossed into their bit. We kicked their asses all the way back to their borders, and into their territory. In the meantime, to weaken their resolve and ability to fight back, we threw some almighty stones at them, and completely wiped out a couple of their areas (Hamburg, Dresden).

But they were bullies and needed to be stopped. They'd done the same thing 25 years earlier, and got off with a few lines rather than damned good caning. So this time, they were going to be fixed once and for all.

And they were. So fück 'em (and the Japs, who got a couple of meteors dropped on them).

[SPIT]

Does he think that if the Germans had the heavy bombers ie: Lancs or Halifaxes they would not have done the same to allied cities ??? :{:{:{

[Wander00]

I quite liked Welby and his approach - IMHO he just shot himself in the foot. We will be apologising for Trafalgar and Waterloo next!

[Basil]

Despite all the subsequent words we won! IMHO the greatest war crime is to lose.
Most writers were not there and do not understand the pressures upon our leaders at the time.
No one has started another European war since.

[langleybaston]

COVENTRY.

Where my father was nearly killed defending the city with his barrage balloon,

[ihg]

the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilised life throughout Germany.[43] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet#cite_note-46)[44] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet#cite_note-47) ... the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.[45] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet#cite_note-48)
[]Sir Arthur Harris, 1st Baronet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet#Citations)

no further comment

[Pali]

A comparison with Trafalgar is not very precise one - can you imagine Navy shooting at passenger ship knowing that they are sinking mostly civilians?

[Mal Drop]

From Welby's own Blog (http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/blog.php/23/reflections-on-dresden):

'What a sadness then that late in the evening someone showed me a headline in the Daily Mail saying that I had apologised for the RAF bombing the Nazis. No honest reading of what I said in the church and on the BBC afterwards could come anywhere near such an idea. Contrary to the Mail's report, on the BBC I spoke clearly of the bombing of British cities, mentioning especially Coventry and London. I also spoke of the terrible losses of the heroic crews of Bomber Command.'

Looks like the Daily Fail (the UK paper which supported Fascism and was owned by an admirer of Mussolini and Hitler) is having another go at getting people wound up by trying to twist somebody's words.

[gr4techie]

All such war losses are tragic and regrettable, but at the end of the day, it was us or them.

The problem occurred because who "them" were. The target for that night wasn't tactical against the Wehrmacht .

[Genstabler]

GR4
No, Dresden wasn't a tactical target against the Wehrmacht. It was a strategic blow against the infrastructure that permitted the Wehrmacht to operate against the Russians. The liberal yoghurt weavers don't understand the difference.

[Wander00]

By the standards of the time Dresden was a legitimate target. I believe the Geneva Convention has now changed in this respect but those in Syria and Ukraine and elsewhere may have missed the change

[Chugalug2]

ihg:-
no further commentum, well I will if you don't mind...

Wokafans, many thanks for the link to the Peter Hitchens blog, which shares the state of the curate's egg. Like other gainsayers, he thinks that the policy of area bombing, that is bombing cities rather than factories, was made by choice. It wasn't, it was made by the simple fact that Bomber Command could find cities at night (well most of the time), but couldn't find factories (well most of the time). In contradiction of that he cites the Dam Busters, who practiced hard for that one raid, the targets of which were lightly defended or completely undefended, that required favourable met and moonlight conditions, and that still suffered a high loss rate, and Peenemunde that was itself the size of a small city, albeit its power station was its Achilles heel and thus the IP.

I don't blame Hitchens for not grasping the fundamental point that main force was turned against cities simply because they could find them at night to bomb. It needs an aviator to assess the abilities of inexperienced crews (because they weren't around long enough to be otherwise) with little more than DR to fall back on (the later nav aids helped to find the cities, but scarcely the factories).

Those who have that knowledge but who still feel free to cast moral judgements on the events of 70 years ago should ask what, prior to D-Day, the Army or Navy could do to take the fight to Germany other than in defence, which is essentially what the Desert and Atlantic campaigns were about.

As to Harris, he believed in what he was doing. If he were my commander I would prefer he believed in what he was doing. If he issued blood curdling statements against the enemy in order to encourage me and my fellows to go out night after night to face 50% odds of not returning I would feel that he was trying to do his duty, by me, my country, and our Service.

As to Churchill, I have nothing to express other than utter contempt in relation to Harris, Bomber Command, and Dresden.

As to Dresden, it was just another German city. It was of course a pretty one. So what? This was a war that had yet to be won, and as quickly as possible. Dresden stood in the way of the Red Army, whose advance was essential to the ending of the war. It was fortified. It was now its turn to suffer the fate of its fellow cities. What makes it so special?

A war crime? All war is a crime. There is no such thing as a good war, they are all bad. The German people appear to have learned that lesson, but some of our liberal thinkers appear not to have .

[VinRouge]

Undestand where Britain was at the time of the Hamburg raids and you will undrstand that targetting the will of the German people by killing thousands of civilians and questioning their superiority complex was not only right but was completely necessary. Knowing they were not safe and allies had the ability to delete entire German cities was a key to winning the war. The only limitation back then of course was the effectiveness and accuracy of a strategic bombing campaign.

He can apologise all he wants. It's all about winning, which we did. And stopped millions more being liquidated and being sent up a chimney. I've never quite understood why Dresden has been viewed as a special case, we did far worse to other German cities and populaces. Let's also not forget the Russians had 2 major population centres flattened by German air power, but lacked the ability to retaliate using strategic bombing, not having a significant bomber force. Stalin was pretty fed up at the relative sacrifice of Russian vs allied forces and wanted to see the fight get taken to the Germans. We turned wurzburg to dust, despite it being a pretty city with far less in the way of military industry other then the uni that developed the German equivalent to RADAR

By flattening Dresden, we placated Stalin meaning we didn't have defend the political situation by engaging in a ground war with huge potential losses for our land based forces

[Basil]

Chugalug2, Very good post. I laud Chuchill as a war leader but share your distaste for his political manoeuvering after the war.
Nevertheless, we must remember that, following WW2, the threat changed and we needed Germany onside. Operation Unthinkable proposed 100,000 Wermacht troops fighting alongside the Allies against Russian forces.
We rapidly needed to be seen as 'the good guys'.
In the immediate aftermath of WW2 things were not great for Germans. I recollect an uncle castigating my young cousin for refusing to eat, saying that he'd seen people starving in Germany.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The International Court of Justice gave an advisory opinion in July 1996 on the Legality of the Threat Or Use Of Nuclear Weapons. The court ruled that "[t]here is in neither customary nor international law any comprehensive and universal prohibition of the threat or use of nuclear weapons." However, by a split vote, it also found that "[t]he threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict." The Court stated that it could not definitively conclude whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in which the very survival of the state would be at stake.

The same judgement still applies to strategic bombing, as there are no specific rules on aerial bombardment in the Geneva Conventions. The principles for judging legality are military necessity, distinction, and proportionality. The GC do put the obligation on the defenders not to deliberately place troops, weapons factories, etc. in densely populated areas.

Thus, I think Dresden would still be legal today.

[Genstabler]

It's a pity the commentators who attack Welby don't read for themselves what he actually said. He did not apologise and he did mention what the Luftwaffe did to London and Coventry. This is a typical distorted DM headline that just stirs up trouble, which is what journalism seems to be about these days. Read what Welby really said, which was balanced and reasonable.

[seafire6b]

A comparison with Trafalgar is not very precise one - can you imagine Navy shooting at passenger ship knowing that they are sinking mostly civilians?

Pali - such an action does indeed have a precedent. Also, kindly note the significant date when this civilian ship was sunk.

SS Athenia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Athenia)

[Tankertrashnav]

Seconded that Genstabler and Mal Drop. Unlike anybody on the Daily Mail it appears, and unfortunately a lot of those who have posted on here, I actually listened to the Archbishop, and noted that he carefully did not apologise for the bombing, and has subsequently made that clear in the light of ill-judged criticism of his words. Certainly reference to it as a horrific event is not a statement that can be argued with, any more than the description of hundreds of other incidents during the war. War is horrific, acknowledgement of the fact does not involve ascribing blame or apologising.

Personally I think it is nonsense to apologise for events for which you were not responsible. Since nobody is left alive who was in a position of responsibiilty in any of the participating nations, nobody can be expected to take it upon themselves to apologise for Dresden, Coventry, Hiroshima, the Burma Railway or anything else.

[Wander00]

Well that is jolly good. Take back what I said. And someone mentioned "Athenia"before I typed a similar comment. Hey ho, back to the Rugby

[Saintsman]

From what I understand, Dresden suffered a 'perfect storm' on the night with the cloud opening up over the city as the bombers arrived. This allowed all the bombers to see and find the target, something that was not usually the case for most night raids and so the city took the full force of all the bombs.

I stayed in Dresden one night, right next to the cathedral. The re-building from the ruins is quite impressive, as was the support from around the world that helped fund it.

[Basil]

It's a pity the commentators who attack Welby don't read for themselves what he actually said.
I hadn't and that is why I refrained from comment about him.

Getting back to general means comment; we are not nice people with whom to go to war. If we were, we'd have all been killed millennia ago.

Someone said, on another thread, that, were we all vegetarians, we would live a peaceful life. Not so; we'd fight over the vegetables.

[Wander00]

Perhaps the title of the thread should be changed to "did not" apologise............... Or change to "Newspaper lies about Archbishop........"

[Heathrow Harry]

Like Tankertrash I can't get excited about all these "apologies"

the only people who can apologise for ANY act are those who carried it out (or ordered it or facilitated it)

anyone else can only say how much they dislike what was done

it's time to put this passion for apologising about history back in the box

the important thing is

A. Not to forget

B. Don't do it again

[DC10RealMan]

Why no mention of the Hamburg raid in the summer of 1943 when more people were killed?

Why no mention of the USAAF who also attacked Dresden during the day?

Personally as an "After the War" kid I am just very grateful for the sacrifice of the young men of RAF Bomber Command in securing my future, a fact I shall commemorate later next month when I lay a wreath at the site of RAF Snaith in East Yorkshire on the 71st Anniversary of the Nuremburg Raid when RAF Bomber Command lost 108 heavy bombers in one night, each aircraft carried 7 young men who were the flower of the youth of Britain and her Commonwealth.

They truly were "The Greatest Generation" and I for one am very grateful for their passing.

[smujsmith]

I was only an Erk during my time in service, never rising to the cerebral ranks of Commisioned life. I honestly believe that whatever the members of our armed forces did during WW2, was necessary for the good of the whole of Europe. We, the British, owe a lot to our friends from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa and many more allies who flocked to our shores to stop the Nazi threat. It seems that the "guilt complex" is easily worn by modern political thinkers, like Blair and others, often quick to apologise on our behalf, for actions taken by our forbears. Not in my name I say, compared with the blitzkrieg inflicted on Warsaw, Civentry, Liverpool and other cities across Europe by the Germans, the "whirlwind" that they ultimately reaped was fitting and proportional. I really suspect though that current "forelock tugging" is designed to gain favour with the National Socialist EU, rather than apportion blame where it truly lies.

Smudge

[Pali]

Originally Posted by Pali
A comparison with Trafalgar is not very precise one - can you imagine Navy shooting at passenger ship knowing that they are sinking mostly civilians?

Pali - such an action does indeed have a precedent. Also, kindly note the significant date when this civilian ship was sunk.

SS Athenia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well, I was speaking about any ROYAL NAVY surface vessel - I would bet admiral Nelson wouldn't sink such a ship even if it would be a direct order.

But let's talk about Dresden bombing. Interesting thing is that both sides of conflict overrated the impact of such raids. Hitler thought that with the "Blitz" he would put inhabitants of London into panic who would flee from the city and put the production of London industry into halt. Also psychologists in England thought the same but nevertheless we know that opposite was true. Brave nation stood tall and it was impossible to break the will of Londoners.

But the same is valid to Germans. Inhabitants of bombed cities suffered the hell of bombing but their readiness to continue to live there and work never ceased. I've studied quite a lot about the subject and although German cities turned to rubble the industrial production under Albert Speer raised into the late 1944. The belief of Bomber command was simply wrong. It was unable to destroy German industry by bombing raids aimed at factories nor by killing workers and wiping out their homes. Though there were shortages (the most important effect impeding Nazi regime was lack of fuel after raids at Ploesti, Schwechat and Leuna) it is rather surprising to watch how Germany kept their production intact so long.

It must be very sobering for anybody involved to realise that bombing raids with intention to spread terror into civilian inhabitants missed the declared goal. In this respect it was unnecessary and sort of dark spot in the history of war.

However in all the fairness this raids helped to end the war in a way which was not considered in the beginning. Luftwaffe was desperate to stop allied heavy bombers and in attempt to do it they lost too many pilots and their fighter squadrons were bitterly decimated. Though they were able to build aircrafts to the very end there was lack of trained pilots and due the lack of fuel their training was more than insufficient.

Look at the German opposition in the air during the D-day and to the very end of war. Where were all the fighters gone? They were lost in an futile attempt to defend Reich and shoot down the bombers. Bomber Harris was wrong and his strategy to cut the industrial production and make workers flee from cities didn't work as expected. But the campaign knocked down Luftwaffe's resources up to the point when it became a marginal force. Another important issue was air defence (FLAK). Imagine the amount of resources needed to defend German cities...

It may be bitter to recognise that to attack civilians and cause so much suffering was merely ineffective. I feel the same, there were many countrymen of mine in RAF too.

I spoke to a friend of mine - German mountaineer I used to climb with near Dresden who was 12 years boy at the time of the raid and who spent the fateful night in a deep basement in the centre of the city. In about 1987 when I raised the topic he was unable to talk about it. Even if he tried. Then he started to speak about the moment when they finally could get out to the streets and he stopped to talk again. I looked into his face and saw something I didn't see ever and I didn't insist anymore. No, it is not the best thing for a bombing crew to think about this. Crew members were heroes who did their duty and died in attempt to win the war. I am not sure if I would use the same words for all the top rank commanders and politicians but this is completely different issue.

I am not trying to blame anybody nor I am liberal pacifist. I think it was a different world in 1940's. Also I am quite sure that an attempt to use the same strategy in a war today would end up in Hague.

World is not black or white. I am silently remembering young men who died when defending their country but allow me to give a long thought to people who died in Dresden that night. You may fight the worst evil but in doing so you better don't lose the values of being human.

And one final thought I seldom see in discussions like this. Some German units ended in Russian hands just due Dresden raid which paralysed the whole area and stopped the transports which headed to the west in order to end in American hands. I've read heartbreaking stories about desperate attempts of Germans to avoid Russian captivity. Why? Most of POWs went to gulags and majority of them died there and came back 8-10 years after the war. Read the story of Erich Hartmann and you will understand better. Add few thousands of dead German soldiers in Russian gulags to the victims of Dresden raid.

[Courtney Mil]

I know this has been said before and, in a small way, I'm sorry to have to say this.

Seventy years after the event it is all too easy to draw on the luxury of a lot of time and 20/20 (6/6) hindsight. It's also all too easy to forget or not understand just badly Britain's back was to the wall.

I know a lot of folk here have been talking about "they started it", but that isn't really right. Neither the War nor the bombing of cities. But Britain's leadership, including that of the RAF, were simply doing the only things they could in order not to be overrun by the worst and cruelest regime for centuries.

Question them all you like after all this time. But you might be careful about pointing fingers, at least before you're sure you completely understand and consider all the issues Britain and her leaders were facing.

[VinRouge]

Pali,

Good post. I would counter your point about PoW transport, in allied eyes it also prevented a freedom of movement which would have re-enforced german front lines.

The difference today of course is that although Harris was unable to prevent the growth of industry in Germany then, today with modern capability its unlikely the same would be true in an environment of air superiority or supremacy.

[Two's in]

So is the lesson here is don't try to rewrite history - it is what it is - but if you do, consider the Daily Mail as a first rate example of Nazi propoganda?

[Chugalug2]

Pali, thank you for such a thoughtful and considered post. You make a number of good points, not the least of which was the absence of the Luftwaffe over the D-Day beaches because they were defending the skies over Germany or resisting the Soviets in the east. I would suggest that was an effect that was very much in the minds of the senior commanders with which you have such reservations.

Eisenhower was able to reassure those facing the fearful odds of storming a well defended coast that any aircraft that they saw or heard would be ours. Even with such Air Superiority it was a close run thing. If they had been repelled who knows if and when another invasion would be attempted? The Liberation of Europe might then have been completed by the Red Army. In which case the entire population, military and civilian, Axis or subjugated, would have suffered the terrible fate that you so movingly relate in your final paragraph.

Of course there was terrible suffering in Germany, as there was in Poland, Russia, Holland, Britain, and everywhere else that fell under the dark shadow of WWII. Since then there has been continual suffering in further wars, up to and including the present. The concept, if it were ever true, that somehow the civilian populations should be spared the carnage of the battlefield, was certainly debunked well before Dresden, just as it is in the cities of East Ukraine. The only way to prevent it is to prevent war itself.

There is the rub. We know what doesn't prevent war; ladies with wire cutters outside NATO bases, United Nations resolutions, German Chancellors bearing papers promising peace in our time. The problem is we don't really know what does prevent it, other than to carry a big stick and speak softly. As an old Cold War warrior I found that to be quite effective, but that doesn't fit in with the world of today it seems.

[newt]

We have paid war reparations twice and now the Germans still rule Europe! How the hell can we be having this conversation after what they did in WW2?

The raid on Dresden was just one of the raids which achieved a result!

Forget all the fluffy rhetoric about war crimes etc.

This was a result!

Move on and by all means remember those who suffered but do not turn this anniversary into a crusade for the Nazi Party!

[Herod]

Regret at the killing of so many civilians? Yes
Pride that the Allies were able to destroy the Nazi regime? Again yes
Two different arguments.

[Wander00]

Ahem, who voted Hitler into power - Oh, sorry, aren't we supposed to ask that one.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

It's funny; people will eagerly tell us that the bomber offensive didn't halt or significantly reduce German war production. They don't seem so ready to tell us what it would have been without it, though.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

EXACTLY !!

Speer himself commented that one of the biggest effects of the bombing campaign was drawing off 75% of 88mm gun production for (largely ineffective) air defence. Go ask any Russian soldier (and, after D-Day, later Western European) how much they would have liked the Germans to have 4x as many 88mm guns as they actually faced.
The loss of Luftwaffe pilots was especially important on the Eastern Front, where the largely inexperienced Russian aircrew were shot down in droves by the better German pilots (Erich Hartmann - 352 kills, all but 7 against the Soviets. Gerhard Barkhorn flew throughout the Battles of France and Britain without getting a single kill,but then shot down 301 Soviet aircraft). Thanks to Bomber Command, they weren't very many of them.

Another point rarely mentioned about German productivity was that for most of the war, the Germans were much less productive than the Allies. Women were rarely used, for example. The increasing production figures need to be compared to what could have been achieved had Bomber Command not been hard at work.

Interesting article here describing how the German production miracle in ww2 was largely due to measures introduced just before the war, coupled with economic measures introduced in 1942 (such as a wholesale switch from cost-plus to fixed-price contracts.), and the production of factories in the Occupied Territories (e.g. Poland)
http://www.econ.yale.edu/growth_pdf/cdp905.pdf
It points out that the major bottlenecks in German production were due to a lack of labour, and the ineffectiveness of labour working outside their home town. Both of these factors are directly related to the Area Bombing campaign.

Try this for an idea of the effects of the bombing campaign

The next sudden about-turn of its production program again coincided with a
considerable loss of efficiency. In 1942, Heinkel had to give up its production of Ju 88
wings and started to fabricate the new bomber type He 177. As a result of this change
the “regular” depreciation rate of Heinkel’s capital stock soared to 28 % in 1942/43. This
time the necessary adaptation process was made even more difficult by the fact that
simultaneously a large number of concentration camp prisoners newly arrived at the firm
who had to be trained and made further adjustments of the firm’s organization of
production necessary. It took another two years until Heinkel was suddenly ordered to
stop the production of the bomber He 177 and to concentrate instead on the final
assembly of the fighter Fw 190 which was needed to repel the Allied bombers.

You don't have access to local labour (workers killed and bombed out of their homes)
You lose huge amounts of efficiency importing foreign/slave labour.
Just when you get them trained,you have to switch to building fighters to defend against the bombers.

I think research in the next few years will continue to show just how effective the Area Bombing campaign was.

[Royalistflyer]

Regardless of what Welby did or didn't say (I don't care for the man at all) The Germans twice in less that half a century launched merciless campaigns against all their neighbours. Their stated aim was to rule everything from the Urals to the Atlantic - including us. They started it, they employed unconscionable methods. Therefore I see nothing wrong in our fighting any way we could to prevent their invading us, and getting them out of our neighbour's territories. Dresden got flattened, with very good reason, as did several other of their cities, next could have been Berlin. Nagasaki and Heroshima got flattened, next could have been Tokyo. There were extremely good reasons for doing this - it simply saved a lot of our lives. No apology by anyone is called for - ever.

The thing that worries me is that an awful lot of people seem unable to grasp that Germany is doing it again right now, which is why we need to exit their EU. I suspect that if Greece and UK exit, their grand plan may come unstuck. Somewhat different from their former cruder efforts, but in the long run, we are being slowly but surely ruled from abroad, just as we fought not to be in 1940.

[Pali]

It's funny; people will eagerly tell us that the bomber offensive didn't halt or significantly reduce German war production. They don't seem so ready to tell us what it would have been without it, though.

Well, maybe the production could be really hampered if the bombers would focus really on industry instead of indiscriminate area bombing of civilians.

Now guess, who said this after Dresden raid:

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.

And when we talk about ending war sooner there was a good chance to do it right from the beginning. Not to sacrifice Czechoslovakia in 1938, keeping the word and fight united shoulder to shoulder with Poland - France and Britain would be also in completely different situation.

Even if we were left alone we were supposed to fight. I remember my father telling me the capitulation to Hitler without a single shot even if our allies deserted us was probably the most shameful feeling he had in his life.

Apology, apology, I wonder if I've heard anything in regard to Munich...

And yes, the quote above is from the same leader who said something about blood, toil, tears and sweat. He was a very fine gentleman. Pity he wasn't at Downing street in 1938.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Well, Churchill was not a political idiot. Harris followed direct orders, and was disgusted with Churchill's perfidity in that statement. Indeed, Harris demanded Churchill withdraw the memo about Dresden condemning "acts of terror and wanton destruction", and Churchill did so, though as ever the withdrawal was much less widely reported than the memo.

My grandmother (no idiot) showed me a propaganda leaflet from 1941 she had kept, which claimed that the 'Blitz' had had no chance of success against the stout British people, but also claiming widespread bombing of German cities would succeed.

[seafire6b]

V2 ROCKET - hardly a precision-target weapon.

First attack on London (after Paris, but on the same day) was 8th September 1944.

In all, over 3000 such rockets were directed against various European "general targets".

The final two V2 launches during WW2 were on 27th March 1945; both came down in southern England.

Remind me, what dates were the Dresden raids again?

[air pig]

Looking at rail maps from the time, Dresden was one of the three main rail routes to the Eastern front, one through Berlin, one through Prague/Salzberg and one through Dresden. Routes used for moving men and materiel to and from the battle. In 1945 the Germans ability to replace such railways must have been degraded as by that time they had 2 ATAF attacking the rail system in the west since 1944.

With the bombing campaign steel production must have been falling, whilst its requirement was rising.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The attack on the German transportation system, beginning in September 1944,was the single most important cause of Germany’s ultimate economic collapse. The effects of the bombing on the German rail and water transportation systems were almost exactly as envisioned in AWPD-1 and AWPD-42. Transportation targets received almost one-third of the total bombs dropped throughout the campaign from 1944-1945 with decisive results.
Bombing raids decimated rail yards, depots, bridges, and canals. After October 1944, it became impossible for the rail and waterway systems to meet transportation requirements. From December on, all sectors of the German economy were in rapid decline.

http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0413102-132317/unrestricted/Rigole_thesis.pdf

A study of the effectiveness of Allied bombing yields one consistent lesson. The attacks on almost any of the target priorities; cities, ball bearings, aircraft factories, oil production, could have brought about a rapid end to the war if the initial raids had been sustained.
Harris was right.

[GreenKnight121]

Nagasaki and Heroshima got flattened, next could have been Tokyo.

There was nothing left in Tokyo - it had already been firebombed into ashes - far worse than Dresden ever was.

Simply put, Nagasaki and Hiroshima were among the last 5-6 relatively undamaged cities left in Japan - specifically so that there would be a good assessment of the damage caused by the A-bombs.

The Tokyo Fire Raids, 1945 (http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm)
A successful incendiary raid required ideal weather that included dry air and significant wind. Weather reports predicted these conditions over Tokyo on the night of March 9-10, 1945. A force of 334 B-29s was unleashed - each plane stripped of ammunition for its machine guns to allow it to carry more fire-bombs. The lead attackers arrived over the city just after dark and were followed by a procession of death that lasted until dawn. The fires started by the initial raiders could be seen from 150 miles away. The results were devastating: almost 17 square miles of the city were reduced to ashes. Estimates of the number killed range between 80,000 and 200,000, a higher death toll than that produced by the dropping of the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima or Nagasaki six months later. Japanese Cities (http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html)
Name of Japanese city firebombed / Percentage of the city destroyed / Equivalent in size to the following American city
Yokohama 58 Cleveland
Tokyo 51 New York
Toyama 99 Chattanooga
Nagoya 40 Los Angeles
Osaka 35.1 Chicago
Nishinomiya 11.9 Cambridge
Siumonoseki 37.6 San Diego
Kure 41.9 Toledo
Kobe 55.7 Baltimore
Omuta 35.8 Miami
Wakayama 50 Salt Lake City
Kawasaki 36.2 Portland
Okayama 68.9 Long Beach
Yawata 21.2 San Antonio
Kagoshima 63.4 Richmond
Amagasaki 18.9 Jacksonville
Sasebo 41.4 Nashville
Moh 23.3 Spokane
Miyakonoio 26.5 Greensboro
Nobeoka 25.2 Augusta
Miyazaki 26.1 Davenport
Hbe 20.7 Utica
Saga 44.2 Waterloo
Imabari 63.9 Stockton
Matsuyama 64 Duluth
Fukui 86 Evansville
Tokushima 85.2 Ft. Wayne
Sakai 48.2 Forth Worth
Hachioji 65 Galveston
Kumamoto 31.2 Grand Rapids
Isezaki 56.7 Sioux Falls
Takamatsu 67.5 Knoxville
Akashi 50.2 Lexington
Fukuyama 80.9 Macon
Aomori 30 Montgomery
Okazaki 32.2 Lincoln
Oita 28.2 Saint Joseph
Hiratsuka 48.4 Battle Creek
Tokuyama 48.3 Butte
Yokkichi 33.6 Charlotte
Uhyamada 41.3 Columbus
Ogaki 39.5 Corpus Christi
Gifu 63.6 Des Moines
Shizuoka 66.1 Oklahoma City
Himeji 49.4 Peoria
Fukuoka 24.1 Rochester
Kochi 55.2 Sacramento
Shimizu 42 San Jose
Omura 33.1 Sante Fe
Chiba 41 Savannah
Ichinomiya 56.3 Sprinfield
Nara 69.3 Boston
Tsu 69.3 Topeka
Kuwana 75 Tucson
Toyohashi 61.9 Tulsa
Numazu 42.3 Waco
Chosi 44.2 Wheeling
Kofu 78.6 South Bend
Utsunomiya 43.7 Sioux City
Mito 68.9 Pontiac
Sendai 21.9 Omaha
Tsuruga 65.1 Middleton
Nagaoka 64.9 Madison
Hitachi 72 Little Rock
Kumagaya 55.1 Kenosha
Hamamatsu 60.3 Hartford
Maebashi 64.2 Wheeling

[Chugalug2]

Pali:-
Apology, apology, I wonder if I've heard anything in regard to Munich...Seems to me that you want to have your cake and eat it. If the UK had declared war on Germany in 1938 in support of Czechoslovakia, it would have been as much use to that country as it was a year later to Poland, and it would have probably sealed its own fate into the bargain. As it was that extra year meant that
Even if we were left alone we were supposed to fight.and we did, and we survived, and we helped defeat the tyranny that enslaved Europe. Of course, like Poland, Czechoslovakia then became enslaved by another tyranny and for that apologies might be in order. But for 1938? Not in my book.

The point about war, as has been said here by others, is to win. That was Churchill's stated aim even in the darkest hour and in the final analysis the aim was achieved, despite mistakes, despite betrayals, despite the bleating of pacifist Canons. If you accuse us of dishonourable conduct, that is you prerogative, but your solution would have probably meant a Reich Protector still being in residence in Prague Castle.

[bosnich71]

The only problem with bombing Dresden in 1945 was that it should have been bombed more frequently prior to that date.


P.s. R.I.P. Phyllis Thomas. Born 25/04/1917.
Died in the Blitz on Coventry, November 1940.
Phyllis died leaving 3 young children under the age of seven.

[Pali]

Nothing wrong with hitting civilian objects while aiming at railroad. But questionable if you intentionally destroy large part of a city and say there is railroad somewhere in the vicinity.

[bosnich71]

Pali .... with respect, B******s !
The Luftwaffe raid on Coventry in November 1940 was undertaken using radio beams for accuracy which resulted in the city centre of Coventry being virtually destroyed. However my relative was killed in that raid although she lived some miles from the city centre, she wasn't the only one.
When Adolf returned to Germany after his triumphant visit to France there were literally hundreds of thousands of Germans out on the street with their arms in the air to greet him. They were all for the war in 1940 so should stop whingeing when they received some back later on.

[sitigeltfel]

.......and the CofE wonders why people are deserting it in droves! :rolleyes:

[rh200]

The Germans twice in less that half a century launched merciless campaigns against all their neighbours. Their stated aim was to rule everything from the Urals to the Atlantic - including us. They started it, they employed unconscionable methods. Therefore I see nothing wrong in our fighting any way we could to prevent their invading us, and getting them out of our neighbour's territories.

Well I was with you, until you got to this bit

The thing that worries me is that an awful lot of people seem unable to grasp that Germany is doing it again right now, which is why we need to exit their EU. I suspect that if Greece and UK exit, their grand plan may come unstuck. Somewhat different from their former cruder efforts, but in the long run, we are being slowly but surely ruled from abroad, just as we fought not to be in 1940.

Stop seeing conspiracy where none exist. Though technically possible, not likely.

[bcgallacher]

All the absolute nonsense spoken by those who believe that because Dresden had some historic buildings it should have not been bombed shows how divorced from reality they are. In order to prevent any kind of Victory by the Nazis I would have destroyed every city in Germany and killed the entire population - this was a regime who practiced total war - given the chance they would have enslaved us all. They probably killed in excess of 20 million people and the intellectuals are concerned that a so called cultural centre was destroyed?
I suggest that those with concerns should talk with those of the generation who endured the Second World War who are still with us and ask if they had any concerns about the bombing campaign - my parents and grandparents certainly had none.

[TBM-Legend]

BC well said.:D The PC history revisionists never lived through that war and comments from the Archbishop in or out of context are not appropriate and he is to be condemned.

[Wensleydale]

Stalin had been criticising the Allied Leaders - Churchill in particular - about the lack of a "second front" and refused to accept the bombing campaign as the only alternative. At Yalta, Stalin asked for bomber attacks against reinforcement centres and this gave Churchill the opportunity to show what Bomber Command had been achieving by attacking a target on the Soviet line of advance. It would also demonstrate to Stalin the power of Bomber Command should Stalin decide to continue on after Berlin. Perhaps this is why such a large bomber force was sent to attack this target (perhaps larger than necessary?) and the subsequent firestorm which was a rare event during WW2 (there were only about 6 produced throughout the war?).


However, War Crime Trials against the German leaders was also publicised at Yalta, and after Dresden the German leadership countered this by openly releasing uncensored footage of the raid, for the first time in the war, together with hugely inflated casualty figures of 400,000. This propaganda was picked up by the usual suspects in the House of Lords who personally attacked Churchill just as he was facing a general Election in a few months time. The result was that Churchill side-stepped to let Bomber Command carry full responsibility.


Churchill thought that Dresden (and the other 3 raids at this time) would give him some degree of morale justification to Stalin but sadly it rebounded leading him to betray those very people who had given so much to the overall war effort.

[BEagle]

Genstabler wrote: It's a pity the commentators who attack Welby don't read for themselves what he actually said. He did not apologise and he did mention what the Luftwaffe did to London and Coventry. This is a typical distorted DM headline that just stirs up trouble, which is what journalism seems to be about these days. Read what Welby really said, which was balanced and reasonable.

Indeed. I heard his speech on TV and it was carefully phrased. But the distorted nonsense of the Daily Mail completely missed the point.

There is no doubt that the overkill of the 3-day firestorm was intended to be a deterrent to Stalin, as much as anything else - the RAF memo issued to crews even stated as such.

[Chugalug2]

Pali, as someone tending to field the pro Welby view, as well as someone whose family was on the receiving end of both Axis and Allied action or inaction, from even before what is generally considered the start of WWII, you have been cut a lot of slack here, and rightly so. In return though you are expected to answer counter argument rather than simply ignoring others responses and repeating the same mantra that bombing cities is immoral. Of course it is, war is immoral but if you engage in it, engage in it to win.

The general view of the UK is that we are a pushover, be it for hopeful immigrants, third world supplicants, or aspiring dictators. We may be, but there comes a point where enough is enough and then we fight to win. Who cares which way the bloody Belgrano was steaming? It posed a threat and was sunk, end of!

We went to war in 1939 because there was no alternative, not because we were obliged by Treaty obligations, but because we were yet again faced with a European power on the rampage that was a direct threat to us. Be it Spain, France, Holland, Germany, Russia, or whoever, we have always had to confront such a threat and we always will. That alone should tell us that we are not Europeans but a maritime power that has to watch its 6 o'clock at all times.

Mention has been made that once again we are seeing the same threat coming from Berlin, albeit the continuation of war by a different means. It has been poo-pooed but I am not so sure. The agenda that is attempting to create a super state out of a patchwork of completely different countries and philosophies is already showing signs of ever growing dissent. Dissent within states leads to the very worst kind of warfare, civil war.

God forbid that Europe should be thrown once again into yet another internecine bloodbath which could trample the very hopes which the original Common Market embraced. Time perhaps for the UK to take a long hard look at the direction Europe is going in and decide if it wants to go there too, or simply say "I'm out".

What has this harangue to do with Dresden? Everything in my book if we don't want to be doing the same all over again.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Civil war is only the worst kind of war for the inhabitants. Too often in history have we seen external enemies invented and external wars fought in order to avoid internal strife.

I for one am grateful that the vast majority of islamists are busy fighting each other in Syria/Iraq.

[Chugalug2]

So we don't want to be European inhabitants then, should such a calamity occur in the EU, do we?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I have already opted out of that particular 'we'. ;)

I think the breakup of the EU, whilst acrimonious, will not result in any kind of civil war. There is neither the means nor the appetite to hold it together.

[Chugalug2]

Point taken, Fox3. Hopefully we will soon be following your excellent example, though not by emigrating but by voting democratically to say, "Thanks, but no thanks".

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Good luck with that, but first you have to find a political leader who will even offer you the chance to vote democratically....

..can't have the people voting unless it's to agree with what the poli's want, can we?

...which in some ways brings us back to why Dresden got bombed in the first place.


There was a good line on the John Thaw drama about Bomber Harris, spoken after Dresden.

"They called us murderers. What would they have called us if we'd lost?"

Don't think Harris ever used those exact words, but it summarises the sentiment rather well.

I am also much in favour of asking the question - what other strategies would people have used to win the war?, and having those totalisers running of all the deaths to Jews, our troops etc. happening whilst they delayed.

[Warmtoast]

Chugalug2

We went to war in 1939 because there was no alternative, not because we were obliged by Treaty obligationsSurely we went to war because Germany had invaded Poland. We had after all on 25th August 1939 signed an "Agreement of Mutual Assistance" with Poland. This agreement contained promises of mutual military assistance between the nations in the event either was attacked by some "European country".
As Chamberlain said on 3rd September 1939: "This morning the British Ambassador in Berlin handed the German Government a final note stating that unless we heard from them by 11.00 a.m. that they were prepared at once to withdraw their troops from Poland, a state of war would exist between us."

[Heathrow Harry]

"A study of the effectiveness of Allied bombing yields one consistent lesson. The attacks on almost any of the target priorities; cities, ball bearings, aircraft factories, oil production, could have brought about a rapid end to the war if the initial raids had been sustained.
Harris was right."

But Harris himself was against what he called "panacea targets" such as the oil programme

how much of that was due to the fact that for most of the war hitting a precise target was impossible for most aircrew of any side I don't know but it was obviously an issue

It was only in mid/late 1944 that the air defences of Germany were degraded to any reasonable amount - until then the critical issue that you had to keep going back to targets such as railways or bridges to keep them knocked out was recipe for suicide

[Wander00]

While we are on this, what did people think of BBC TV coverage of the Dresden anniversary? Methinks it was a bit on the "awfully sorry" track, but what do others think?

[Chugalug2]

Quite right of course, Warmtoast. My suspicion though is that we obligated ourselves to Poland because its invasion would constitute a line in the sand crossed that meant that Hitler was on a roll and thus posed a direct threat to us.

The Saarland, Austria, The Sudetenland, had all been gobbled up on the specious pretence that as their inhabitants spoke German they hence belonged within the Third Reich, whether they wished it or no. Poland was obviously an exception to any such rule despite Danzig, as was of course the previous seizing of the remainder of Czechoslovakia.

Funny how that all strikes a bit of a chord with present day events isn't it? Particularly ironic is a German Chancellor reporting to a Munich conference that a military confrontation with another dictator, bent on a similar gathering in of the Herrenvolk, was not the answer but that negotiations should produce peace in our time! What goes around comes around...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Reichsgaue.png

[Molemot]

For anyone prepared to read through the 52 pages, this report seems pretty comprehensive....

http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-130523-051.pdf

[Basil]

Molemot, from the 1954 US report: Marshal (sic) Harris, (allegedly called "Butcher Harris" by the Germans)
I thought he was known as 'Butch' by his crews because of their personal rate of attrition. Perhaps they picked it up from the Germans - a bit like Lili Marlene.

[walter kennedy]

It was so near to the end of the war and the bomber crews could see what they were doing - especially the second wave that caught out so many of the young firefighters.
Just to remind you that it was Britain that declared war and it was Churchill's pressure to start bombing civilian cities - the Germans were not initially intentionally targeting civil areas but Hitler was under political pressure to retaliate in kind. The now known deliberate "de-housing" strategy carried out by the RAF was indeed a war crime - it was areas of the highest density housing in Dresden that were the focus.
You need to understand whose pocket Churchill was in and what was the particular significance of Dresden to them.
Why the Polish government did not accept Germany's generous compensation for letting the Danzig corridor go (re-uniting East Prussia with the rest of Germany) is hard to understand - perhaps it was under pressure from elsewhere to trigger that war.

[Clockwork Mouse]

Some real flights of fantasy now appearing on here but I've never before read that it was Poland and Britain who were the aggressors against the poor misunderstood Nazis.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

the Germans were not initially intentionally targeting civil areas

never heard of Guernica, or Rotterdam ????

Another nutter for my ignore list. Never used to need it.

[Chugalug2]

wk:-
Why the Polish government did not accept Germany's generous compensation for letting the Danzig corridor go (re-uniting East Prussia with the rest of Germany) is hard to understandPerhaps it was that they were rather better informed! Rather like the Belgians they knew that the threat was always from the West or from the East, or as it turned out this time from both and simultaneously! They had been after all breaking the Enigma traffic, were no doubt avid readers of Mein Kampf, and knew where he was going and how he was going to get there.

I've no doubt also that they knew they possessed the one vital raw materiel desperately needed by Germany, the Gold reserves. Those wily Swiss bankers were not impressed by the creative accountancy of the Reich Bank, that had bankrolled the Wehrmacht and the Autobahns, and demanded Gold on the Nail in exchange for the Foreign Exchange that was needed to balance the books. Hitler had to go to war, and the Poles knew it long before the Germans did.

[Tankertrashnav]

Blimey Walter Kennedy, I've been trying to work out a response to your post but I am so astounded by your comments that I am just speechless :oh:

Have to agree with Fox on this one!

[seafire6b]

Walter Kennedy

Just to remind you that it was Britain that declared war ...So consequently, but purely as a retaliation against Britain, and having already finished off Poland (in a stitch-up with the USSR), Hitler then attacked.... Norway!(?). Then followed by Belgium, Holland and Denmark, et cetera.

Yes, that all makes sense now. About as much sense as your post anyway.

[clunckdriver]

Walter Kenedy, you by by any chance related to the late Ambasador Kennedy who did his utmost to hang Britain and her allies out to dry in 1939/1940? Had the American Pesident listned to this dirt bag the world I think would have been doomed to hundreds of years of the "Master Race' policies. Its no secret over here that granting Sir Winston Churchill honary American Citizenship was President Kennedy's way of apologising to the world, its a good thing that the then US President had enough dirt on Kennedy to ensure that he behaved himself when he was recalled.As for the allies being the originators of bombing cities, I sugest you walk down the Thames river and view the monument and inscription to the victimes of a Gotha raid in 1917, on top of this the "Kondor Legion" refined this method of waging war in Spain againts the legitimate government and population of this nation, you Sir, talk utter B---!

[Rwy in Sight]

I for one am grateful that the vast majority of islamists are busy fighting each other in Syria/Iraq.

I was thinking along similar lines this morning: if we had to run a/some bomb attack(s) or even use the buckets of instant sunshine against IS held cities - areas to stop them will we have similar afterthoughts in 70 years time or will we be happy for ever that IS was eliminated?

Also we need to have a thread about the efficiency of mass bombings.

Rwy in Sight

[walter kennedy]

Chugalug wrote
<<Those wily Swiss bankers were not impressed by the creative accountancy of the Reich Bank, that had bankrolled the Wehrmacht and the Autobahns, and demanded Gold on the Nail in exchange for the Foreign Exchange that was needed to balance the books.>>
While most of the developed world was suffering in the Great Depression Germany had made herself into a prosperous country by 1937 (separately from rearmament) by generating its own method of banking that did not involve borrowing currency from overseas at compound interest - this allowed the payment of workers/industries in the internal economy, the means of exchange of goods and services that sovereign nations need - they could have reminded the world how to control their own money supply and break the economic stranglehold on nations that exists today. Of course they needed gold for international business as the powers that be didn't like their money. The Germans taking control of their own economy in 1933 was the real trigger for WW2 - had they been allowed to continue prospering UK, USA, etc may have followed suit. We should today look at independent national economies again to get ourselves out of the mess we are in.

[Chugalug2]

wk:-
Germany had made herself into a prosperous country by 1937 (separately from rearmament) by generating its own method of banking that did not involve borrowing currency from overseas at compound interestWalter, I should stick to SEAL conspiracies, they cannot so easily be debunked. Wiki explains the scam far better than I ever could. I commend it, not to you as it would be pointless to do so, but to others who might wonder at the miracle that Hitler supposedly performed upon a broken and humiliated Germany:-
Reichsmark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsmark)
In particular this para:-
MEFO was a dummy company that was formed with relatively small amounts of capital that was used to finance German rearmament off the books. It issued bills without backing by its own resources but which were guaranteed redeemable at 1:1 for reichsmarks for five years by the government. The MEFO bills amounts were considered a state secret and were an important element in the impression that Hitlerian economics was a success. This company essentially created a large amount of reichsmarks off the books, inflating the currency in secret. Payment was about to come due giving Hitler the option of shifting the German economy to export goods to pay the bills or going to war and paying the debts off from looting profits extracted from conquered states.I notice your "separately from rearmament" qualification, but that was the catch, wasn't it? In order to maintain this 'miracle' he had to go to war to loot and enslave conquered nations in order to keep the show on the road. Some miracle!

[Al R]

I'm not sure what Welby did or didn't say. I'm sure he wasn't so inept he'd actually hand the opposition something like that on a platter. But has he apologised for Elf oil, Wonga and for ordaining the soup de la jour, Lord Green?

The German President's speech from Friday is resonant.

http://www.bundespraesident.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Reden/2015/02/150213-Dresden-englisch.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

[Chugalug2]

Thanks Al. A very measured and thoughtful message from the German President. Better late than never, here is a link to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Dresden Speech:-
Archbishop's speech on 70th anniversary of Dresden bombing (http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/5498/archbishops-speech-on-70th-anniversary-of-dresden-bombing)

[Al R]

.. regret and deep sorrow.

Hardly makes him a hand wringing apologist. Thanks. Hope you're well. :ok:

[ACW418]

Walter,

I believe in the freedom of speech in this country, in a way I fought for it by being a Cold war warrior. That freedom also gives me the right not to listen!

ACW

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I would repeat my fundamental disagreement with
and diminished all our humanity.

A member of the Armed Forces does not diminish their humanity by fighting evil, but enhances it, if the fighting is proportionate. I repeat my challenge for naysayers to propose a better strategy at the time.

[Deepest Norfolk]

Once more some do gooder with no grasp of reality mouthing off about something he understands F**K all about. Providing he did apologise of course and it's not been filtered through our completely factual media.

I liked what the German bloke said. Words to the effect of let's not forget who started it!"

DN

[diginagain]

Providing he did apologise of course and it's not been filtered through our completely factual media.You could always try reading the link in post #83.

[MOSTAFA]

I've read the Archbishops speech and I can’t see where he apologised. However, I can see where he infers what happened in our name was wrong but the thread as gone off on another tangent, usually thats my my fault, anyway I got to thinking.

Anybody remember, those dreadful essays, set by the CO, that had to be delivered to the Adjutant each year? As if, we weren’t busy enough! I recall one of the subjects I had a stab at was 'Strategic Bombing and its vindication' or something similar. I picked that subject because my Grandmother was killed in the bombing of Penryn in 1941 and she wasn’t a budding warrior, just a lady, asleep in her bed!

I read a book, like we were encouraged to do; by somebody who had something to do with the Air Ministry during the war. The whole book was about justification and for me, it was extremely valuable in trying to understand the extremes of air warfare. It clearly stated, that the bombing of cities and civilians was started by the Germans when they invaded Poland (Warsaw), they did the same in Norway, Holland and Belgium albeit; by some twisted logic, they only did it; to support their ground troops! Somehow, but not using that same logic, the Germans interpret British bombers were designed to bomb innocent cities and civilians! Somehow, the German High Command viewed their bombers as tools to bomb a path for its invading army and the fact that they were actually killing civilians just didn’t come into it!

By the time the British returned the favour, that same high command who opposed this tactic, completely refused to retaliate for a couple of months whilst German cities, part of the infrastructure was bombed, hoping, as Hitler said 'Churchill would stop this nonsense.’ Those who were opposed to this here were and quite rightly in my opinion, described as pacifists and socialists. Germany justifies the ‘Blitz' as retaliation. Whether, Hitler wanted it or not, he certainly didn’t want the mutual bombing to go on, why should he - it was working. I think he even tried to have it banned by international agreement.

All wars are pretty terrible for most people, not least the protagonists that step up to the mark and participate but the inter-European ones always seem to be about the domination of Europe and domination today is rightly condemned by most rational thinking people. I think its quite instructive to know that most of the propaganda spread, especially then and today about World War 2 is quite false - because if we understand that - it will provide a clue to the understanding the spin masters of Governments today are essentially the same as those of 1940.

ah well.

[Pali]

Discussion moved since I've been involved here. I would add only one thing. Nazi regime was horrible and it was needed to fight it by all means. My point is that if you fight for a just cause it is important not to slip into hatred or to retaliate with a questionable means. We speak about strength which goes along honour and integrity.

You want to live with head held high in peace after all fighting ended.

Here is a great article (http://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/german-pilot-in-wwii-spared-an-american-b-17-pilot-over-germany-only-to-reunite-40-years-later-and-become-fishing-buddies.html#at_pco=smlre-1.0&at_si=54e0440ac587dbff&at_ab=per-2&at_pos=1&at_tot=4) which describes it all.

Some will understand and some not...

[Basil]

Pali, I'd heard that story.
The German pilot should, of course, have shot the bomber down in order to prevent the crew returning.

[clunckdriver]

Pali, Im afraid there are many more acounts of aircrew being lynched by German civilians and being killed whilst hanging in their chutes by Luftwaffe pilots {which in no way takes away from this one incident} for this to be held up by many as normal German behavior: had the pilots superiors found out I dont think he would have lived to tell the tale, he was indeed a very brave man.

[Heathrow Harry]

but that is a risk of the job for all aircrew bombing people

I'm pretty sure more than a few German Aircrew didn't survive a parachute drop over the UK or France (in 1940)

both sides targeted civilians - we were just better at it doing it from the air - you could argue the Germans were better at doing it on the ground or at sea

[Molemot]

Perhaps we should remember that the nuclear weapons being developed by an international group of physicists and engineers were never intended for use in the Pacific theatre. Had they been ready in time, I don't doubt that the Third Reich would have been the target...and they would have stopped the European War in just the same way that they stopped the Pacific one. That would have changed the face of Europe in the post war era...

[Herod]

Molemot. Don't forget that the Nazis were developing a nuclear weapon. If the Allies had been a year or two longer winning the war, Hitler would have had the V3 (or whatever) with a nuclear warhead on top.

[clunckdriver]

Heathrow Harry, I think you will find there was only one case of a Luftwaffe air crew being lynched during the Battle of Britain, and to quote the authorities," they reacted with vigor to prevent it hapening again", however at least two RAF pilots were given a few lumps untill they managed to straighten things out. I have a relative who flew in Bomber Command{shot down and badly wounded} and after the war had the task of digging up allied aircrew remains for the War Graves Commision, I have heard him state that ones chances of making it into a POW camp if other than the military caught you were pretty slim judging by the evedence that he helped dig up.

[Danny42C]

I would tend to discount stories of baled-out aircrew shot in the air from the air. It is hard enough to hit a thing the size of an aircraft, never mind a single body, in this way. Do you remember the balloon-bursting competitions by light aircraft at the Air displays of long ago ? (it looks easy, but isn't, to fly onto a point in the air).

In any case, in combat, your aim is achieved when you have downed the bomber. The crew, alive or dead, are no longer combatants. Alive, they are prisoners (useful to Intelligence, too). And why waste your precious few seconds of firepower when you might need them yourself in a moment or two ?

Lynching by an infuriated civil mob seems far more possible. When you have just seen your nearest and dearest killed or maimed before your eyes, and your home in ruins, you are not rational.

Kipling, as usual, has the right idea:

"I do not praise my country's foes,
Nor call 'em 'eroes. Still,
Where is the sense in 'ating those
'Oom you are paid to kill ?"

D.

[Basil]

ISTR some were hanged from the Mainz-Kastel bridge.
Hence the BC "Keep one for Mainz".

[Wensleydale]

There was even some degree of honour amongst the Nachtjager crews. When using Schragemusik (upward firing cannon), it was obviously bad form to fire into the bomb bay from underneath (in case it went bang) so the German night fighters aimed between the inboard and outboard engines to hit the wing fuel tanks which usually caught fire after a few rounds. Nazi doctrine demanded that RAF bombers be attacked on the starboard side - if targeting the starboard side then the fire would trail past the main entry door of a Lancaster thereby preventing the escape of the rear crew. However, many night fighter pilots targeted the port side to give the crew a sporting chance of escape. (It was hard to get out of Lancaster anyway).

[VinRouge]

Wensleydale, no different imho than modern gen aam which go for the cockpit area as the point of aim. Simple fact, trained experienced crew is harder to replace in wartime than the aircraft.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

It's not exactly new. The aim point for cannon was always the pilot's head.

[Lonewolf_50]

No one has started another European war since. Some people in what used to be Yugoslavia, and what is now Ukraine, would like a word with you about that. :cool:

[Basil]

Some people in what used to be Yugoslavia, and what is now Ukraine, would like a word with you about that.
Both internal conflicts.

[Lonewolf_50]

Both in Europe, and both involving people from Other European (and other) countries. (Russia is a European country, in case you weren't sure. )

[Basil]

(Russia is a European country, in case you weren't sure. )
Ah, Texas humour - gotta love 'em.

[clunckdriver]

Danny,42C, trying to hit a very light ballon with an aircraft is very different from blasting away with cannon or machine guns , an aircraft will push a lot of air and cause something a light as a ballon to move out of the way, fifty call rounds do not telegraph their impending arrival. Regardles of this, S/Ldr Star, the C.O. of 253 Sqdn RAF was killed whilst descending by parachute on the 31 of August 1940, this is very well documented, when I can dig my way through the snow to the building in which my papers are stored I can provide you with many more examples, also will be visiting my brother in law in the UK next month who has extensive records and memories of the cause of death of may of the aircrew he dug up, a grim task indeed.

[rh200]

Both internal conflicts.

There really is no such thing as an internal conflict anymore. What starts out by one is usually involves help by outside forces.

Rule one, either you help your side as your enemy will be helping theirs.

Rule two, how much do I care about my side and what do I stand to lose.

In the modern world borders are just lines on a map, the integration time of what is happening further away affecting yourself, is getting smaller.

As for Dresden, RIP, but tough, everyone wants to be a revisionist. There is one sad fact, war is a disgusting foul sometimes necessary thing (human nature -> animal nature) The moral question of how far you go in ending it as quickly as possible, to extending it is a hard one.

Another words the possibility of x people dying in short amount of time versus 10x amount of people over a longer period.

[DC10RealMan]

Sgt Leslie Pidd descending on a parachute during the Battle of Britain was also machine gunned whilst in the chute harness.

[oldpax]

My late friend George(worked for Boulton-Paul in Wolverhampton)His words as I remember them"I volunteered to drive to Coventry to pick up parts we needed,we arrived just as the raid started and were almost at our destination after taking cover,the street had a river of melted margarine and fat carrying dead bodies with it .I will never forget that night.
Another friend was in the WRENS in Plymouth"we were in the shelters during the raid and some bombs dropped very close.After, I tried to get home but the city centre was just a pile of smoking rubble.
Tell them Dresden was not justified.
Oh yes and the Luftwaffe strafed the main street of the small port I was brought up in.Now why would they do that?

[A and C]

Having taken the trouble to read the archbishop's speech I can't see and apology for the bombing, as some of you may know from previous posts of mine on this subject I am very supportive of the bomber offensive during WW2 and even more supportive of the men of Bomber Command who at huge cost carried out the offensive.

These men and others spent five years of their lives fighting a war they did not want or choose with the memory of WW1 fresh in their minds for the ideals of freedom and democracy.

Part of this freedom was the right to free speech that the so called newspaper used to misquote the archbishop to cause offence and outrage just to sell a few newspapers.

All right thinking people should not be getting irate at a man who points out the folly of war, they should be attacking those who abuse the right to free speach that cost the men of Bomber Command so much.

I would suggest the place to start would be never again buy that disgusting rag The Daily Mail.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

For newcomers, he didn't apologise.

His full speech is here (courtesy of Chugalug 2, post #83)
Archbishop's speech on 70th anniversary of Dresden bombing (http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/5498/archbishops-speech-on-70th-anniversary-of-dresden-bombing)

His own response to the Daily Mail article (courtesy of Mal Drop, post #15)
Reflections On Dresden · Blog (http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/blog.php/23/reflections-on-dresden)

[nimbev]

I suggest that this thread could now be closed. The texts of the speeches by the President of Germany and the Archbishop say all that needs be said

http://www.bundespraesident.de/Share...ublicationFile (http://www.bundespraesident.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Reden/2015/02/150213-Dresden-englisch.pdf?__blob=publicationFile)

Archbishop's speech on 70th anniversary of Dresden bombing (http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/5498/archbishops-speech-on-70th-anniversary-of-dresden-bombing)

[pulse1]

Stanwell,

Judging by your response to "nimbev's" not unreasonable suggestion, I wonder if you are able to understand most of what anybody else is writing.

I would be all for a wider debate about the morals of war but I don't think that it should appear under the erroneous heading about the Archbishop's so called apology.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Looks like the PM is on the side of the Bomber Crews. Good to see.

David Cameron defends Second World War RAF 'heroes' of Dresden raid - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11422903/David-Cameron-defends-heroes-of-Dresden-raid.html)

[walter kennedy]

Hardly surprising given the PM's pedigree - Milliband would be the same.
I don't think it was Stalin that Churchill was trying to impress with this "spectacular" given that the first bombs fell on Shrove Tuesday, the 604th anniversary of the burning at the stake of a certain minority group in Dresden.