The BBC program makers fell into the classic trap of all Bomber/WW1 & WW2 documentaries in the last 20 years. Trying to use late 20th/21 century "moral values", to
judge the actions of 70 years earlier. I wonder what the lads of bomber command would have thought of the effectiveness of our efforts in Afghanistan over the past 10 years.
Stick to "The World at War" format, leave the viewer, if he wishes to reflect on the moral implications.
Last night would have been much better to deal with the brief story of the development of bomber command & interviews with the veterans (not the usual BBC, "You fought in WW2, how did it feel" type questions). Maybe a more detailed look at how the developments led to modern aviation safety systems. ATC, radar, low vis landing systems, search and rescue. I always think of Leonard Cheshire as interesting character of the time who deserves some of the limelight, his contribution to the Bomber Effort and his charitable efforts after the war. Even Churchill fell foul of this in the 5/7/1945 General election losing 190 seats....
Also I never heard of Sir Charles Portal last night. I have always been under the impression area bombing was his idea? And Harris was merely in charge of the Operations of RAF Bomber Command in european theatre. He took the can after the war due to political naivety, historically common with wartime figures.
On a positive thought, it was beautifully shot in HD and the McGregors did a good job linking it together.
And as a final thought, what was the "inserted" section about Afghanistan for?
