Notwithstanding the contemporary standards, one can only but wonder whether, to use the Cold War nuclear vernacular, counterforce rather than countervalue targetting would have yielded a more expeditious end to the war in Europe.
By the way, how many of you brave keyboard warriors have actually
been to Dresden and spoken to any of the present generation?
Or visited the restored Frauenkirche, completed in 2005 and explained why you felt it was necessary to raze it.....
On 13 February 1945, Anglo-American allied forces began the bombing of Dresden. The Frauenkirche withstood two days and nights of the attacks and the eight interior sandstone pillars supporting the large dome held up long enough for the evacuation of 300 people who had sought shelter in the church crypt, before succumbing to the heat generated by some 650000 incendiary bombs that were dropped on the city. The temperature surrounding and inside the church eventually reached 1000 degrees Celsius. The dome finally collapsed at 1000 on 15 February. The pillars glowed bright red and exploded; the outer walls shattered and nearly 6000 tons of stone plunged to earth, penetrating the massive floor as it fell.
If there were indeed essential military targets in Dresden which required such a counterforce strike, then please would someone elucidate. Because all I've read in this thread so far is general comment about the wartime bravery of Bomber Command crews, which is, of course, indesputable.
However, I do remain to be convinced about the destruction of Dresden, but would be so
if someone can provide sufficient evidence to justify the action.
The bombing of Dresden was also used by the Soviets, in the early Cold War period, as propaganda about Western heartlessness and cruelty - they even left much of the rubble from 1945 untouched in order to illustrate their case.