Come bitch about US bombing raids, not limited to: Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden,Tokyo

So you don’t have to do it on every other perfectly good thread. Look, every time you mention Hiroshima or Nagasaki that means someone has to go link to the many old threads, patiently point out that it is a complex topic in and of itself, or go completely mad.

Why mad? Because those examples happened 58 years ago at the earliest. We don’t do things that way any more. Ferchrisakes, we don’t even declare war any more. That stopped after WWII also.

What real war plan involves carpet bombing Baghdad? If the US does that it will face international condemnation like it has never seen - and that’s saying something. But, when in the process of trying to miss civilian areas a couple JDAMS go off target, someone will trumpet the ‘proof’ that the US ‘carpet’ bombs civilian targets on purpose. I’d love to see one example of modern carpet bombing - post Vietnam - that was not directed at an enemy troop concentration outside a city. That we could debate. Fact: during the Gulf War every strike in Baghdad was flown by a F-117 with guided munitions or was carried out by cruise missile.

OK, if we launch a huge number of cruise missiles can we agree that that is not “carpet bombing”? I figure someone will say “what’s the difference?” The ability to hit military targets is the difference.

Even the much hyped campaign (Awe and Wonder?) that supposedly is directed at Baghdad, if I’m guessing correctly, is targeted at the Special Republican Guard - keeper of the WMDs. If what I’ve heard is true, the SRG is planning to hide in and around Baghdad to maximize civilian casualties. Supposedly it consists of cruise missile strikes at military targets. Of course, if I’m wrong, I’ll be ashamed of my nation for carpet bombing Baghdad. I just wish some of you psychics would come back and apologize when you are proven wrong. Remember how Kabul was going to be pulverized? Chomsky said we were trying to starve millions. Where are the apologies for those epic slanders?

The most recent example begins on page 3 of this thread. It happens pretty frequently. How a bombing over a half century ago relates to an insult hurled at a modern internet poster is beyond me.

I meant “Shock and Awe” Awe and Wonder would be a good name for a documentary about space or something.

So you are saying there were no civillians killed in Bagdad? That every bomb landed excactly where it was supposed to? No collateral damage?

No, I’m saying what I said in the OP. We don’t carpet bomb urban areas. We have not carpet bombed a big city since WWII. We have not used nuclear weapons in 58 years, don’t bring up Hiroshima as an example of modern US bombing tactics.

To directly answer your question, no, there were civilians killed in Baghdad. I remember one incident in particular, a bunker with civilians in it that supposedly housed the military sometimes. Anyway, it was hit full of civilians. This was a horrible tragedy. It does not mean that the US targets civilians as a matter of course.

Also, no, weapons fly off course. Some of the cruise missiles that hit civilian areas around Baghdad were those hit with ground fire. To me, the real tragedies occur when the US military really screws up - ignores a no fire suggestion and hits Canadians, hits a wedding party, etc. I don’t want to diminish any targets that we have hit, because that is how you learn to not make the same mistakes.

But, please, do not compare the accidental bombing of a wedding party with the fire bombing of Tokyo or the two raids on Dresden.

I agree about comparing the wedding and Dresden and Tokyo. The wedding was an accident. Dresden and Tokyo was deliberatly targetting civilians. The history of the US targetting civilians goes back to at least the War of Northern Agression when Sherman shelled Atlanta. Lets not even get into the Indian Wars.

What he’s saying is to pull your head out and realize that during the waning days of World War II, nobody had the type of guided munitions we have today.

I was about to ask if that’s so hard for you to understand until I realized that, yes, it is that hard for you to understand.

Can you assure me that, if we end up bombing Baghdad, that absolutely no carpets will be damaged? I think not.

Yes, Monty, that is a big part of it. Also, WWII was an example of Total War.

All the major powers launched questionable attacks on urban areas in WWII. In particular the British on Germany and the US on the Japanese. Element of revenge? Hard not to believe that was some of what was going on.

Miller, of course there will be huge collateral carpet damage in any bombing of Baghdad. I think that is a tragic certainty.

I’m not joking about civilian casualties by the way. In fact, there are casualties from leaving Saddam in power. How many people does he allow to starve every year because he chooses not to spend the money in areas with groups that oppose him?

What if the U.S. winds up catapulting bodies of people who died from disease into Baghdad to spread plague? That’s barbaric!

Monty…I suggest you go read about the firebombing of Tokyo. About how they used fire bombs because the houses were made of wood. They intended to set the town on fire civilians be damned. They weren’t targetting military targets in downtown Tokyo. They were terrorizing the civilian populace. Terrorize them enough and perhaps they will bring the government down. You can go bury your head in the sand and pretend we didn’t do it. But the fact is we did.

And this has fuck all to do with now.

Oh, damn, I should have mentioned the Germans terrorizing London. Sorry about that one. I did not mean to make Britan sound like the aggressor in WWII.

At the end of the war the US and Britan made some bad calls regarding civilian areas, IMO. Particularly Nagasaki and Dresden. To me those are the worst examples of unnecessary bombing of civilian areas - but in the heat and twisted morality of a total war.

This gives us all a chance to recall some of the lessons of history.

This is the perfect time to vent any greivance about the fire bombing of Tokyo. I know that some people might argue it was unnecessary. Of course, strategic bombing means bombing where people work. Civilian areas.

Strategic Bombing
by Jack Colhoun
Appendix A in Arjun Makhijani and John Kelly, Target Japan: The Decision to Bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, July 1985. Published as a book in Japanese under the title, Why Japan? (Kyoikusha: Tokyo, 1985)

Dave: Not a fucking thing, of course. The only reason he brings it up is because he pretends it’s proof that the United States, and in particular our military, are just fucking scum of the Earth and are the worst criminals ever known to the Universe.

Didn’t you notice how he didn’t say jack about what noncombatant ships & neutral nations ships were sunk, etc.?

Yes, I think I read something about that, back when I was getting my degree in U.S. military history. :wink: I still don’t see what possible relevance it has on our strategies in Iraq.

Exactly. I don’t see us deciding to use B-52s at altitude to carve huge swaths through Baghdad. If we do, let me abhor it in advance. Of couse, you mention the catapulted plague victims. I hope Saddam does not hear that one.

If you majored in military history you must see the wonderful relevance of my last quote.:smiley: You cannot examine an air raid in a total war in a historical vacuum. Four years of war changes the way people think. I think we will do everything we can to make any strikes in Iraq as unlike WWII as possible.

But, anyone, step right up and bitch away. I will agree with you on this thread, and this thread only. I’ll try to remember to save the link with all my cites about the varous bombings for future reference.

It makes my skin crawl when I see this brought up again and again. I’m going to put this out here for the third time.


Have we in the past? Yes. This is because warfare was a different beast decades ago.

Will civilians die if we invade Iraq? Almost definitely. But this will be due to collateral damage and/or Saddam’s use of civilians as human shields.

Will we target civilians in any way during an Iraq campaign? No. How do I know this? “Trust me, I know” is about all I can say without getting in any trouble. Generally speaking, collateral damage is a huge and sensitive issue when it comes to kinetic targets, and every effort is made to keep the effects to the general populace to a minimum.

Reeder needs to remember that no job is too hard for the person who does not have to do it.

Gus: That comment is totally irrelevant to what’s being discussed. Whether it’s difficult or not isn’t the issue. After all, it’s not all that hard to turn two sets of keys.

Here’s one of the offending threads:
The OP seems to believe that the US strategy is to massacre the population of Baghdad to force the Iraq military to surrender.