What’s your point?
This is a hijack, but it has got to be the greatest myth of the 20th century that U.S. freedom was threatened by the Axis powers of WWII. Germany and Japan had no intention of invading the United States. It would have been impossible.
As for Dresden, we should recognize it as a great tragedy, but keep it in the context of WWII when there were many great tragedies. Where do we draw the line between acceptable and unaaceptable civilian casualties resulting from military action? I would say it depends on whether the civilians have already fallen into your control, which is not the case in a bombing raid over enemy territory.
tomndebb questioned whether or not special tactics were used at Dresden. I’m gonna have to dig a little for a proper cite, but as I recall, the night attack on Dresden employed a unique approach that was never again attempted in Europe.
On the night of 13/14 Feb. an initial wave of some 250 bombers hit the town center hard with a concentrated incendiary attack, which caused a large conflagration. Then, some hours later a second, larger formation (I think about 500 planes) zeroed in on the target and dropped incendiaries in a roughly circular pattern around the initial fires. The effect of the two attacks allowed the fires to quickly spread both inward and outward, and also trapped civilians and fire-fighting teams.
Note that the first attack was not a typical “pathfinder” mission that started small fires to illuminate the target. It was a typical-strength assault which would have caused great damage of its own accord.
To me, the plan of attack appears designed to entrap the firefighting crews and to induce a firestorm by rapidly expanding the area of the conflagration. However, I have never seen an admission to that effect. The repeated attacks on Hamburg the year before produced a similar effect, but over a series of four days and nights. Dresden appears to me to be a tactical distillation of the lessons of Hamburg, but as I said, I can only cast the light of suspicion, not fact.
London_Calling, you’re correct. After reading this thread and some further research on Dresden I agree that to use it for a “witticism” would be in poor taste. And I am a PC kind of guy, so what was I thinking with the OP? :o
The discussion of the attack on Dresden is nevertheless very interesting.
justinh asked:
This site has a full list of the indictments against Goering, as well as details of each of the charges of his war crimes, which fell into the categories:
Quoted from the Nuremburg Trial files of Senator Thomas J. Dodd, held in the archives of the University of Connecticut (on the above-linked site.)
Remember that Goering was the first head of the Gestapo, organized the first concentration camp (Dachau), and was aware of the medical experiments at Dachau involving high-altitude simulations.
A myth, and from what I’ve read, a popular one. Goering, by the end, was a bloated self-parody, but he started out as Hitler’s right-hand man and, because of his extremely distinguished career in WWI, was instrumental in keeping the German Army neutrally friendly to the Nazis in the 1920s and early 30’s, thus allowing Hitler to rise to power. Don’t underestimate the evil Goering did.
Sua
#1 Humanity. Read the cite that Rodd Hill posted above me. Section C. It is arguable that “Murder” of civilians was a direct result of the bombing. At the very least, inhumane acts.
#2 I was responding to Mgibson’s mentioning that Germans were not charged for bombing London. There was a huge difference in the amount of destruction caused ny both campaigns, hence I consider them a poor comparison. That was my “Point”.
I looked at a number of sites before I selected the one I linked to earlier. I chose that one specifically because of the volume of the information presented and the source material the author used. And the article does not, in fact, mention “Bomber” Harris even once, which I believe was the point I was trying to make. Sure, as Tomndebb pointed out, it’s a CYA thing, but I don’t think it was designed to cover Harris’s ass, and the fact that it is thoroughly documented is pretty obvious.
sqweels, hijack is the right term. Who said anything like that? I will stand by what I did say. Venturing into speculation, I think it’s interesting to consider what Hitler might have eventually done if he’d had the sense to end the war in 1941. With only Great Britain as an active enemy, the smart play would have been to sue for peace and consolidate his hold on a united Nazi Europe. Who’s to say what he might have accomplished later with “superpower” resources at his disposal? Instead, he turned east; as I’ve stated in other threads, the Third Reich was irretrievable doomed the moment the first German soldier set foot on Soviet soil.
bernse, you’re correct that London didn’t suffer in the same way that Dresden did, but you’re ignoring a few points of fact. London was, in fact, bombed just as hard as the Luftwaffe could manage. Nazi Germany never had a grasp of strategic aerial bombardment. The Luftwaffe was designed and utilized primarily in a tactical role. The Germans built nothing like a B-17 or a B-24, at least in any significant numbers. Hitler himself didn’t believe in big bombers, and preferred to tailor his air force to serve as a tactical tool for his blitzkriegs. (Even the larger German bombers, like the Ju-88, were designed to have the capability of dive-bombing.) But though the Germans never mounted a thousand-bomber raid over London – or any other location – they did send hundreds of smaller bombers every day and night for months. On the other hand, by early 1945, when the most famous bombing of Dresden took place, the Luftwaffe was in the shitter, and the RAF and the USAAF owned the skies over Europe, and had the resources to easily put a thousand-plus heavy four-engined bombers over the city in a very short period of time. In other words, London suffered plenty, but it was spread out over weeks and months, while Dresden was largely incinerated in a single night. As for your claims that Allied commanders should have been tried as war criminals, well, I’m not going there. It’s just too silly.
justinh, yes, Goering was a clown, but he was also the founder of the Gestapo, Hitler’s second-in-command after Hess went off his nut, author of the terror-bombing of London and many other cities (Coventry comes to mind), and probably the most prolific individual art thief of all time.
And finally! samclem, the original question asked had to do with whose name could be substituted for Sherman’s with reference to Dresden. And thanks for your support! My dad was a sailor on a tin can in the South Pacific beginning in 1943, and saw action aplenty. I do not know how they did what they did, and came away from it sane.
Oh, I read it. I just don’t see how it applies to the matter at hand.
This thread has served its full useful purpose, and can’t go anywhere but down from here. Therefore, I’m closing it.
Just opened this thread to say that this topic is also being discussed here in Great Debates: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=65337
Okay, shutting down again.