Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
13 February 2009
08:4515325#1
On this day in 1945 the allies launched a fierce air assault on the women and children of Dresden..and the result of this astonishing two day assault was that 35,000 civilians died in the rubble and horror of an armegeddon.
This was not an attempt to attack soldiers in the frontline but a blatant attack on civilians. With many men in Germany already either dead or away at war, a great many of the people that died would have clearly been women children and the aged. And so it was.
In the war we were fighting against this kind of thing, but there we were carrying it out ourselves on a grand scale. On such a scale that 9/11 dwarfs in comparison.
Not only do the victors write the history books, but they also are not called to account for war crimes either. Was this a war crime? Many say it was...and many are ashamed its in our own history books.
13 February 2009
10:3415335#2
Eh? It. Was. War. Period. Dresden was tragic and awful, but so was the Blitz, Canterbury, Coventry, Dover, etc. And by god, to paraphrase Basil Fawlty, they started it - and we had to win it. And thank god we did.
Guest 658- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 660
13 February 2009
10:3515336#3
As far as i can recall the raid was launched at the request of the Russians because Dresden was thought to be the transport hub from which the eastern front was resupplied. Could the raid on Dresden be the reason why bomber Harris was the only wartime leader who was never knighted or ennobled.
beer the food of the gods
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 February 2009
12:0415337#4
it does bring to mind a few questions,1,was the raid disscused at the highest level,2,did it leviate the problem,3,did it bring a earlier end to the war,4,is it a war crime on the scale as the concertration camps,5 who sufferd the most the germans or the jews.if we could answer these questions satisfactory then you will have a true answer to the oridgenel qustion of it being a war crime or not.
Guest 650- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 542
13 February 2009
12:3415338#5
It depends how you define "war-crime", and what you are measuring it against to decide whether it was one or no. In 1945, legally, probably not (qualified because there were certainly retrospective wriggles at that time.) It was, for a number of reasons, a military target.
However, there are many questions beyond this, eg scale, morality, changing evaluations ...But these aren't, strictly speaking, the criteria. That doesn't mean they aren't relevant, albeit parallel, issues though, for us at least to consider today, maybe with a view to our future moral philosophy. Brian encapsulates some of these well.
While considering the big questions, let's never forget the detail ... the very many precious individuals devastated by war. A few moments thinking of them, without any cloudy discourses of guilt/shame/anger/whatever, in Remembrance, will never be wrong.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
13 February 2009
12:4115339#6
Hey Brian good to see you making a posting that doesnt just have one line in it...lets have more of those
Guzzler yes thats the reason, as I understand it, that Bomber Command and the higher people in that establishment, were overlooked in the years after the war. The total destruction of civilians on this raid was an embarassment at the highest level..even with Churchill himself.
So I think that answers a couple of Brians questions..its doubtful if the raid was discussed at the highest level and I dont think it brought an immediate end to anything. The bombs dropped on Japan brought an immediate end to everything but not in Dresden. You can tell it was wrong by the after war cold shouldering of the whole episode.
But there we are...you never see the war winners brought to trail on war crimes, whether they were indeed committed or not. The legal trials to clarify these situations once and for all never happen, even in modern conflicts.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
13 February 2009
17:1315364#7
The effectiveness of any bombing raid will always be questionable. The dambuster raids, while daring and inovative in themselves, were meant to cripple ball-bearing production and yet the Germans produced more that year than the year before. We have the luxury of hindsight and while we know now that such raids against civilians stiffened their resistance all we had to go on then was the lesson of the blitz etc. At the time it was probably seen as good propoganda on the home front to be seen to be returning the suffering on such a scale.
The raid on Dresden was a terrible thing but we have to see it as a lesson to learn from rather than impose our present sensibilities on it. Our circumstances are very different.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 February 2009
17:3515367#8
wasnt the operation called firestorm or some thing simler.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
13 February 2009
17:5715370#9
Thtas right Brian it did.
Indeed it is very easy for us, sat comfortably with 60 plus years between the war and the present. We did not go through the blitz and the shelling.
Dresden was indeed a transport hub through which German troops were transiting for the Eastern Front and that made it a legitimate target. The accuracy of bombing then was not so good that they could deal with the transport system without a much wider destruction being caused.
War crime, no, war tragedy, yes.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
13 February 2009
18:4915376#10
BarryW
"War crime, no, war tragedy, yes."
Well put.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
13 February 2009
19:1315384#11
getting back to the original post, war crimes are defined by the winners.
always have been, always will be.
don't forget at the end of the war out troops were forced to shoehorn cossack soldiers(who had fought on our side)
and their wives and children, into goods trains, sending them back to the soviet union to be annihalated by mr stalin.
just to keep him sweet.
13 February 2009
19:1515386#12
BarryW - your post is also relevant to the current Gaza unrest. While Hamas continues to hide in residential areas and bomb Israel from the shelter of civilian camps, tragically, those will remain targets. Hamas is therefore culpable in the suffering of the very people they try to entice to vote for them and claim to represent.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 February 2009
21:5015400#13
israel is a tresspasser in this instance.
13 February 2009
21:5215401#14
In self defence. And this is about how words create the means by which violence is committed and accepted.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 February 2009
22:0115404#15
true,but arnt wars allways violent.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
14 February 2009
09:2515421#16
Yes Brian, that's the point of war, but Bern is very right in what she says.
Roger