Dresden, 1945

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Post Reply
User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#361

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 13:54

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
Michael Kenny wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
I haven't seen this poster trying to prove anything definite by way of numbers ...revisionism et al. The only emphatic comment he has made is to the effect that mainline respectable historians are not talking about this new find at all.
Because they are all lefty liberal bleeding-heart anti-German Soviet apologists or because they don't think it is strong enough evidence to overturn the current consensus?
If there is some cover-up going on then you are in pole-position to bring 'the truth' to the fore and gain international standing for your outstanding research.
Those labels ...left..liberal..right..et al lost meaning 30 years ago...took me another 10 to 20 years to realise that. So let's skip the laundry marks please.

Challenging a religious belief is never easy ...whether ancient scriptural religions or current secular ones. Irrespective of what new information emerges. It's much easier to label it heresy or blasphemy and burn out the eyes of the guy who fails to fall off the edge of the earth and says it is round.

NO academician, particularly in Germany, will put his career and liberty at certain jeopardy by pursuing an information dug out by Irving to its logical end !
My, so much disingenuous trash here! Irving? Really? Advancing the views of a convicted criminal, shown liar, and Holocaust denier will probably hurt academic careers of anyone in any country not named Iran...

That being said, your bolded statement is a complete affront to German scholars and academics doing much work and creating discussion regarding the morality of Allied strategic bombing. They just have to use actual research, not histrionics and hyperbole...

The Black Rabbit of Inlé
Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 10 Mar 2011, 21:12

Re: Dresden, 1945

#362

Post by The Black Rabbit of Inlé » 23 Mar 2017, 13:57

I recently saw a declassified file from the Office of the Prime Minister [PREM 19/841] which demonstrates how significantly the perception of the bombing of Dresden has altered since the early 1980s.

In April 1980 the the Board of Deputies of British Jews approached the Environment Secretary Michael Helestine with the proposal that a national Holocaust memorial be created immediately next to the Ministry of Defence in Richmond Terrance, a very short distance from the Cenotaph—it was eventually built in Hyde Park in 1983.

Numerous documents in the file mention a proposed design for the Holocaust memorial which prominently featured the inscription "Dresden, Warsaw, and Hiroshima". The design is not found in the file and no document states who actually drew it, but it's clear that the proposed design was in the possession of Helestine when he first approached the Prime Minister and his fellow Members of the Cabinet with the BOD's proposal.

On 24.06.80 the Secretary for Defence Francis Pym wrote that he was puzzled by the proposal to mention Dresden and Hiroshima on a Holocaust memorial before detailing his fears that any mention of Hiroshima would provide the anti-nuclear lobby with ammunition if the memorial was situated outside the MOD in Richmond Terrace. On 01.07.80 the Home Secretary William Whitelaw wrote that he shared Pym's concerning about the proposed location becoming a site of disquiet due to the memorial and the proposed references to Dresden and Hiroshima, which he also felt were inappropriate on a memorial to the victims of nazism.

Neither Whitelaw or Pym voiced any complaint that the design equated Dresden and Holocaust, nor argued that Dresden was a legitimate military necessity; Pym even wrote:
It is a legitimate subject for debate whether the monument should refer to the victims of Allied bombing, but it is one which certainly needs to be discussed.
Heseltine's private secretary Jeff Jacobs claimed in a 24.07.80 letter that the Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington was prepared to agree to the memorial being placed in Richmond Terrace on the proviso it would "commemorate the victims of the Nazi Holocaust and that it does not bear references to Dresden, Warsaw and Hiroshima", which he immediately followed with a citation to Pym's letter of 24.06.80. Later documents in the file show that Lord Carrington was actually completely opposed to any national Holocaust memorial.

A 30.07.80 memo to the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher by her Private Secretary Michael Pattison mentions that the PM shared the reservations of Pym, Whitelaw, and Lord Carrington about placing the memorial in Richmond Terrace, but Heseltine had "a strong public commitment to the site".

On 01.08.80 Pattison wrote that Thatcher, Whitelaw, Pym, and Helestine had met previous day and Helesltine had assured them he had complete control of any wording on the memorial and "would ensure the references to Dresden and Hiroshima could be removed."

Most of the later documents in the file are concerning the numerous sites that were considered for the memorial, and others show that Lord Carrington was opposed to erecting any national Holocaust memorial in Britain and especially the idea of placing it in a Royal Park or anywhere else on crown land.

No further mention is made of the suggestion that Dresden and Hiroshima should feature on the Holocaust memorial until the PM's new Private Secretary Willie Rickett claimed on 11.09.81 that Thatcher thought "the original drawing for the memorial was very appropriate". As she'd been told by Helestine on 31.07.80 that he would ensure there was no mention of Dresden and Hiroshima on the memorial it seems likely that she thought the design was "very appropriate" only if they they weren't mentioned. But the new Defence Secretary John Nott wasn't sure that's what she meant. Nott's Private Secretary Nick Evans wrote to Downing Street on 04.01.82 objecting to any reference to Dresden on Hiroshima on the memorial, because "not only are such references totally irrelevant to the Nazi holocaust of the Jews" the wording would provide ammunition to anti-nuclear campaigners regardless of where the memorial was situated.

Just like Pym and Whitelaw before him, Nott didn't detail any objection he might have had to the design equating Dresden with Holocaust. Three senior members of the British government and not one of them claimed Dresden was a justified attack, or mentioned that the design's implicit suggestion was even wrong, let alone absurd and offensive to their departmental predecessors who had fought the nazis.

Nott's letter prompted the following 05.01.82 letter from Thatcher's Private Secretary to Helestine's. It contains the final mention of "Dresden and Hiroshima" as suggested inscriptions on the British national Holocaust memorial.

Image


User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#363

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:13

Sid Guttridge wrote:Hi Histan,

Except nobody was bombing in order to stop Germany committing "acts of genocide across Europe".

The bombing was done to shorten the war by damaging the well-spring of German military power at home. The ending of genocide was a happy by-product of that, not its aim.

Dresden was bombed because the local Wehrkreis HQ administered some 10% of German Army manpower, it contained some 20 military barracks, depots, etc., it was the main centre producing the key optical components for German gun sights, bomb sights and periscopes, etc., and because it was a key railway hub behind the Eastern Front.

Cheers,

Sid.

P.S. Have you had any thoughts about my earlier question regarding Dresden and "proportionality": "How many deaths would have been justified by "proportionality"?"
Dresden was also a major communications conduit and command-and-control hub for the Eastern Front, IIRC....

User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#364

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:30

luftschiff wrote: And yet the Allied governments, so allegedly concerned for the sovereignty of nation-states and human rights in general, raised no fuss over the ...the Soviet invasions of Finland....
As stated, completely off-topic histrionics. But perhaps you're ignorant that the French drew up plans to send troops and aid Finland against the Soviets. Of course, since they were at war with Germany it would have been idiotic to do so...

So, I guess they did care to an extent they could do something with the limitations power and its projection...

User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#365

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:40

The Black Rabbit of Inlé wrote:
Nickdfresh wrote:Why don't you cut out the middlemen and just use Josef Goebbels as your source? like Irving did...
The moderator mentioned earlier on the thread:
David Thompson wrote:This is a research section of the forum. If you have pertinent factual sources, feel free to post them. If not, rent a billboard.
viewtopic.php?p=2069218#p2069218

Well. he also denounced your using of David Irving as a source, and David Irving's first book on Dresden DID USE the numbers cited by Josef Goebbels....

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Dresden, 1945

#366

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Mar 2017, 14:46

Nickdfresh wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
Michael Kenny wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
I haven't seen this poster trying to prove anything definite by way of numbers ...revisionism et al. The only emphatic comment he has made is to the effect that mainline respectable historians are not talking about this new find at all.
Because they are all lefty liberal bleeding-heart anti-German Soviet apologists or because they don't think it is strong enough evidence to overturn the current consensus?
If there is some cover-up going on then you are in pole-position to bring 'the truth' to the fore and gain international standing for your outstanding research.
Those labels ...left..liberal..right..et al lost meaning 30 years ago...took me another 10 to 20 years to realise that. So let's skip the laundry marks please.

Challenging a religious belief is never easy ...whether ancient scriptural religions or current secular ones. Irrespective of what new information emerges. It's much easier to label it heresy or blasphemy and burn out the eyes of the guy who fails to fall off the edge of the earth and says it is round.

NO academician, particularly in Germany, will put his career and liberty at certain jeopardy by pursuing an information dug out by Irving to its logical end !
My, so much disingenuous trash here! Irving? Really? Advancing the views of a convicted criminal, shown liar, and Holocaust denier will probably hurt academic careers of anyone in any country not named Iran...

That being said, your bolded statement is a complete affront to German scholars and academics doing much work and creating discussion regarding the morality of Allied strategic bombing. They just have to use actual research, not histrionics and hyperbole...
Hi ..

Have you actually gone through the context? I mean which specific reference to Irving one is talking about here..or is it just general knee jerk..uninformed angst?

User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#367

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:50

Yes, I have (i.e.: "the missing people" document). Are you a tad embarrassed that you could use him as a source with what I presume is a straight face?
Last edited by Nickdfresh on 23 Mar 2017, 14:51, edited 1 time in total.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Dresden, 1945

#368

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Mar 2017, 14:51

Nickdfresh wrote:
luftschiff wrote: And yet the Allied governments, so allegedly concerned for the sovereignty of nation-states and human rights in general, raised no fuss over the ...the Soviet invasions of Finland....
As stated, completely off-topic histrionics. But perhaps you're ignorant that the French drew up plans to send troops and aid Finland against the Soviets. Of course, since they were at war with Germany it would have been idiotic to do so... (my highlighting)

So, I guess they did care to an extent they could do something with the limitations power and its projection...
But it was not "idiotic" (diabolical?) to maintain full diplomatic relations with the USSR inspite of their invasion of Poland and facilitation of the German aggression...after having declared war on Germany on precisely the same grounds..

User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#369

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:53

What does that have to do with anything regarding Dresden? Or are you just furthering the "Evil/hypocritical Allies/see Germany wasn't so bad!" circle-jerk?

I know I shouldn't have commented on his largely ignorant comments, but that was just one of the litany of fallacies in his post and I couldn't resist...
Last edited by Nickdfresh on 23 Mar 2017, 14:53, edited 1 time in total.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Dresden, 1945

#370

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Mar 2017, 14:53

Nickdfresh wrote:Yes, I have (i.e.: "the missing people" document). Are you a tad embarrassed that you could use him as a source with what I presume is a straight face?
Oh my ! I thought the embarrassment was due from you..in ignoring an original historical record unearthed by a historian (or a criminal .. that's of no material consequence in this context) that has a direct bearing to the thread !

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Dresden, 1945

#371

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Mar 2017, 14:56

Nickdfresh wrote:What does that have to do with anything regarding Dresden? Or are you just furthering the "Evil/hypocritical Allies/see Germany wasn't so bad!" circle-jerk?

I know I shouldn't have commented on his largely ignorant comments, but that was just one of the litany of fallacies in his post and I couldn't resist...
This is what it has to do...".... But perhaps you're ignorant that the French drew up plans to send troops and aid Finland against the Soviets. Of course, since they were at war with Germany it would have been idiotic to do so..."

Both have as much to do with Dresden .. as one contrives them to I guess :)

User avatar
Nickdfresh
Banned
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Jul 2007, 14:59
Location: United States

Re: Dresden, 1945

#372

Post by Nickdfresh » 23 Mar 2017, 14:58

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
Nickdfresh wrote:Yes, I have (i.e.: "the missing people" document). Are you a tad embarrassed that you could use him as a source with what I presume is a straight face?
Oh my ! I thought the embarrassment was due from you..in ignoring an original historical record unearthed by a historian (or a criminal .. that's of no material consequence in this context) that has a direct bearing to the thread !
No, the embarrassment is yours really, for calling David Irving a "historian", which he is not and never was...

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Dresden, 1945

#373

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Mar 2017, 15:00

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
But it was not "idiotic" (diabolical?) to maintain full diplomatic relations with the USSR inspite of their invasion of Poland and facilitation of the German aggression...after having declared war on Germany on precisely the same grounds..
The declaration of war on German was the culmination of a series of events that only the willfully ignorant would disregard. The pact with Poland was specific to German aggression so once again you are forced to distort the record in order to continue your knee-jerk defence/excusing of every German transgression.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Dresden, 1945

#374

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Mar 2017, 15:20

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
Oh my ! I thought the embarrassment was due from you..in ignoring an original historical record unearthed by a historian (or a criminal .. that's of no material consequence in this context) that has a direct bearing to the thread !
As has been stated many times your entire premise is false.
I know the casual reader could be confused by the constantly repeated claim this is 'new' evidence that is being ignored but that is a flat out lie.
The document in question has been know for about a decade.
The consensus is it adds nothing that can seriously change the record.
There is an audience who are constantly looking to change the narrative.
They are by and large apologists, revisionists or outright Nazi sympathisers.
These people pounce on any 'fact' that casts doubt on any aspect of the bombing of Dresden.
They clog up forums with their whiney excuses about how poor old Germany was the victim in WW2.
No one but their own places an ounce of credibility in their excuses.
This thread will now run for another 20+ pages as the same document is endlessly re-quoted by the same names who regularly post in glory of, in praise of or in defence of Nazi Germany.

The Black Rabbit of Inlé
Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 10 Mar 2011, 21:12

Re: Dresden, 1945

#375

Post by The Black Rabbit of Inlé » 23 Mar 2017, 16:58

Nickdfresh wrote:Well. he also denounced your using of David Irving as a source,
I must have missed that. Please quote it and provide a link.

I've *relied* on Irving as a source ONCE in this entire thread. It was for an entry in the OKL War Diary and only because A) it's a source that Evans didn't contest, and B) the figure of homeless estimated by the OKL precisely matches the figure the Dresden Civil Police Commander used the same day in a message intercept and decoded by the British.

That's what's known as "corroborating evidence".

I didn't rely on Irving for the 24.03.45 80-100K decode, I went to Kew and spent almost a day looking for it [he didn't cite the file reference] to confirm whether it was genuine or not.
Nickdfresh wrote:and David Irving's first book on Dresden DID USE the numbers cited by Josef Goebbels....
Despite the CAPITALISED EMPHASIS, you're wrong.

RJ Evans wrote that in the original 1963 of edition DoD Irving actually labelled the fake version of TB47—which supported Goebbels' figures—as spurious propaganda.

Irving went with Voigt's 135,000 estimate in the original 1963, the 1964, and then the 1965 German translation of DoD. Irving seems to have also used that figure in his series of 1961 articles in Neue Illustrierte about the Allied bombing of Germany which were subsequently published in book-form as Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht in 1962 and 1963.

It was only in the 1966 revised English edition and 1967 revised German translation of DoD that Irving first suggested the figure could be around what Goebbels had claimed. This was due to Irving getting hold of one of the fake versions of TB47 and started claiming, at least for a bit, that it was genuine after all.

Evans also mentions some German newspaper and magazine articles/letters from 1965ish in which Irving or his German publisher defended the Goebbels-esque figures, obviously written after Irving about-faced on the fake versions TB47.

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”