Dresden Bombing? & Post Liberation Eastern Euro gas Cham

[David Thompson]

Germania -- Thank you. In giving your sources, you have set a good example for all other posters.

[Oswal Boelcke]

Opinionated posters, full of self-righteous moral indignation, are a dime a dozen here. If you have any facts to support your claims, this is the time and place to provide them.

Huh? Isn't this very a personal comment (insult?)? Doesn't matter, I don't have a chip on my shoulder. What claims did I made?
1: Dresden can't be compared with Stalingrad
2: Stalin ordered the civilians to stay in Stalingrad
3: The civilians of Dresden were the mission goal of the terror bombig (like many oher German cities)
When doing a Google search I get some hundred links. Are you able to read German? Well, I prefer to read German but I guess you are not interested in links to German sites.

Paragraphs 5-11 and 24, in the US study cited above, give the military reasons for the bombing of Dresden. Can anyone show that these reasons are false?

When was this paper written? Some years after WW2 sometimes to justify the Dresden raid? This paper isn't worth the ink. The destruction of Dresden shows very clear the mission goal was the downtown.

[Matt H.]

Kasper, 50% is nothing? Might I remind you that any losses above 5% were considered excessive. Bomber Command and Sir Arthur Harris carried out a duty that few would have been able to perform. Aerial bombardment was the ONLY way in which Great Britain could hit back at Germany's war effort.

I've already stated my opinion on Dresden (see the "Churchill and Harris - Terror Raids" thread. We've already been over this countless times!)

How can you equate RAF Bomber Command veterans to "barbarians"? How can you reach that conclusion? They carried out their duty to the best of their ability and served their nation - that is NOT barbaric. And yes, I also include the Luftwaffe bomber crews in my conclusion. Neither they, nor their British and American counterparts, were barbarians.

[David Thompson]

Oswal Boelcke -- I asked you twice about about sources. So far, you don't seem to have anything but evasions. Should I (and the other readers) conclude that you are full of hot air? That's pretty much where this conversation is going. You either have sources, or you don't. If you don't, I think we've all got the picture by now.

[viriato]

David Thompson, frankly I could only be amused after reading the report of the USAF you kindly posted above if not for the sad fact that a lot of people lost their lives in the bombing of the city. Let us see at two points of the report (all emphasys mine):

1-

40. The major significance of the Dresden bombings lay in the fact that they were among several immediate and highly successful air actions made in response to the specific Russian request, given by General Antonov at the ARGONAUT Conference, less than two weeks earlier, for Allied air support of the Russian offensive on the Eastern Front.

A-Blame the "Russians" 8) ;

...provided the Germans could pass reinforcements through Dresden.

B-At that time the Germans were trying to transport the most they could of people from Silesia to Saxony (from East to West), consisting mainly of children, old people and women. The allies should have known of it.

2-

41. Of secondary significance, but by no means negligible, was the destruction or disruption of Dresden’s manufacturing activities, particularly of military goods, and the further reduction of Germany’s critically short railway rolling stock and operating facilities.

Secondary significance!!! Even the report acknowledges that the disruption of the communications and manufacturing activities were after all of secondary significance!

While the Americans, happily, cannot and would not claim credit for this aspect of the Dresden bombings...

One wonders after all if the US was after all not involved in the bombing...

....the fact remains that the RAF area raid on the city was the last of the instances during World War II in Europe when the shock effects of area bombing resulted in nearly total demoralization of a great enemy city.

Wrong! a) This was not the last area bombing and b) Demoralization??? 8) I think that the author(s) of the report are here speaking in a secret/enclosed/creative language because what he/they manifestly want(s) to say is that they accomplished the destruction of the city and the killing of thousands of its inhabitants.

[David Thompson]

viriato -- You said:

David Thompson, frankly I could only be amused after reading the report of the USAF you kindly posted above if not for the sad fact that a lot of people lost their lives in the bombing of the city.

I glad you got some amusement out of the post. I wish the feeling was mutual. So far, you haven't even posted secondary evidence. All we have is your opinion, and without evidence, facts or sources, that isn't worth much here.

[viriato]

David Thompson the idea was to show what the report realy says. I didn't want to introduce new facts except for the refugees and this I believe is a well known fact.

[Oswal Boelcke]

Oswal Boelcke -- I asked you twice about about sources. So far, you don't seem to have anything but evasions. Should I (and the other readers) conclude that you are full of hot air? That's pretty much where this conversation is going. You either have sources, or you don't. If you don't, I think we've all got the picture by now.

You should try this link: http://www.google.com

[David Thompson]

Oswal Boelcke -- The responsibility for providing sources for your assertions is your burden, not mine. I have asked you repeatedly for sources, and you have provided nothing. The readers may draw their own conclusions about your scholarship from this fact, as I have drawn my conclusions.

In the meantime, this was the military situation right at the time the Dresden bombings ended (See paragraphs 6-9 of the USAF study quoted on p. 2 of this thread). The city of Dresden is just to the left top of the German Army Group "A," commanded by Schörner:

[John W]

Where did that map come from?! I looked for over two hours yesterday, all over the net and I couldn't find it I was hoping to look into the military situation on the ground and decide for myself if the RKKA was close enough to Dresden to warrant a bombing of the place to disrupt enemy concentrations/communications etc.

Thanks for the map. Any chance it could be made a little bigger? Or is there a better source?

[David Thompson]

John W. -- The map is from the West Point Atlas of American Wars, Frederick A. Praeger, New York: 1960, vol. II (1900-1953), Map 44a. The pixel restrictions for attachments here prevent me from enlarging the full map, but I can try to enlarge the top half of the illustration, which may help. As you can see, Dresden is only about 100 miles behind the front on 15 Feb 1945.

[KalaVelka]

I dont have time to answer now. My school starts in 15 mins and i am going to Estonia just after that. Il be back on sunday-monday night, so hold on

Kasper

[KalaVelka]

OK, so now i am in schools library and i have time to answer.

Kasper, 50% is nothing? Might I remind you that any losses above 5% were considered excessive. Bomber Command and Sir Arthur Harris carried out a duty that few would have been able to perform. Aerial bombardment was the ONLY way in which Great Britain could hit back at Germany's war effort.

I've already stated my opinion on Dresden (see the "Churchill and Harris - Terror Raids" thread. We've already been over this countless times!)

How can you equate RAF Bomber Command veterans to "barbarians"? How can you reach that conclusion? They carried out their duty to the best of their ability and served their nation - that is NOT barbaric. And yes, I also include the Luftwaffe bomber crews in my conclusion. Neither they, nor their British and American counterparts, were barbarians.

50% is nothing compared to the casualties of 36SS and SS RONA.

Aerial bombardment was the ONLY way in which Great Britain could hit back at Germany's war effort.

So in 1945 it was only way to hit back?

I've already stated my opinion on Dresden (see the "Churchill and Harris - Terror Raids" thread. We've already been over this countless times!)

I agree 100%. I am also so tired of this :/ .

How can you equate RAF Bomber Command veterans to "barbarians"? How can you reach that conclusion?

Both slaughterd innocent civilians. Both also did the real job (36SS and RONA against real partisans and RAF against factories etc.). It does not make difference that do you drop the bomb from airplane or do you throw handgrenade.

And yes, I also include the Luftwaffe bomber crews in my conclusion. Neither they, nor their British and American counterparts, were barbarians.

This is good point. Usually when LuftWaffe bombed cities, it was start for the land attack. Examples like Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow etc. London and other UK cities are in grey zone because there was suppose to be a attack, but it never started. I dont say that USAAF or RAF didnt support groundtroops this way, but they also bombed cities like dresden that were no (or would be) under massive land attack.

Kasper

ps. Sorry i didnt have my english dictionary with me this time, so some of the sayings can sound little bit weird.

[Matt H.]

So in 1945 it was only way to hit back?

In February 1945, Germany had not surrendered. Bomber Command was not obliged to halt it's campaign, as such.

I agree 100%. I am also so tired of this

Then why must we continue to exchange heated posts? I respect your opinion, and I sincerely hope you respect mine. If we can agree to disasgree on this matter, then that will be fine by me.

Both slaughterd innocent civilians. Both also did the real job (36SS and RONA against real partisans and RAF against factories etc.). It does not make difference that do you drop the bomb from airplane or do you throw handgrenade.

In a war of aerial bombradment, civilians will become in embroiled in the ensuing conflict. It is a most unfortunate facet of total war, which is what the aerial warfare over Europe was. Do I believe that the Luftwaffe airmen who bombarded Stalingrad were criminals? No, I do not. I have a unique respect for bomber airmen on both sides.

Might I also remind you that it was the RAF who developed the highest number of navigational/technological advancements of the bomber war. Bomber accuaracy was given the utmost attention, possibly more so than in USAAF from 1942-45 (the Norden bombsight was great - in clear skies!)

From the RAF Bomber Command Memorial website:

The first major development in navigation technology was ‘GEE’, a radio navigation aid eventually perfected in early 1942. The on-board device received radio pulses from England that enabled an aircraft to follow a set course and know its position on the track to the target at any time.

In December 1942 the first operational trial of a new bombing aid, code-named OBOE took place. Radio signals directed the pilot to the target and told the bomb-aimer when to release the bombs, allowing ‘blind bombing’ through cloud at night from high level. However, the system could only guide one bomber at a time, so it was fitted to ‘Pathfinder’ lead aircraft to aid the accurate dropping of target-marking flares, thus increasing the accuracy of the main force’s bombing.

In January 1943 a more advanced device known as H2S began being fitted in Pathfinder aircraft. It was a true airborne radar set, giving a radar picture of the outline of the ground up to 25 miles ahead of the bomber. It worked best on coastal targets or those with a river nearby as the outline of land and water showed up reasonably well on the fairly blurred screen. Unfortunately, as was feared, an aircraft carrying one of the top-secret sets crashed in Holland and the Germans got hold of the H2S equipment. Within months their fighters had a device for homing in on the radar transmissions of RAF aircraft using H2S. Nevertheless the invention had a spectacular effect on bombing accuracy.

I's also refer you to the point I made about Sir Arthur Harris' reservations over the Dresden raid, and the fact that he played no part in planning it.

This is good point. Usually when LuftWaffe bombed cities, it was start for the land attack. Examples like Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow etc. London and other UK cities are in grey zone because there was suppose to be a attack, but it never started. I dont say that USAAF or RAF didnt support groundtroops this way, but they also bombed cities like dresden that were no (or would be) under massive land attack.

The only evidence we have to go on so far in this thread is David's USAF report examining in detail the military and strategic reasons for the RAF/USAAF attack upon Dresden.

Sorry i didnt have my english dictionary with me this time, so some of the sayings can sound little bit weird.

Do not apologise for your English. It's far better than my Finnish!

[Germania]

How can you equate RAF Bomber Command veterans to "barbarians"? How can you reach that conclusion?

Both slaughterd innocent civilians. Both also did the real job (36SS and RONA against real partisans and RAF against factories etc.). It does not make difference that do you drop the bomb from airplane or do you throw handgrenade.

But I think it is an difference between bomb cities or hunt partisans!