Since the winners of World War II wrote the history books they may have felt the need to justify their own atrocities (terror bombing of cities)
First off, the winners of WWII didn't exclusivly write the history books, and it's bunk to claim so. Albert Speer wasn't on the winning team. Neither was Guderian, or Skorzeny, or Kurt Meyer or Guy Sajer. Or Saburo Sakai. Or Count Ciano.
Second, The US/British strategic bombing campaign against German cities is often incorrectly cited as a "war crime" because all those heavy bombers were killing hundreds of thousands of defenseless German civilians. An analogy might be that the Allied bombing campaign against Germany was a war crime as the Einsatzgruppen campaign in the USSR was a war crime. (This is a terrible analogy I know, but it's supposed to be one that's similar to the ones often posted on the AHF)
However, this is a argument that has been "framed" to paint the Germans as exclusively vicitms. But an argument like probably wouldn't mention:
a) The termendous size, strength and "home-field" advantage of the Luftwaffe air defenses
b) The fact that something like 1,000,000 Germans were involved in anti-aircraft defense in the Reich. That's a lot of people manning a lot of 88's. (note: my stats for this thread come from Dunnigan and Nofi's Dirty Little Secrets of WWII
c) The terribly high casualty rate among the Allied air crews. - did you know about the 25-mission limit imposed on USAAF aircrews? (any more would dramatically lower morale - as it was many didn't survive to 25) The fact that the German forces defending those "defenseless" civilians managed to destroy 8,237 bombers and 3,924 American fighter planes?
29,000 USAAF airmen were killed in action during the ETO bombing campaign - a number GREATER than:
- the number of US Army dead for the D-Day landing,
- the number of US Army dead forthe Battle of the Bulge
- the total number of US Marine Corps deaths for WWII
In fact, a WWII Marine Corps trooper had a BETTER chance of surviving the war than did a ball-turret gunner on an 8th Air Force B-17.
Given the robust German anti-aircraft defenses and the high casualites suffed by the USAAF, it's hard to paint German civilians as defenseless.
Labeling the strategic bombing campaign as "terror bombing" is inaccurate and is cribbing a page from a Third Reich propaganda sheet. The only "terror" on USAAF missions to the Schweinfurt ball bearing plant or the Ploesti oil fields was the emotion felt by brave US airmen as they suffered horrendous casualties attacking a legitimate military target.
"Hitler: Rise of Evil" demonstrates exactly the kind of nearly absurd, comic book exaggeration that today is accepted as gospel truth!
History Channel = Entertainment
History Channel != Accurate, Nuanced, Detailed Discussion of History
BTW historical knowledge is learned through research, discussion, lots of thinking, and reading, reading, reading. Bisogna saper leggere. Can't get a history degree watching TV.
Thus, in theory, the Revisionists have a valid case
Absolutely not. Like what? Gas chambers didn't exist? That the einstazgruppen photos were faked in Canada?
And who are they? Please explain how if they "give an inch" suddenly the whole history of the Holocaust comes tumbling down...