Dresden 1945

[Gott]

Hello Gott! You wrote:

Listen here Oswald, I am a German and it is a war crime to bomb Dresden. You sound like you are supporting this war crime.

Oswald Mosley wrote:

Despite what you say, I cannot believe that as late as February 1945, with Allied troops already on German soil, there could be any justification for a carpet bombing attack. The war was already won. The attack on Dresden was a crime - it would treated as such if it happened in a war today, no doubt about that. Industries are destroyed in precision bombing attacks, not carpet bombing - these are designed purely to kill as many people as possible. Moreover, The planes which attacked Dresden aimed for the centre of the city, not the industrial estates.

I'm afraid Gott but what I read is that Oswald Mosley is condemning the bombing of Dresden, not supportung it!

Oh ****, I don't know what I was up to that day, I mean a hadn't ben sleeping for 2 days... But anyway who ever support the terror bombing on Dresden, is like putting yourself on the table with the evil Stalinists. No doubt that it is a crime, I had a classmate from Dresden which all his family members but his mother were dead. All but his father were killed in Dresden, while his father was killed in he front. So he really hated Arthur Harris...

[admfisher]

Taking an overall look at the Bomber Offensive one finds it hard to imagine that as the raids increased so did the German production till, the raids overtook them in 45.
But then as parts of the occupied countries fell so did the some of the supplies needed.

[Caldric]

Usual pathetic excuse, this one. None of the places mentioned above were bombed anything remotely as badly as Dresden. Roughly the same number of people are estimated to have died at Dresden as all those killed by German bombing on the UK during the whole of the war.
The merchant navy was a legitimate target because it was helping to sustain the enemy's economy and food supplies. The fact that civilians were manning the ships is irrelevant - they were never targets per se.

The German bombing of Stalingrad killed at least 40,000 people in the first raid. Then of course I pretty sure I read less then 15% of the population survived the battle. 1 million give or take at Leningrad. Germany has no right to accuse anyone of bombing civilians.

But you know those are just Soviets...

[Gott]

Taking an overall look at the Bomber Offensive one finds it hard to imagine that as the raids increased so did the German production till, the raids overtook them in 45.
But then as parts of the occupied countries fell so did the some of the supplies needed.

Bomber Command is the worst book written. Bomber Command is as infamous as Mein Kampf. Both were written by a war criminal.

[Marcus]

Bomber Command is the worst book written.

Have you ever read Mein Kampf? Now there is a horribly written book!

Bomber Command is as infamous as Mein Kampf.

It is definately not as infamous as Mein Kampf, for starters a lot fewer people know the existance of the "Bomber Command" book ;-)

/Marcus

[Gott]

Usual pathetic excuse, this one. None of the places mentioned above were bombed anything remotely as badly as Dresden. Roughly the same number of people are estimated to have died at Dresden as all those killed by German bombing on the UK during the whole of the war.
The merchant navy was a legitimate target because it was helping to sustain the enemy's economy and food supplies. The fact that civilians were manning the ships is irrelevant - they were never targets per se.

The German bombing of Stalingrad killed at least 40,000 people in the first raid. Then of course I pretty sure I read less then 15% of the population survived the battle. 1 million give or take at Leningrad. Germany has no right to accuse anyone of bombing civilians.

No, if we have no right to accuse, than the Russians, the Americans, and the British should not accuse, they all did the same thing, and it is only a difference of time. The statistics are useless. If we killed lets say 60,000 people, would it be right to kill back 60,000 people? No, thats why the death penalty on murderers (excluding major war crime figures) is not a just thing to do. You are an American, and your country puts underaged teenagers to the electric-chair. Talk about the liberty... China has a better judicial system than US, honestly, I studied law. In Europe (at least what many people say), we now find it very hard to see the point of revenge.

Let me ask you, do you mean a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (which was a cowardly act) on US would give the a right and just driving force to bomb Japan throughout the war (That was cowardly too).

We humans are all cowards, doesn't matter you are an American or I'm a German, we are still cowards. So just as you think accusing us a right thing to do, we understands why you accuse us, but also we would have to accuse you, because you only repeated what we did.

[Gott]

Bomber Command is the worst book written.

Have you ever read Mein Kampf? Now there is a horribly written book!

Bomber Command is as infamous as Mein Kampf.

It is definately not as infamous as Mein Kampf, for starters a lot fewer people know the existance of the "Bomber Command" book

/Marcus

Marcus, I did read the Mein Kampf, not because I'm a Nazi, but I found the book on my grandfather's bookshelf and decided to read it (The book was published in the 30s, it was my grandfather's "bible" during the Nazi regime). Mein Kampf was a typical Nazi's "bible." It is filled with racist thoughts. I found it offensive myself, maybe because most of my friends are Jewish, and they influenced their own hate of HItler to me, I already hated Hitler ever since I knew what he did.

Your are right, Bomber Command is not as infamous as Meine Kampf, but it is still infamous. I remembered hearing people say Arthur Harris wrote the book so that he could make everyone to think the terror bombing of German, percisely Dresden, was a totally just thing to do.

[Gott]

BTW Marcus, I think you misunderstood what "infamous" means, it means famous but in a negative way. Notorious. I believe you meant infamous means not well-known, but its wrong.

[Caldric]

No, if we have no right to accuse, than the Russians, the Americans, and the British should not accuse, they all did the same thing, and it is only a difference of time. The statistics are useless. If we killed lets say 60,000 people, would it be right to kill back 60,000 people? No, thats why the death penalty on murderers (excluding major war crime figures) is not a just thing to do. You are an American, and your country puts underaged teenagers to the electric-chair. Talk about the liberty... China has a better judicial system than US, honestly, I studied law. In Europe (at least what many people say), we now find it very hard to see the point of revenge.

Then why are you contridicting yourself and pointing the finger and saying "Look at Dresden".

Sorry I have not seen to many teenagers put to death lately, although I have seen a few that needed it. What does the death penalty have to do with Bombing in WWII anyway? And if you call the fact of being tried and shot in the same day as happens in China fairly often to political offenders then you need to go back and study some more.

But lets not go that far off topic discussing judicial fairness, if there even is such a thing.

Let me ask you, do you mean a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (which was a cowardly act) on US would give the a right and just driving force to bomb Japan throughout the war (That was cowardly too).

Yes, whatever means to destroy the military fighting ability of the enemy. Is ok with me. I do not blame the German's for bombing Stalingrad, but then those same German's should not have much of a case when the tables are turned.

We humans are all cowards, doesn't matter you are an American or I'm a German, we are still cowards. So just as you think accusing us a right thing to do, we understands why you accuse us, but also we would have to accuse you, because you only repeated what we did.

Not even remotely close did America do what the German's did. Not even close. Nor did the UK or even Soviet Union, not at this time anyway.

[Roberto]

Just because they were not as "badly hit" does not make Dresden any less of legitimate target. The Luftwaffe targetted civilians, so did the Allies (Though the latter were rather more effective at it, from the air at least.).
BTW Mr. Justice Gray, in the The Irving Judgement put the death toll in Dresden within the bracket of 25-30,000.
60,000 British civilians died in aerial bombardments, 148 were killed by cross-channel shell-fire and 30,248 died whilst in the service of the Merchant Navy*

So attacking civilian targets at sea is okay, but not on dry land? I don't see the logic in that argument. Surely the targetting of the workforce (Hence the concentration on working class districts.) is just as legitimate as targetting the raw materials? Of course, if you don't agree, then the targetting of shipping (With no knowledge of what is on those ships.) must also be wrong.

What evidence does Judge Gray have have that 25-30,000 were killed at Dresden? He seems to have plucked a figure out of the air just because it sounds plausible (to him). Most reliable estimates point to between 50,000 and 80,000 killed.

What estimates are those?

Standard military arguments, coupled with the demonstration of alliance solidarity and a show-off presentation of [the Bomber Command’s] capacities, cost the lives of about 25,000 people in the night from the 13th to the 14th of February, 1945. This figure results from recent investigations of the Dresden city archive and is based on documents, assessed for the first time, of the departments of the city of Dresden which had been in charge of recovery and burial of the victims at the time. The city administration continued to function even after the attack, the recovery and burial of the dead was by no means carried out in a chaotic manner, there was accurate registration. The number mentioned includes 6,865 dead who were burned on the Altmarkt in order to prevent the spread of diseases. Former rescue workers consider it a myth that dead should have been burnt to ashes in cellars with flame throwers. The figure also includes 1,557 dead bodies which were found in 1957 under the ruins during construction works in Dresden. These data coincide with other official documents which in March of 1945 had contained detailed listings of the dead, but thereafter been crudely manipulated and thus lead to confusion after the war - a forger had added a naught to all the figures.
When discussing the total balance of the horror, the question is often put how many refugees were in the city at the time of the attack. It is widely maintained that these people, unknown in Dresden, died in their tens of thousands in the firestorm. Yet no eyewitness confirms that caravans of refugees crossed Dresden in the middle of February on horse carriages. Neither could massive lodgings in Dresden households be established. Only such a measure would have made it possible to accommodate hundreds of thousands of externals in a city that still had about 600,000 inhabitants. Great numbers of refugees could be seen, however, in the vicinity of the railway stations; many were also lodged in restaurants, hotels, schools and other centers of reception. Serious estimates consider that, including the about 30,000 prisoners of war and forced laborers, there were about 100,000 externals inside the city; other sources mention 200,000 people
from abroad in the city itself and in the surrounding area.
Some controversies about the number of victims in the past took the form of macabre technical considerations. It was considered possible, for instance, that many people were burned in the firestorm into heaps of ash so small that they could not be found. Fire department experts and forensic medics have in the meantime responded to this question very clearly – hardly a human body burns completely to ashes. This means that six digit numbers of victims that have been talked about for decades must be seen as pure speculations.

The above I translated from: Guido Knopp, Unser Jahrhundert -Deutsche Schicksalstage, 1998 C. Bertelsmann Verlag, München, page 258.

[Gott]

No, if we have no right to accuse, than the Russians, the Americans, and the British should not accuse, they all did the same thing, and it is only a difference of time. The statistics are useless. If we killed lets say 60,000 people, would it be right to kill back 60,000 people? No, thats why the death penalty on murderers (excluding major war crime figures) is not a just thing to do. You are an American, and your country puts underaged teenagers to the electric-chair. Talk about the liberty... China has a better judicial system than US, honestly, I studied law. In Europe (at least what many people say), we now find it very hard to see the point of revenge.

Then why are you contridicting yourself and pointing the finger and saying "Look at Dresden".

Sorry I have not seen to many teenagers put to death lately, although I have seen a few that needed it. What does the death penalty have to do with Bombing in WWII anyway? And if you call the fact of being tried and shot in the same day as happens in China fairly often to political offenders then you need to go back and study some more.

But lets not go that far off topic discussing judicial fairness, if there even is such a thing.

Let me ask you, do you mean a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (which was a cowardly act) on US would give the a right and just driving force to bomb Japan throughout the war (That was cowardly too).

Yes, whatever means to destroy the military fighting ability of the enemy. Is ok with me. I do not blame the German's for bombing Stalingrad, but then those same German's should not have much of a case when the tables are turned.

We humans are all cowards, doesn't matter you are an American or I'm a German, we are still cowards. So just as you think accusing us a right thing to do, we understands why you accuse us, but also we would have to accuse you, because you only repeated what we did.

Not even remotely close did America do what the German's did. Not even close. Nor did the UK or even Soviet Union, not at this time anyway.

Well, for Americans they would have say "Look at Pearl Harbor". Chinese for "Look at Nanking." British for "Look at Conventry."

China did something that suits its political idealogy, and would you mean having white police officers beating black teenagers or executing teenagers suiting the American society?

Anyway, I don't want to talk about the problems nowadays in China and US.

You said it is okay to destroy the military fighting ability of the enemy through those acts. Well the Germans did it. You blame them. You did it to us too. Look who's talking?? You are not a Russian, so you wouldn't give a **** about Stalingrad, but if Stalingrad's situation came to America, would you care?

I don't see why Americans would not be as cowardly as anyone. Maybe you should get yourself a big history book to check out how cowardly Americans were just as all men. UK did just as cowardly as US, and do you find it right for a Stalinist society that forbids to talk about sex and that the leaders of Stalinism promoted the rape of German women? Is that not cowardly or not??

Maybe you should go outside and visit the world some more, so that you can realize what's the real deal. Maybe consider going to Dresden and look at the memorial there. For people like you who don't give a **** about terror done by your own country, maybe that memorial would change your mind. All of Dresden's famous landmarks are not even the same as before. At least the German refrained from bombing the Buckingham Palace or the Big Ben.

[Caldric]

and would you mean having white police officers beating black teenagers or executing teenagers suiting the American society?

Again what does this have to do with bombing in WWII. And I have not seen any white officers executing black teenagers, stop with the nonsense, and even the latest incident was not a beating but a cuff up side the head, big difference between beating.

Anyway, I don't want to talk about the problems nowadays in China and US.

Good so don't bring them up.

You said it is okay to destroy the military fighting ability of the enemy through those acts. Well the Germans did it. You blame them. You did it to us too. Look who's talking?? You are not a Russian, so you wouldn't give a **** about Stalingrad, but if Stalingrad's situation came to America, would you care?

Did I damn the German's for bombing cities? No, as a matter of fact I stated I did not blame them for it. But this has little to do with the accusations of mass genocide that German Nazi's was accused of and found guilty.

Yes I care about Stalingrad, those people are no different then me and you. Just because they are Russian does not make them less or better then the rest of us.

I don't see why Americans would not be as cowardly as anyone. Maybe you should get yourself a big history book to check out how cowardly Americans were just as all men. UK did just as cowardly as US, and do you find it right for a Stalinist society that forbids to talk about sex and that the leaders of Stalinism promoted the rape of German women? Is that not cowardly or not??

Maybe we have to different opinions on what the word Coward means. I consider Stalin and his cronies to be just as bad as Hitler and his cronies.

As far as the rape goes of German women, as horrid as it was, it was not promoted by the Soviet high command or Stalin, it was ignored, which may be as bad. However, it was not policy.

Maybe you should go outside and visit the world some more, so that you can realize what's the real deal. Maybe consider going to Dresden and look at the memorial there. For people like you who don't give a **** about terror done by your own country, maybe that memorial would change your mind. All of Dresden's famous landmarks are not even the same as before. At least the German refrained from bombing the Buckingham Palace or the Big Ben.

I know well what my country did to people, I also know what yours did to millions of people that was done systematically. And I am afraid I am one of those simple people who weigh evil and good, and I find my answer.

I am sure the women and children and men that died in London really gave a damn about the German's not bombing a building, I am sure they considered it noble.

[Marcus]

BTW Marcus, I think you misunderstood what "infamous" means, it means famous but in a negative way. Notorious. I believe you meant infamous means not well-known, but its wrong. :mrgreen:

I'm very well aware of what infamous means.

/Marcus

[admfisher]

Taking an overall look at the Bomber Offensive one finds it hard to imagine that as the raids increased so did the German production till, the raids overtook them in 45.
But then as parts of the occupied countries fell so did the some of the supplies needed.

Bomber Command is the worst book written. Bomber Command is as infamous as Mein Kampf. Both were written by a war criminal.

Question for you gott.

Where do you get the idea I am basing anything off of the book Bomber Command.

I have never liked the idea of carpet bombing.
As I stated earlier my Grade 10 German teacher told of his time in Hamburg when it was hit with the first 1000 plane raid.
I am sorry gott, but after his story I changed my mind and looked into the bombing offense on my own and was horrified.
This is why I asked earlier about the fire raids on Tokyo in 45.

[Oswald Mosley]

Just because they were not as "badly hit" does not make Dresden any less of legitimate target. The Luftwaffe targetted civilians, so did the Allies (Though the latter were rather more effective at it, from the air at least.).
BTW Mr. Justice Gray, in the The Irving Judgement put the death toll in Dresden within the bracket of 25-30,000.
60,000 British civilians died in aerial bombardments, 148 were killed by cross-channel shell-fire and 30,248 died whilst in the service of the Merchant Navy*

So attacking civilian targets at sea is okay, but not on dry land? I don't see the logic in that argument. Surely the targetting of the workforce (Hence the concentration on working class districts.) is just as legitimate as targetting the raw materials? Of course, if you don't agree, then the targetting of shipping (With no knowledge of what is on those ships.) must also be wrong.

What evidence does Judge Gray have have that 25-30,000 were killed at Dresden? He seems to have plucked a figure out of the air just because it sounds plausible (to him). Most reliable estimates point to between 50,000 and 80,000 killed.

What you say about the issue of merchant seamen is blatantaly untrue; it is your logic that is twisted. The merchant seamen chose to do that job and they knew the risks from the outset. The area bombing campaign against Germany was designed to cause terror and kill indiscriminately. It seems sheer stupidity that you can even talk about 'targetting of the workforce'! There was no targetting - nor could there be in a carpet bombing attack. Ridiculous!

Listen here Oswald, I am a German and it is a war crime to bomb Dresden. You sound like you are supporting this war crime. I sure don't support the war crimes my country did. In WWII, all major fighting nations committed war crimes. Whether if the nations were "good" or "evil." The Germans, The Russians, the British, and quite possibly the Americans did something evil. We are all guilty of what we all did, but only us Germans were tried over this and us Germans beared all the guilt and responsibilty. I don't know how could Arthur Harris could live with his conscience. He died still defending the terror bombing of Dresden a very just thing to do. The most deserving place for him to die is not in South Afrika where he ran a shipping line, but in Spandau Prison being a cell-mate of Rudolf Hess.

...I was kidding, he shouldn't die in Spandau, but died as a low-life which I hoped he felt guilty and his countrymen should also feel the same way.

I think this is a case of mistaken identity. Surely you are addressing Richard Murphy? I am condemning the bombing of Dresden, not supporting it. Fool.