 |
| |
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:24
|
|
Everyone:
As I post this, it should range from early morning to early afternoon in Europe, so I expect to get some responses from our brethren across The Pond. The subject line says it all; read the article and feel free to contribute to this thread as you see fit afterwards.
***
quote:
New book questions morality of Allied bombing of German cities
By Daniel Rubin
Knight Ridder Newspapers
BERLIN — When the morning of March 13, 1945 dawned on the German resort city of Swinemuende, Leon Kolberg climbed out of his bunker and found himself in a city of the dead.
"A woman was walking down the street with one hand missing, the other holding a baby," said Kolberg, then a 14-year-old refugee. "People were stacked on the foot paths, bodies everywhere. The buildings were gone. I got lost."
The diaries of American bombers show that their targets the day before were ships and rail lines in the city on the Baltic Sea. The Russians, only 12 miles away, had asked their American and British allies to aid their advance. Some 1,500 German soldiers were identified and buried after the raid, but most of the 23,000 people who were killed in 45 minutes of bombing were German refugees trying to flee the advancing Red Army.
"It is one of the great slaughters of the Second World War," charges German historian Jorg Friedrich. "Did children deserve to die? Or women?"
The country that slaughtered millions of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and Slavs has been hesitant to raise questions about its own peoples‚ suffering in a war that its Nazi leaders started. But Friedrich, whose earlier work focused on Nazi atrocities, has ignited a raucous debate with a new book that questions the morality of the Allied bombing of German cities in World War II.
The serialization of Friedrich’s book, "The Fire: Germany Under Bombardment, 1940-1945," in Bild, Germany’s largest tabloid, has released a torrent of wartime reminiscences in German newspapers and television programs.
It also has unleashed a torrent of protest elsewhere. Journalists in Britain, whose cities were pounded by Hitler’s Luftwaffe and later by German V-1 "buzz bombs" and V-2 missiles, have taken particular umbrage at Friedrich‚s account of the deaths of 635,000 German civilians.
"I am not interested in blaming anyone," Friedrich said. "I am interested in clearing up the facts." Yet his use of words such as "massacre" and "crematorium" were bound to raise hackles because they suggest that there is some moral equivalence between the Nazis‚ genocide and the Allies‚ military tactics.
In London’s Daily Mail, military author Correlli Barnett called Friedrich a dangerous revisionist whose "historical travesty" is an attempt to justify Adolf Hitler’s crimes. In the Guardian, columnist Ian Buruma wrote that German right-wingers have long dwelled on their victimhood. "All Friedrich has done is break a left-wing taboo."
"It has been a topic that professional German historians have stayed away from, in part because they haven’t known what to do with it," said Tom Childers, a University of Pennsylvania historian. "Do they dare talk of German suffering when Germany was responsible for the suffering of so many millions?
"The right have claimed this topic for years. And why not the left? Suffering is human suffering, and these are shattering stories."
Born in 1944, "I am the generation of sons who questioned their parents," said Friedrich, whose schoolteacher father raised him in the Austrian mountains after their German city of Essen was bombed. "We asked: ‘What happened in the war? Where were you in 1941 when the first Jews were deported? Who wrote for the Nazi papers?’"
Friedrich spent most of his career writing about the Nuremberg war crimes trials, Nazi guards, Nazi justice. For years he thought of the Allied bombs "as something that came from the sky that punished the rotten and criminal kingdom of evil." Then he read the testimony at Nuremberg of a German general who defended shooting Belarus villagers who were suspected of helping the partisans, saying that was better than bombing indiscriminately.
Although the Nazis also bombed indiscriminately and their efforts to slaughter and starve Russian civilians are well-documented, Friedrich spent a decade pondering the German general‚s defense of his conduct as he researched the Allied firebombing of Dresden and Hamburg and the leveling of cities such as Cologne, Kassel and Wurzburg.
"How can we deal with the fact that those massacres took place?" he asked. "Because it was a just cause? But are those just means?" Friedrich argues that Allied air raids such as the one at Swinemuende, now part of Poland, were unnecessary, and reflect Allied rage at the Germans’ refusal to capitulate.
There again he runs into flak. Tami Davis Biddle, a historian at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., said the Allies were desperate to knock out Hitler before he could develop terrifying new weapons, including an atomic bomb. Intelligence reports predicted a long fight, so in January 1945 the Allies decided to bomb both synthetic oil refineries and eastern German cities to help the Soviet Army finish off the Third Reich faster.
For years, historians have debated whether bombing German cities, particularly as the British did, was an effort to choke the Nazi war machine or to destroy German morale. Some argue that the Americans and British merely tried to do to German civilians what Hitler had first tried to do to the residents of Rotterdam, Warsaw, London and Coventry.
In fact, German pilots first practiced the tactic in the Spanish Civil War, killing some 1,600 civilians in a 1937 raid on the Basque village of Guernica that was memorialized in a mural by Pablo Picasso.
Biddle said a series of documents show that when the Allies targeted eastern German cities, they knew their bombs would fall on refugees as well as massing troops.
"Who is going to be in that population? It is going to be women and children. It is a statement of the desperation and the level of fear among the Allies that no one stops and says, ‘Wait a minute, maybe we should rethink this …’"
Kolberg, now 71 and living in Australia, said that for 57 years he has wondered why the Americans would bomb a place full of civilians. While there were some ships in the harbor and German soldiers in port, most of the people in Swinemuende that day were helpless. British historian Roger A. Freeman, who has chronicled the U.S. Eighth Air Force in World War II, notes that American B-17 and B-24 heavy bombers flew about five miles above their targets to avoid anti-aircraft fire. And when smaller, faster fighters dropped through the clouds to strafe trucks and trains, they flew at about 300 mph, making it difficult or impossible to distinguish civilians from soldiers.
"Remember," said Freeman, "this was total war, and the civilian population was involved as never before."
What happened that March day six weeks before the Germans surrendered holds lessons for the future, as well, said University of Pennsylvania historian Tom Childers, whose father and uncle flew in the Eighth Air Force.
"All of the moral ambiguities of modern war are on display in an air war — and this remains true in Afghanistan and it will be the case should there be war in Iraq," he said. "With the air war, with the Germans dropping bombs on Rotterdam or Warsaw or London, or the British hitting Darmstadt, you have military forces attacking places where civilians will be hurt.
"It forces you into making the kind of argument that this is a just war and awful things must be done, so traditional notions of morality are among the first casualties." |
***
All I can say is that this sort of debate would *never* be taking place had Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan succeeded in achieving their goals during World War II.
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dis
|
 |
Las Vegas, Nevada
Feb 2000
time: 21:24
|
|
And the judgement of this book is just stupid.
No bombing is moral. Killing is killing. All bombings (even one's today with high tech weapons) result in civilian deaths.
Bombing any way you do it is evil. But it is a necessary evil.
I'm trying to find the right words to explain this.
But what I'm asking is how you can say one type of bombing is moral, while another type isn't. Civilians are killed either way. All you have is conjecture of what the intention of the generals were when they drew up the plans. Did they intentionally target civilians? Probably. But that is not how we operate today. What more needs to be said about this?
Last edited by Dis on 16-12-2002 at 13:48
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:24
|
|
The mass-killing of innocent civilians, such as in the fire-bombings of Tokyo, Hamburg, and Dresden, are absolutely inexusable. Besides, more likely than not, all you're doing is hardening civilian morale and thirst for revenge (i.e. the bombing of London). Sometimes terror works, such as with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it generally fails, and is always wrong.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ramo
The mass-killing of innocent civilians, such as in the fire-bombings of Tokyo, Hamburg, and Dresden, are absolutely inexusable. Besides, more likely than not, all you're doing is hardening civilian morale and thirst for revenge (i.e. the bombing of London). Sometimes terror works, such as with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it generally fails, and is always wrong. |
Mass killing of civilians was a result of decentralization of wartime industries by the Japanese. While everyone whines about Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki (among many others - Yokohama, Yokosuka, Osaka, Nagoya, Kobe, Sendai, Fukushima, Niigata and more were all heavily hit, people tend to forget that the US completely exlcuded four cities from bombing because the Japanese did not put military industries there - Nikko, Kamakura, Nara, and Kyoto were all restricted areas which the US did not bomb, for both humanitarian and cultural reasons.
This despite the fact that the highest levels of US command knew about the systematic execution of 200 civilian construction workers on Wake Island, from the very beginning of the war, and many other atrocities committed by the IJA and Kenpeitai everywhere that was occupied by Imperial Japan.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
So pile on the bastards and break 'em as fast as possible, by whatever means are necessary and effective. |
Ah, but the German civilians were by no means "bastards". They were in the same situation as Americans - being forced to fight people who were not THEIR enemies, but rather enemies of their country's political leadership.
Murdering these people was wrong - of course, that should be a redundant statement, because murder is always wrong.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Mass killing of civilians was a result of decentralization of wartime industries by the Japanese. While everyone whines about Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki (among many others - Yokohama, Yokosuka, Osaka, Nagoya, Kobe, Sendai, Fukushima, Niigata and more were all heavily hit, people tend to forget that the US completely exlcuded four cities from bombing because the Japanese did not put military industries there - Nikko, Kamakura, Nara, and Kyoto were all restricted areas which the US did not bomb, for both humanitarian and cultural reasons. |
Are you trying to tell me that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not to terrorize the Japanese into ending the war, but simply to destroy Japan's industrial base? 
quote:
This despite the fact that the highest levels of US command knew about the systematic execution of 200 civilian construction workers on Wake Island, from the very beginning of the war, and many other atrocities committed by the IJA and Kenpeitai everywhere that was occupied by Imperial Japan. |
The atrocities of the Japanese (i.e. in Nanjing) don't justify anything.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-12-2002 13:25
Yet another whiny leftist rant. What would have happened if Hitler and his friends would have gotten their way? Of course innocent people got hurt during a war. Only a fool would think other wise. The real question is did the allies do more harm then the facists would have done if they weren't stopped? 
|