You’re not serious, are you?
I voted “A pragmatic wartime leader”. From a sober point-of-view…
Nice Avatar D502 that was my very old one. Anyhow I voted a bastard but our bastard. Im not british but the americans had plenty of basdards like Curtis Lemay…so thats my take on it.
Maybe we should have a “bastard-off” to see which bomber general was the biggest bastard of all? 
Hitler bombed my mam in Leicester England in 1940 but missed.
He also area-bombed other Brit cities.
So I applaud Harris’s famous quote -
“They sowed the wind and now they are going to reap the whirlwind”…
The trouble with modern history is we tend to be too revisionist when it comes to topics such as WWII. It’s all very nice to sit back in our nice, comfortable homes, our warm and fuzzy lifestyles and bitch and moan how hard life is for us. Similarly we can in our leisure time hypothesize how WWII could have been fought differently.
It’s so easy to fall into this way of thinking, because we never flew in a narrow metal tube loaded with bombs and fuel while high explosives were flung at us and fighters tried to shoot us down. All these men and Harris were trying to do was to end a war not started by them, to defeat a crazed madman whose view of the world was a perfect blond Ayran race who either exterminated or enslaved anyone not fitting their vision of a perfect master race.
For all of you who complain about Harris, Bomber Command and the tactics used to defeat Hitler’s regime, remember it was men like these, as well as the men of all Allied nations who fought, died and eventually won a war so you could live in your nice comfortable suburban box and judge their deeds.
Regards to all,
Digger.
Did what he had to do. There was no other way to attack Germany in those days, he had to use area bombing because that’s all we could use.
especially “newer” historians are sure that it would have been better to attack only military targets and not to kill hundred thousands of helpless children and women (600.000 estimated, millions homeless).
So I applaud Harris’s famous quote -
“They sowed the wind and now they are going to reap the whirlwind”…
if you have in mind that half of all 7000 ever built lancaster were brought down, it was even a high price for the BC. a good quote for the defenders, which I as a german applaud to … so that`s the other side.
there are also facts that show that these bombardments of the cities had hardly no influence on the lenght of the war. the aim was to demoralize the germans, but like the british under the blitz, the germans were not demoralized, they only knew that there was sheer terror against them.
by allied understanding, if he was a german, he is a war criminal. there is no discussion about german attacks on civilians and it is the same cruel, unnecessary and damned thing, but even this is no legitimation (in my mind) to do the same and to feel free to do it. but as we all knew, tribunals were only done by the winners. it is often forgotten that the brits bombed german cities early in the war (on the german coast in the north-west), so it is not the point to say it is so important to find out who started the slaughter.
“die geschichte schreiben die sieger.” (the story is always written by the winners).
DER BRAND
ALS FEUER VOM HIMMEL FIEL
2 newer german books about the bombings, interesting to read.
Ha Flammpanzer
And welcome to the board.
Thanks for the post,finally we saw here the real German oppinion whithout ass-licking of victors.
… it is often forgotten that the brits bombed german cities early in the war (on the german coast in the north-west), so it is not the point to say it is so important to find out who started the slaughter.
This is interesting i think. What can you tell us about early british bombings of Germany?
Cheers.
The amount of the british bombers lost in the attack:
1941 - 2.5%
1942 - 4.0%
1943 - 3.7%
1944 - 2.2%
1945 - 1.1%
Regarding the early allied bombing, “the first one took place on the 16-May-1940 against targets in Ruhr area, Hamburg, Hannover and Aachen. After that the bombings continue practicaly uninterupted with slow increase in intencity”.
Thanks mate.
So am i right understand , the Britain began to bomb the Germany first?
Nonsense.
The RAF was banned from bombing any land targets in Germany at the start of the war. They were allowed only to attack warships at sea, and were not even allowed to attack warships too close to the shore, in case of civilian casualties.
In March 1940 the Germans bombed a number of land based military targets in Scotland, killing a civilian. The RAF were then allowed to attack a German seaplane base on the island of Hornum in retaliation, chosen because it was well away from civilian areas.
The RAF were not allowed to attack targets in Germany until the 11th May 1940, after German bombing attacks on towns and cities in the west. At that point the RAF were allowed to bomb road and railway targets west of the Rhine.
The RAF were still not allowed to bomb industrial targets in Germany until after the raid on Rotterdam, when the prohibition was lifted. They were expected to bring their bombs back if the individual factory they were supposed to bomb was not identified.
It was not until after the area attacks on Coventry and a number of other British cities in late 1940 that the RAF was allowed to used the same tactics in their attacks on Germany,
The first German town or city to be bombed in WW2 in which there were civilian casualties was the town of Freiburg on the 10th May 1940. There were 57 deaths, of which 22 were children. The ironic bit of this sad story is that the airforce which had bombed Freiburg was the Luftwaffe !!!
Three He-111s had lost their way on a bombing mission to Dijon airfield in France, and bombed Freiburg in error.
The Germans never let out the true information, but used this attack as an excuse for their own bombing campaign on Allied towns and cities
Well we see the point. Good redcoat.
Are any other opinions gentlemens?
So am i right understand , the Britain began to bomb the Germany first?
that way it is not true (and I have never said or meant it that way by the way) but “nonsense” will not get it either, I think. I just tried to say that both sides started early with the bombing of civilians.
The amount of the british bombers lost in the attack:
1941 - 2.5%
1942 - 4.0%
1943 - 3.7%
1944 - 2.2%
1945 - 1.1%
regarding the losses of british heavy bombers: the information can be found in the book “als feuer vom himmel fiel” from stephan burgdorff and christian habbe, bonn 2004. (I found the information in other british (!) literature, too.) they relate to actual data from the BC and documents. the loss rate was some times over 10%, so the numbers named here seem too low, but I can understand that some like to believe that the BC was a brave, effective and nealy unbeatable weapon. but reality was a bit different: the total loss of british crew members that took part in the bombings is rated with 55.000 airmen, so the loss of 600.000 civil lives was not for nothing. sorry, it is hard to say that, but when I hear how mr. harris is adored here, I only could puke … there is no doubt that germany and the germans of those days have a great guilt to bear, but I do not think it was heroic or neccessary to kill civilians in such a great manner - on both sides.
jens
OK now i understand.
And i have to agree that the strategic bombing was the most wasteful and sensless way to fight with Germany. The whole half of Britain budget were lost for the “effective” bombers.
Moreover some our britains friend even proved for themself that those strategic bombings distracted the large part of the German defense industry. So therefore it was legitime and usefull;)
Even in Dresden some of western historians founded the “importaint” war industry objects like the Optic plant. But what’s strange this plant “accidentally” didn’t got into the zone of carpet bombing. Even the realway station was damaged insignificantly. But the centre of city was a goal for the bombers -they simply killed refugers and sitizents.
bit when I hear how mr. harris is adored here, I could puke …
That’s the REAL germans think - Do you see our Britis/US friends?
And who will say more that the genocide of german population was needed for the “great war effect”?
Cheers.
The bomber loss number are from a 1947 year book. And note that they are given per year. One given attack could have higher lose rate, of course.
The Germans started September 1 1939,
Britain May 11th 1940.
I get the same urge when people start singing the praises of the Waffen SS
No Red coat you are forgetting Spain Poland, and Holland Britain was just one in a long line. The Germans made it quite clear from the start that they saw civilians as a legitimate target. They viewed the terrorisation of the people as a way of to victory.
2nd of foot:
According to your logic UK should also start extermination of jews… just because Germans did it. Rediculous, right?
Or maybe we should be resposible of our dids and not blame the other side so much… just curious…
Absolutly agree redcoat.
But I think you have to agree that Waffen SS it’s not justification for Bomber Harris’s unhuman tactic of firebombing civilians.
Not at all. I was referring to Redcoat who said that:-
The Germans started September 1 1939,
As has been pointed out the RAF at the start of the war was specifically ordered not to attack civilian target even if they were being used for military work as they were classed as private property. It was a political decision not an operational one and until it was seen that Germany was willing to attack UK civilian targets the politicians would not let the RAF attack non-military targets. Within Britain politicians control the military not the other way round.
Were as I pointed out the Germans specifically targeted civilians and civilian property to cause terror as a process of war not as a side effect. This is a tactic they used in the first war with Zeppelin raids on Britain, a tactic that was very effective in causing terror in the civil populas. Max Hasting in his book Bomber Command suggests that this was a major factor in Trenchard’s view on the concept of future operation of the RAF and how airpower could win wars.
Using your warped logic the British should have attacked the USSR because Germany did.