Bath, Canterbury, Cambridge, etc, are all well known industrial areas, of course :roll:
Moreover the mass killing of germans was the primary goal of strategic bombing.
Quite simply that’s a total and utter lie.
The goal was to disrupt both the infostructure, and the civilian populations in the towns enough to effect the German war effort
I’m not the one downplaying it.
Just as a matter of interest, do you agree with him that the ‘jewish’ holocaust was in his words ‘very exaggerated’ and the 6 million figure is wrong.
Not exactly - more like one of a number of goals. At certain points of the war Harris would quite likely have exterminated every single German if given the choice, and been backed wholeheartedly by the population of the allies. That he - thankfully - lacked the means to do so limited the destruction he was able to do.
Incidentally, with the technology of the time it was very difficult indeed to destroy industrial targets without hitting the workers very hard. The workforce would live literally just outside the factory gates in many cases, and accurately targeting such a factory in blackout conditions with primitive instrumentation and under fire is very hard indeed. Hence the switch to area bombing - which in practice means you are targeting the civilian population.
Besides, “lie” implies he knows he is being mendacious. Quite apart from whether he is speaking the truth or not (and I suspect few if any people alive today can answer that question) if it is a sincerely held belief on his part - something we have no reason to doubt - it is not a lie.
Well you see, I just wanted to be on a coservative side, so that you would not accuse me of exaggeration. 
I’m not the one downplaying it.
Just as a matter of interest, do you agree with him that the ‘jewish’ holocaust was in his words ‘very exaggerated’ and the 6 million figure is wrong.
Yes, I agree. 6 million is a symbolic number. There is Holocaust memorial in France, where six light projectors shoot in to the sky from the six sides of the David’s star. It is this kind of symbolism I am talking about.
In my humble oppinion, the real figure is about 4 million, which does not make it any easier for the jewish victims diring the war.
Best rgards
Igor Korenev
Wasn’t he after “Lebensraum” (literally, room in which to live) rather than slaves? If so, surely it would be a matter of national policy to depopulate the captured reasons. Certainly, the Germans made quite a good start on depopulating the areas of Poland and the Soviet Union they captured. In Poland something like 25% of the population died during the war.
Poland was the eastern territory for Hitler. Just like Ukraina, Belorussia and Russia were. The Lebensraum implied depopulation by many different ways (including Holocaust).
Regarding the percentages it is not that clear I guess. It depends in which borders take the countries and if counting by nationalities or not.
This is a quote from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#endnote_Poland): “Losses by ethnic group were 3,100,000 Jews; 2,000,000 ethnic Poles; 500,000 Ukrainians and Belarusians.”
The total population of Poland before 01-sep-1939 was app. 35 million. The Poles were about 25 millions. 3.5 million jews, app. 5 million Ukraininas, app. 1 million Belorussians, app. 1 million Germans.
Most of the poles lived in the area soon to be occupied by Germany.
All of the Ukrainins and belorussians and most of the jews (app. 2 mill) were in area soon to be taken back by USSR.
So the percentage numbers change dramaticaly depending on this factors. If you just remove the stats for 2 millions of jewish population, that was almost completely completely killed during the war, the situation shifts dramaticaly.
But this of course does not show, that Poland was not one of the country that suffered enourmous death rate during WW2.
Best regards
Igor Korenev
May also depend on how you count deaths. AIUI (please correct me if I’m wrong) the Germans deprived the Poles of many resources such as adequate food, medical supplies, etc. This will have led to a greatly increased death rate.
However, I had forgotten that “Poland” has been a rather elastic concept this century. It’s quite possible that the figure I was quoting is a before and after number for the population living within the boundaries of Poland as a state - in which case it becomes rather useless.
pdf27:
May also depend on how you count deaths.
I think if one reads “XXX losses” it normally means all death causes. This is especially true when talking about a whole country, where any unnatural death (murder, famine, ect) are counted as losses. Sometimes even unborn children are concidered as losses.
Can be, problem is that people are often very cavalier in how they do the counting. This can lead from only counting the easy official statistics (which will only show cases where there is a clear, attributable cause of death) to rectal extractions intended to support the author’s point.
Oh really.
well open please the memoirs book of Harris :“Bomber offencive”. London. 1947
…The basic objects of defense industry was to be searched for, where they occur in any country of peace, i.e., in cities themselves. One should especially emphasize that besides as in Essen( when was killed a lot of civilians-my comment Chevan) we never made with the object of film any specific plant.The destroyed enterprise in the city we always considered as additional success. The center of city always remained our main purpose. All old German cities are most densely build ot to to center, and the outskirts of them always more or are less free from the buildings. Therefore center section it is municipal is especially sensitive to the incendiary bombs
So as could you see if not the german industry was the goal for the Harris then what was it for?
Certainly the terrorizing and killing of population - the “favorite method” of Nazi when they bombed London, Warsaw , Gernica and ets (but just in much less scale.)
OR may be Harris lied?
The goal was to disrupt both the infostructure, and the civilian populations in the towns enough to effect the German war effort
But the barbarian way which Harris choose for the disrupt the German infostructure was via the mass killing of peoples. It was the Nazi tactic to terrorised the population and killing the civilians but in MUCH MORE scale.
Cheers.
I have not to agree.
The killing of civilians was the not forced measure in the Harris tactic. Don’t forget about psychological reasons and politic.
There is no doubt that Britain people wished the retrebution for Germans after the cynical Blitz bombardment of UK. And therefore the Churchill in his public speech useed this point as the importaint for the justification of bombing.(Remenber about “Wind and whirlwind”).
I can understand britains i that time.
But the problem was that not many peoples in Britain knew that this “retribution” planned as the mass slaughter of German polpulation ( abot 50% victims were the women and 20% - children).
To be the honest after the war when true about “effectiveness” of bombing come to the surface many people in Britain were agitated of this murder. The firebombing of Germany caused at least 10 times more death of civilians than both US and UK civils victims in entire WW2.
Even W.Churchill was frightened of responsibility and he was forced to remove from Harris.
Poor Harris after the war become the “scapegoat” together with strategic RAF high command . Certainly it was not only his blame. He just did it’s work as “good soldier”.
But many Nazi “good soldier” were shooted for less dirty work.
Cheers.
It is a question of equality. The bombing of Britain by the Germans isn’t considered a war crime, so why should the bombing of Germany be considered a war crime ???
okay, I now understand. it is no crime at all to kill 600.00 civilians? to me, both sides commites a true war crime when killing civilians for no really obvious reason (I pointed out why earlier). the us 8th air fleet did those permanet attacks on targets like factories and railroads f. e., but most effects are achieved with explosive bombs, not with fire-bombs. there were also civil losses by the us and they also used the strategy of wiping out living-areas, but the brits did that with a greater success and IT WAS the main aim of the BC. earlier in another thread, I related to those statements that showed off a proud attitude towards the effects of the BC (“applaud ont he result”), maybe some of those posters should think about that twice. but reflecting own parts of history that were not so glorious in a most objective way seems not easy for some sons of the winners. I do not want to hear any sorry, but please understand that I can find nothing heroic or good in killing helpless and defendless people in such a way. again: this is a crime and a to built up a statue for harris is the wrong way …
I also agree that Goering was never charged for his Luftterror, because this would have had a bad effect for the allied side.
personally, I find it a bit dangerous to bring in the holocaust-card as someone named it here - especially as a german. there should never be a direct comparison between the holocaust-victims and those of the bombing-nights.
jens
I think you’re overstating the importance of this phrase. It’s a direct biblical quote (Hosea 8:7) and nicely fits in with Churchill’s rhetorical turn of phrase.
British experience from the Blitz - notably at Coventry - was that it was far more destructive to bomb the centre of a target than attempt attacks on factories. If you hit a factory with anything but extremely heavy bombs (and I’m thinking 5 tonne + in size) you can pretty much dust off the machine tools, sling a tarpaulin over the roof and resume production. The British knew this from their experience on the recieving end during the Blitz.
However, if you hit the centre of a town you generally knock out water and electricity supplies to the factories around that town. The factories are out of action until these essential supplies are restored, and as they will have been damaged over a wide area the restoration work is much harder than if they were at a single point.
How true this lesson was for Germany, I don’t know (the USSBS may have further data on this). However, it is what the British believed at the time and it did influence their decision making process.
I don’t agree with that (see above). Until very late in the war the bombloads dropped by the US were simply too light and the bombs too small to do very much damage to factories (although they could do quite a lot of damage to what they were producing, hence the drive to bury or decentralise).
There are exceptions to this - largely for things like the Fischer-Tropsch plants for producing synthetic fuels - but these are mainly places that would burn down of their own accord given half a chance.
Hello!
Does anyone have text in English of the RAFs “moral area bombing” directrice from February 1942?
And does any one have a text in English of the paper leaflets dropped by the RAF on Germany in August - October 1942. I read it in Russian. And it say among other that “it is not for revenge”, but nontheless “we will hunt you down mercilessly”. And it was not told about German generals, but about ordinary people.
I think if we could post these two documents here, it may clear some issues.
Best regrads
Igor Korenev
Hello!
It has been mentioned in here by someone that it was Russians that asked for the bombing of Dresden. So the claim is that the British just did what Russians asked them to do.
Does anyone have an info (with references to the sources) about what exactly did Russians ask for?
Common! Lets get some life into our forum! Some fresh going fight of ideas!
Stalin didn’t have any success getting the other Allies to open the Second Front in 1943.
Then again, the Americans didn’t have any success getting Churchill to do it in 1943, either.
Things must have improved by early 1945 when Dresden was bombed, despite America and Britain by that stage worrying about how to deal with the Russian bear if it kept going westwards, or even just stayed where it was, after Germany was defeated…
Does anyone have an info (with references to the sources) about what exactly did Russians ask for?
The Russian Request for Allied Bombing of Communications in the Dresden Area:
- The Allied-Russian interchanges that had begun in the closing months of 1944 and had become, with the passing of time, more frequent and more specific, culminated in the ARGONAUT Conferences of January-February 1945. On 4 February, President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill, and Marshal Stalin, together with their foreign secretaries and military advisors, assembled at Yalta to present definitive and specific plans, and requests, for bringing the war against Germany to a victorious conclusion, by the summer of 1945, if possible (Other considerations involved in the ARGONAUT deliberations are not pertinent or relevant here). At this meeting, Marshal Stalin asked Army General Antonov, Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff, to outline to the Conference the situation existing on the Eastern Front and to describe Russia’s plans for subsequent operations. At the conclusion of his extended presentation, General Antonov made three specific requests for Allied assistance to the Russians: 27
Our wishes are:
a. To speed up the advance of the Allied troops on the Western Front, for which the present situation is very favorable: (1) To defeat the Germans on the Eastern Front. (2) To defeat the German groupings which have advanced into the Ardennes. (3) The weakening of the German forces in the West in connection with the shifting of their reserves to the East (It is desirable to begin the advance during the first half of February).
b. By air action on communications hinder the enemy from carrying out the shifting of his troops to the East from the Western Front, from Norway, and from Italy (In particular, to paralyze the junctions of Berlin and Leipzig).
c. Not permit the enemy to remove his forces from Italy.
- It was the specific Russian request for bombing communications, coupled with the emphasis on forcing troops to shift from west to east through communications centers, that led to the Allied bombings of Dresden. The structure of the Berlin-Leipzig-Dresden railway complex, as outlined in paragraph 8 above, required that Dresden, as well as Berlin and Leipzig, be bombed. Therefore Allied air authorities concluded that the bombing of Dresden would have to be undertaken (1) in order to implement strategic objectives, of mutual importance to the Allies and the Russians, and now agreed upon at the highest levels of governmental authority, and (2) to respond to the specific Russian request presented to the Allies by General Antonov to “paralyze the junctions of Berlin and Leipzig.”
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:_iXt0skUZNwJ:https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/PopTopics/dresden.htm+Strategic+Bombing+in+Relation+to+the+Present+Russian+Offensive&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=au [Website is down so I’ve had to use Google cache]
P.S. I’ve come into this thread late, so if this has already been posted I’m sorry.
Common! Lets get some life into our forum! Some fresh going fight of ideas!
So, I’m not the only one bored with the dull state, or total lack of, debate lately? 
Well RS, I hate to tell you the dull state of this site is common on other sites too, probably because most members are enjoying the northern summer.
The other problem is since you’ve joined you’ve kicked off five million threads and there is nothing left to talk about:shock:
I believe there is only one way we can rectify this situation;)
Regards digger
I suspected that.
I suppose they’re entitled to enjoy their pale imitations of a real summer.
The other problem is since you’ve joined you’ve kicked off five million threads and there is nothing left to talk about:shock:
I believe there is only one way we can rectify this situation;)
So, the solution is that I go north for the summer; locate Egorka, Chevan and others, and force them back to their keyboards?
P.S. I realise that there is another solution available, but I’m not into seppuku.
Or all that fond of a culture which extols it, as shall soon become apparent in a post in the A bomb thread which, even allowing for the gentle delights of the northern summer, ought to drag someone away from their hired deck chair (How can a chair on a beach be a chair for a deck on a ship?) on a rough pebbled beach with no surf.
They don’t know what they’re missing down here.
Yes, despite their own promise.
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:_iXt0skUZNwJ:https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/PopTopics/dresden.htm+Strategic+Bombing+in+Relation+to+the+Present+Russian+Offensive&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=au [Website is down so I’ve had to use Google cache]
Yes, I know of this page but have not read it yet - could not connect even to Google cash page… So thanks for that!
I still have to read it through. But the first comments are:
[ol]
[li]Formally USSR did not ask to bomb Dresden. [/li][li]USSR asked to bomb “junctions” (I guess these are the transport junctions), not the city center.[/li][li]The infamous air raid was not the first and not the biggest one over Dresden, yet the civilian casualties were the highest.[/li][/ol]
Did I get it correct so far?
RS, go forth young man and share some vodka with our Russian friends:D
Dresden was the major transport junction(outside of Berlin)and virtually all rail traffic going to the Eastern Front passed through.
The major rail yard in the suburb of Friedrichstadt is next to the city centre. Immediately south of the city centre were more substantial rail yards and industry in the suburb of Sudvorstadt.
Significantly there were two major rail junctions in the area defined as the city centre, one of these junctions immediately west of the main railway station. There is also a misconception the city centres of German cities were devoid of worthwhile military targets.
Regards digger