there's plenty of RAF memorials, but none dedicated to the "bomber boys".

Are there any memorials to the German U Boat crews who died in WWII ? Arnt they in a similar situation to the RAF bomber crews. The RAF bomber crews suffered a terrible loss rate during the war,possibly the most dangerous job of any in the British military, and yet because of the misguided way in which they were used, and the terrible civilian losses caused by area bombing their valour was never officially recognised.
The UBoat crews are in a similar situation, they also suffered massive losses, they were hated and feared by the allies, and the indescriminate sinking of shipping was considered "illegal" at the time.
Both the UBoat and the Bomber were considered war winning weapons at the time,and in retrospect (isnt hindsight a wonderfull thing) they could have been.
Germany never had enough UBoats in the early war years,and in later years allied numbers,technology and knowhow decisively defeated the UBoat threat.
Britain devoted a very high percentage of her war effort to the bomber fleet. Yet Harris showed a lack of imagination and an inflexible attitude as to where to use this huge bomber weapon.

The Lancaster bomber was not the most succesful British bomber. Four merlin engines, seven crew and all that effort to build that magnificent aircraft and they made about seven trips before being lost or written off, all to indescriminatly scatter some bombs somewhere in Germany, what a waste. the most efficient British bomber of WWII was the mosquito, its survival rate was very high and it was a lot cheaper to make, it also benefitted from having a smaller crew and could be a lot more precise on hitting specific targets.

guys, it's about celebrating the men.

As a matter of fact there is a U-Boat memorial site for both wars at Laboe, close to Kiel.

But i think that that bombers and U-Boats in their roles aren't comparable.

There is no memorial for the Luftwaffe, though. They were also misguided by their leaders. :D

I'm afraid you are going to be annoyed ... http://www.londonremembers.com/memorials/bomber-harris

PPP

didn't know about that one, and frankly the description on that page talks for itself. As far as I'm concerned that's even more offensive to all the "bomber boys" who never lived to see a memorial dedicated to them, but had a statue of the man who send him to be slaughtered.

Harris was a stubborn, vengeful individual whose tactics were completely wrong and caused the death of thousands of people on both sides for his distorted ideas; celebrating him with a statue is definitely out of place.. I wonder who had the idea to erect a statue on his name.

There is no reason why he should not have a statue. War is war and for centuries it hasn't been confined to battlefields or strict rules of engagement. Every individual of an enemy state is a combatant.

WW2 is the best example of "total war" and Harris did his job well. An unpleasant and tragic job, certainly, but in war you need the ruthless b*stards to give the orders.

The 7500 members of the Bomber Command Association (ex RAF aircrew) raised the money themselves to erect a statue to their chief.

..well according to your theory we should have a statue for Himmler, since he did his job quite well too :rolleyes:

it is a known fact that the area bombing idea was a bad idea, which cost not only innocent lives and RAF aircrews, but caused a lot of losses and great expenditures even after the war. It is also a fact that it's not because of area bombing that the war ended, it was just a tragic waste.

..I bet you're telling me next that Montgomery was a great general ;)

Better than you i'd wager.