RAF Bomber crews remembered. Better late than never.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by winny

I never said it was good. Don't put words into my mouth, speak for yourself.

It happened. It probably was criminal. But in the context of the time what else were the allies gonna do? Having a memorial to the men who were in the bombers is simply that. A way to remember very young men forced into a horrible situation with very little chance of survival, who died.

The days such issues become simple is the day the modern nation state is no more.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

I think you are intentionally derailing the raised issue, playing Ace of Aces wannebe.
I refer to my last post and in it's eventuality, that is all there is to be said about it.

No I simply asked a question based on your statement, but as this will be like getting blood from a stone then I guess I will have to settle for a 'yes you do think bomber command was formed solely to kill civillians'

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

No I simply asked a question based on your statement, but as this will be like getting blood from a stone then I guess I will have to settle for a 'yes you do think bomber command was formed solely to kill civillians'

And I gave you an answer. If you want details, ask for them, I am not going to answer to quotes or repetitions you use to deflect issues thrown at you. Go play those games with someone else.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

The days such issues become simple is the day the modern nation state is no more.

I said that the memorial was simply for the crews, not what they did. I did not say it was a simple issue.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

And I gave you an answer. If you want details, ask for them, I am not going to answer to quotes or repetitions you use to deflect issues thrown at you. Go play those games with someone else.

I specifically asked you not to give details, I just wanted the yes or no kind of answer, there is no deflection going on here...well from you there is.

you made a statement...

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Something to chew over:
Not a single german military branch was solely created to kill civilians on a massive scale.
Those organisations and units geared for mass extermination were of Nazi origin. From a german perspective, that gives you an idea of what kind of connections Bomber command evokes here.

and I was intrigued by what exactly you were asking us to 'chew' over, the claim not a single German military branch being created solely to kill civillians on a massive scale was highlighted, on a thread about bomber command, who did kill civillians and it sounded just like you were claiming that bomber command was an example of what you were asking us to 'chew' over.
To be honest I could have queried the strange disassociation of the Nazis, almost like you were brushing it under the carpet, but as I recall the Nazis were from Germany and did create some particularily nasty military units.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by winny

I never said it was good. Don't put words into my mouth, speak for yourself.

you said (and I quote) "Truth is that wartime Germany got what it deserved, no more, no less". That too is a bit of sweeping statement, don't you think?

It happened. It probably was criminal. But in the context of the time what else were the allies gonna do? Having a memorial to the men who were in the bombers is simply that. A way to remember very young men forced into a horrible situation with very little chance of survival, who died.

agree.

[Al Schlageter]

RAF Bomber Command was formed on 14 July 1936 Bewolf.

Regarding the legality of the campaign, an article in the International Review of the Red Cross stated:

In examining these events [aerial area bombardment] in the light of international humanitarian law, it should be borne in mind that during the Second World War there was no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian property, as the conventions then in force dealt only with the protection of the wounded and the sick on the battlefield and in naval warfare, hospital ships, the laws and customs of war and the protection of prisoners of war.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I specifically asked you not to give details, I just wanted the yes or no kind of answer, there is no deflection going on here...well from you there is.

you made a statement...

And I answered

Nitpicking and distraction, Bongo.
That was it's main emphasies. While in other branches the killing of civilians was indeed mostly collateral, sometimes delibaretly, no other "regular" military branch of any nation was so preoccupied with killing civilians as it's main operational goal over such a long period of time. At least none that I know of.

Now you can point out to the various NAZI organisations, but as I said before, be careful with what kind of organisations you want the comparison.

Originally Posted by bongodriver

and I was intrigued by what exactly you were asking us to 'chew' over, the claim not a single German military branch being created solely to kill civillians on a massive scale was highlighted, on a thread about bomber command, who did kill civillians and it sounded just like you were claiming that bomber command was an example of what you were asking us to 'chew' over.
To be honest I could have queried the strange disassociation of the Nazis, almost like you were brushing it under the carpet, but as I recall the Nazis were from Germany and did create some particularily nasty military units.

And you understood that quite correctly. And yes, the Nazis did create some particulary nasty military Units. Amongst those were the Waffen SS. Those guys commited some much more hideous crimes then the ones already occuring in a total war environment.

I think you understand perfectly what I say, Bongo. I am saying that the UK in some areas employed tactics and methods also employed by Nazi Germany in the field of war crimes. And the problem is not so much that they did it in the first place, but the staunch refusal to see it as what it ultimately was, especially in late 44/45.

[bongodriver]

And why 'must' I be carefull bringing up a Nazi unit that was formed solely for exterminating civillians?

Why have you deflected again and taken the elaborate deception with answering my question?

And I answered

But you didn't, you just mentioned the aerea bombing campaign (it's a campaign not a military unit)

And the problem is not so much that they did it in the first place, but the staunch refusal to see it as what it ultimately was, especially in late 44/45.

I think everybody saw it for exactly what it was, why else would a memorial take 60 years to come if it didn't lay heavy on the conciousness?....staunch refusal?.....as Stern would say 'OH puhlease!'

[seaeye]

Originally Posted by winny

I said that the memorial was simply for the crews, not what they did. I did not say it was a simple issue.

I agree with you in that the memorial should be for the crews of Bomber Command. They deserve to be remembered.

I think what the others are getting at is that the memorial may not be seen that way by the wider public, a lot of people in the UK seem to think that whatever Bomber Command did during WW2 was ok becuase it was the good guys doing it, and that is wrong.