Bomber boys - bbc one

[ATAG_Dutch]

So, was Curtis LeMay a 'War Criminal', as you accuse Harris of being, or not?

'realised that with the American intervention he was going to lose the grip on the ETO' - what? Churchill campaigned for American involvement from the word go. Stupid comment.

'according to Churchill's memoirs,he was always reluctant about the de-housing' - I know, I have the books (you know, those I've never looked at), which he wrote after the war.

'Harris is guilty for what I think is his personal revenge' - Personal revenge for what exactly? He was quite happy farming in Africa.

'I'm only saying that celebrating them is really out of place.' - let me guess, because they helped win the war against Nazism?

'if the Japanese caught him they would have tried and executed him for war crimes' - he had good evidence and good cause. The Doolittle Raiders suffered that exact fate in '42. Didn't take a genius to work that out.

So, was Curtis LeMay a 'War Criminal', as you accuse Harris of being, or not?





.......

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

So, was Curtis LeMay a 'War Criminal', as you accuse Harris of being, or not?

'realised that with the American intervention he was going to lose the grip on the ETO' - what? Churchill campaigned for American involvement from the word go. Stupid comment.

'according to Churchill's memoirs,he was always reluctant about the de-housing' - I know, I have the books (you know, those I've never looked at), which he wrote after the war.

'Harris is guilty for what I think is his personal revenge' - Personal revenge for what exactly? He was quite happy farming in Africa.

'I'm only saying that celebrating them is really out of place.' - let me guess, because they helped win the war against Nazism?

'if the Japanese caught him they would have tried and executed him for war crimes' - he had good evidence and good cause. The Doolittle Raiders suffered that exact fate in '42. Didn't take a genius to work that out.

So, was Curtis LeMay a 'War Criminal', as you accuse Harris of being, or not?





.......

I think he was, but I have no intention of carrying on a conversation with you if you don't change your offensive tone. I'm sure you can voice your opinion without being offensive to your interlocutor.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I think he was, but I have no intention of carrying on a conversation with you if you don't change your offensive tone. I'm sure you can voice your opinion without being offensive to your interlocutor.

Stones and glass houses etc.

The end does not always justify the means, hence the controversy over Harris and the atomic bombs on Japan up to modern day issues in the Middle East.

It's too easy to look back from our current warfare morality/philosophy and to criticise those in the past. Take the trenches of WWI - at the time it was all new as the face of war completely changed within a year or two. In the early stages could they really have appreciated the horror?

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Hood

Stones and glass houses etc.

I'm sorry, but I don't call other people's intelligent and mature opinions as idiotic, and in this specific thread the conversation has been extremely civilised, so no, it's not acceptable. Besides if we had any friction we need to move on, or shall we always use it as an excuse for being rude to each other?

The end does not always justify the means, hence the controversy over Harris and the atomic bombs on Japan up to modern day issues in the Middle East.

Bingo. And since you mentioned the Middle East, as much as I definitely don't want Iran to get a nuclear arsenal for obvious reasons, it's crazy to think that some countries dictate over others' freedom of choice on such topics.

It's too easy to look back from our current warfare morality/philosophy and to criticise those in the past. Take the trenches of WWI - at the time it was all new as the face of war completely changed within a year or two. In the early stages could they really have appreciated the horror?

well it's not like the Allies didn't know about area bombing effects, since the Blitz happened 3 years before.. Truth is that Harris' de-housing, meant as DELIBERATE (not incidental, like it could happen with pinpoint) targeting of civilian targets was not necessary, was just a bloodshed of innocents on both sides.

The use of atomic bombs stands on another ground though: they had to use the two kinds of bombs because of all the R&D that went into it and because they needed to send a message to Russia. Still, they could have used a desert island and invited an international observation committee..