RAF Bomber crews remembered. Better late than never.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

It would be interesting to hear a hypothesis on what might have been 'without' an allied bombing campaign.

@Stern, be carefull with waving that 'national bias' flag again, so far there has been no need to mention it.

I was not referring to anyone in particular here, but it happened in the past.

Anyway, the Allied bombing campaign was made of two specific aspects: the pinpoint (more or less accurately) attack of strategic targets from the 8th Air Force and the systematic carpet bombing (AKA "de-housing") done by the RAF.

It's interesting how the Americans were reluctant to take part to it in the ETO but had no problem whatsoever in doing it over Japan..

It has been argued and demonstrated that the de-housing was a counterproductive technique (like the dambusters raids), and it was also argued in 1945 in the British Cabinet that after the war was over, the Allied would have been left with a pile of rubble to fix, which would have proved itself being costly and very difficult.

It's tough to justify all of that bloodshed mainly for retaliation and propaganda, not to mention trying to keep Stalin happy, but unfortunately that's what happened.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Anyway, the Allied bombing campaign was made of two specific aspects: the pinpoint (more or less accurately) attack of strategic targets from the 8th Air Force and the systematic carpet bombing (AKA "de-housing") done by the RAF.

It's interesting how the Americans were reluctant to take part to it in the ETO but had no problem whatsoever in doing it over Japan..

Hmmm...not quite true but the perceived truth. An important difference, no?
Again, what we do know now is that by early 1945 the British night bomber offensive had reached a pitch of precision where our raids were actually
more accurate than the daylight campaign of the eighth airforce where overcast conditions meant that much of their bomb aiming was done by H2S through cloud with the same erratic results the RAF was getting at night in '41/42. The American command fully understood this too but to admit that would mean they could no longer state that "the strategic bomber was not being thrown at the (German) man in the street."

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by arthursmedley

Hmmm...not quite true but the perceived truth. An important difference, no?
Again, what we do know now is that by early 1945 the British night bomber offensive had reached a pitch of precision where our raids were actually
more accurate than the daylight campaign of the eighth airforce where overcast conditions meant that much of their bomb aiming was done by H2S through cloud with the same erratic results the RAF was getting at night in '41/42. The American command fully understood this too but to admit that would mean they could no longer state that "the strategic bomber was not being thrown at the (German) man in the street."

I think the main point Stern was trying to emphasise is the British campaign was immoral and murderous, the RAF wasn't going after strategic targets but more after women and children and babies and family pets.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I think the main point Stern was trying to emphasise is the British campaign was immoral and murderous, the RAF wasn't going after strategic targets but more after women and children and babies and family pets.

Yep, it's the deliberate decision to attack civilian targets,not hitting them as collateral damage from pinpoint bombing that makes quite the difference.. but again it was done by the Americans as well. I find it somehow grotesque and really difficult to justify, condemning the Nazis for war crimes against civilians and then doing exactly the same thing..

And as usual the eloquence of Bewolf is spotless: it should be looked as a memorial about the casualties of that foolish campaign,not a "feel good" big monument.

[PeterPanPan]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

... I find it somehow grotesque and really difficult to justify, condemning the Nazis for war crimes against civilians and then doing exactly the same thing...

Please don't ever compare what the Nazis did with the efforts of the allies in WWII. Or have I misunderstood your point?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by PeterPanPan

Please don't ever compare what the Nazis did with the efforts of the allies in WWII. Or have I misunderstood your point?

No you haven't missed his point I'm affraid, Stern makes it no secret he thinks history is a lie written by the Allies, and very much equates the collateral killing of civillians in the allied bombing campaingns to the deliberate mass murder perpetrated by the Nazis.

it's his oppinion and I'm done getting into big fights about it, beyond his naive beliefs he's not a bad chap.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

No you haven't missed his point I'm affraid, Stern makes it no secret he thinks history is a lie written by the Allies, and very much equates the collateral killing of civillians in the allied bombing campaingns to the deliberate mass murder perpetrated by the Nazis.

I rest my case.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I think the main point Stern was trying to emphasise is the British campaign was immoral and murderous, the RAF wasn't going after strategic targets but more after women and children and babies and family pets.

Come now Bongodriver. That's not how Stern has worded it and I don't quite think thats what he is saying either. However, you can make a case for that view. We have all the war cabinet discussions available. From early 1942 our campaign was aimed at German civilians. It is still a difficult truth. That's why Churchill, ever a man with his eye on history was so keen to distance himself from it in '45.

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.

In the back of each Wermacht pay book were some fine words on the duties and responsibilities of German soldiers written during the Kaisers time. These were universally ignored in every country the German army invaded. The Wermacht, it's soldiers and commanders were complicit in war crimes everywhere they went. There is no getting away from from this, another uncomfortable truth.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by arthursmedley

In the back of each Wermacht pay book were some fine words on the duties and responsibilities of German soldiers written during the Kaisers time. These were universally ignored in every country the German army invaded. The Wermacht, it's soldiers and commanders were complicit in war crimes everywhere they went. There is no getting away from from this, another uncomfortable truth.

And I never said or even wanted to imply that. My words were "solely created for".

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

And I never said or even wanted to imply that. My words were "solely created for".

And why would they? there was no need to create any unit solely for that purpouse when the entire German military was at the disposal of the ruling Nazis.

Just wondering but by your statement are you claiming Bomber command was created 'solely' for murdering civillians?