Bomber boys - bbc one

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by robtek

Far from diminishing the efforts of any allied soldier who died fighting nationalsocialism, i find it very disturbing, to see this part of the RAF, which most prominent actions were, especially in the hindsight, acts of terrorism, getting a memorial.

I understand the mixed feelings, but you know, in the end of the day one has to think of it for what it is, a celebration of those brave guys who were asked to go do a job which wasn't great and that was deadly serious. Should we differentiate because they were sent to fly a Lancaster instead of a Spitfire? No, and I don't think the intent is to celebrate the deaths they caused, but their bravery and courage, their will to fight for their country.

The price of Total War is that we're all involved, if anything I would like to see the Germans doing the same for their fallen and forgotten soldiers of both wars, all in all those poor ** were only obeying orders, it's not like they had much of a choice.

IF there was a memorial for Bomber Harris, on the other hand, I'd be quite annoyed..

[robtek]

The better idea, imo, would have been a RAF memorial.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by robtek

The better idea, imo, would have been a RAF memorial.

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

[whoarmongar]

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.

[Sternjaeger II]

guys, it's about celebrating the men.

[robtek]

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.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by robtek

There is no memorial for the Luftwaffe, though.

What ??????

Yes there is .... in Bavaria not far from Munich ...

http://www.ww2museums.com/article/15...-Luftwaffe.htm

[PeterPanPan]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

IF there was a memorial for Bomber Harris, on the other hand, I'd be quite annoyed..

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

PPP

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by PeterPanPan

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.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

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.