RAF Bomber crews remembered. Better late than never.

[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.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

I rest my case.

And what? the actual targets were strategic, the allies were simply not targeting civillians, they dropped enough leaflets warning of impending raids......or would it have all been easier to digest if the allied bombings were done on the back of revolutionary new technology like ICBM's?

[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 arthursmedley

Come now Bongodriver. That's not how Stern has worded it and I don't quite think thats what he is saying either. .

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

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..

.

I think it was pretty accurate.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

And what? the actual targets were strategic, the allies were simply not targeting civillians, they dropped enough leaflets warning of impending raids......

But Bongo, the targets were the civilians. Specifically. Thats what the area campaign was all about. It all culminated in the Americans dropping the ultimate area weapon on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[Sternjaeger II]

No Bongo, you're bending my words.

My point is that the deliberate decision to attack civilian targets is as unjustifiable as the Luftwaffe bombing campaign of England, aimed at killing innocent civilians and spreading terror among the population.

Churchill was well aware of this and his arm was bent towards the final decision, but his attitude after the war was over really shows how they were well aware of the high price that both sides paid for an offensive that in fact served only to keep Stalin happy.

The dropping of leaflets in a country run by a regime is a very pale justification for what came after. Same applies for the American offensive in Japan.

[bongodriver]

OK at this point I'm failing to see why there is disagreement to what I said Stern says?

[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?

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

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?

'the aim of this offensive is the destruction of the German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilised life throughout Germany’

Sir Arthur Harris

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

'the aim of his offensive should be unambiguously described as ‘the destruction of the German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilised life throughout Germany’

Sir Arthur Harris

The campaign perhaps, but you empasised a point of the creation of a 'unit created solely' for the purpouse of killing civillians, so are you saying Bomber command was such a unit?

the way I see it Bomber command was more than just the area bombing campaign and by that token very much deserve a memorial.