German irritation over British bomber memorial

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-840858.html

They want that memorial? Let them, I have no objections. But it is a good idea that the diplomatic discussion led to a small recognition of the victims of such attacks, too. Most people killed in the bombing of cities were neither military, nor Nazis, but civilians that happened to live their lives right in the line of fire. To call these raids criminal imo is misleadsing, since in that time and with that technology and that tactical understanding all combating sides tried and did what they thpught was militarily necessary to win final victory. Now, occupation of cities and then committing attrocities against the occupied population - that is criminal, Nanking for example. The bomber raids against cities were not. They were what was tried to win the war. Criminal you call them from that moment on when the commanders kinew that they were militarily ineffective, becasue then you accept the killing for zero effect gained. That's when fighting turns into senseless murder for no purpose.

So the only debate legitimate here is not whether bombing raids against cities in WWII, in that setting, were criminal per se or not - the only debate is about since when commanders should have known about the real or lacking effect that one originally hoped for. This can only be assessed from the perspective of that past tiemframe. Judging the thing from today's modern standards and information, makes no sense.

[HunterICX]

The memorial is about the men who didn't return flying these missions because they where ordered to, it is not to memorate the commanders that gave them these orders. So I fail to see why the Germans are irritated by this.

HunterICX

[danlisa]

Foremost, Bomber Command has never received the appropriate recognition for their actions and sacrifices in WWII. So I welcome the memorial.

Does Germany not have a similar memorial for airmen lost when they were on bombing runs over London, Coventry etc?? TBH, I'm not even sure this would be commemorated in Germany, given that they wish to expunge all Nazi history, however, not all airmen were given to those political views.

Sound like complaining for complainings sake.

I don't think that Bombing Raids should be classed as criminal during wartime activities in WWII. The inherent inaccuracy of the technology determined the result of mass 'civilian' casualties/fatalities. However, should the same happen today, given the accuracy of our weapons, then yes, it's criminal.

[BossMark]

Originally Posted by HunterICX

The memorial is about the men who didn't return flying these missions because they where ordered to, it is not to memorate the commanders that gave them these orders. So I fail to see why the Germans are irritated by this.

HunterICX

Originally Posted by danlisa

Foremost, Bomber Command has never received the appropriate recognition for their actions and sacrifices in WWII. So I welcome the memorial.

Does Germany not have a similar memorial for airmen lost when they were on bombing runs over London, Coventry etc?? TBH, I'm not even sure this would be commemorated in Germany, given that they wish to expunge all Nazi history, however, not all airmen were given to those political views.

Sound like complaining for complainings sake.

I don't think that Bombing Raids should be classed as criminal during wartime activities in WWII. The inherent inaccuracy of the technology determined the result of mass 'civilian' casualties/fatalities. However, should the same happen today, given the accuracy of our weapons, then yes, it's criminal.

QFT both of you

[Herr-Berbunch]

Criminal - no. Shocking - yes. Even Churchill said Dresden was going to far.

Whilst they were mostly civillians killed in those raids, they undoubtedly had friends and family in uniform, they worked towards the war effort whether they wanted to or not, and whether it was working in a munitions factory, knitting sweaters, or picking apples. Every bomb dropped was a step towards peace.

Memorial or not, we will remember them, on all sides.

[Oberon]

Ditto for what BossMark has said. It isn't about the leaders, or the commanders, it's about the airmen who braved flak and fighter on their mission, and indeed there should be recognition of the civilian and service personnel injured or killed in these raids, be they in London, Berlin, Tokyo or Leningrad.

Long overdue

[NeonSamurai]

See I would argue that many of these attacks were criminal as they purposely targeted non-combatants. The Blitz, Dresden, the carpet bombing of cities by the allies late in the war, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc. All the powers involved in WW2 were guilty of intentional terror bombing.

I see a huge difference between that and collateral damage.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

See I would argue that many of these attacks were criminal as they purposely targeted non-combatants. The Blitz, Dresden, the carpet bombing of cities by the allies late in the war, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc. All the powers involved in WW2 were guilty of intentional terror bombing.

Destroy the homes of those who work in the factories and make those on the front lines worry about those at home, destroy their morale, reduce their work-effort. I'm not saying it was right, but that was the reasoning given.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

See I would argue that many of these attacks were criminal as they purposely targeted non-combatants. The Blitz, Dresden, the carpet bombing of cities by the allies late in the war, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc. All the powers involved in WW2 were guilty of intentional terror bombing.

I see a huge difference between that and collateral damage.

I think the difference between criminal and non-criminal still is that in WWII it was thought that shattering the combat moral of the German population (or the Londoners) by putting their cities to ruins, was possible. That is what made it a military "tactic", although one that did not work: it did not break public moral, but brought people closer together in stubborn determination. But that we know onyl since afterwards, and today.

To imply present moral standards on situations back then and inside that war, imo does not match.

I agree though that the victims of such bombing raids againbst cities were no collateral damages, but the intended target of such attacks. But again: not a target for gaining personal satisfaction or revenge by for example committing mass rapes like the Soviets in berlin and the Japanese in Nanking, but a target due to miliutary assumnption on how that would help to break the combat will of the German and help to let the enemy collapse form within.

I am not in the historic knowledge since when, if ever, Allied commanders realised the tactic did not work. If at some point they realised that it was ineffective and id not work for the desired result, from then on continuing such attacks would have been a "crime", imo. By my thinking, it then no longer is an issue covered by the standards of war, but the moral standards of peacetime, since it would have been then a tactic that serves no military purpose anymore. (I argued in past threads that it makes no sense to imply peacetime standards onto acting in war, but that war has its own set of standards and needs, and that these are very different from those in peacetime. It already starts with that at war you do not get punished for doing what when doing it in peacetimes you would serve life in prison for: killing other humans).

BTW, the Nazis had started with targetting cities. During the conquest of Poland already, at the very beginning of WWII, Warsaw was subject to extremely intense artillery shelling and dive bombing attacks. This later repeated often during the war in Russia.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

They want that memorial? Let them, I have no objections. But it is a good idea that the diplomatic discussion led to a small recognition of the victims of such attacks, too. Most people killed in the bombing of cities were neither military, nor Nazis, but civilians that happened to live their lives right in the line of fire.

Yeah, cause Germany was an innocent victim and never did anything like that during world war 2.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Yeah, cause Germany was an innocent victim and never did anything like that during world war 2.

Dumpfbacke. Have you an idea how many elderly and mothers and children got killed in these attacks? Well, the physically combat-capable men were all away, so what was left were women, elderly people, children for the most. The real hard and mean Nazi scum, I mean, the battle-hardened troops that costed your army so dearly...

You get my point. Your sarcasm is unneeded, I think. Most Nazis inEurope were Germans. But not all Germans were Nazis. That may ruin your completely demonised image of how evil Germans are, but I cannot help it. If you want to accuse a majority of Germans of anything, than that many remained silent instead of engaging themselves in an underground resistence.

But before you complain about that, be certain that you would have the courage yourself to do that in case of living under a brutal dictatorship that kills and tortures and where police and justice do not deserve that name and where your family is at risk. It's easy to be a hero by mouth only, you know.

That's why I said in another thread some weeks ago that I do not say that I know what I would do in such extreme situations, only that I know what I hope I would have the courage to do if facing such extreme situations.

[Codz]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Yeah, cause Germany was an innocent victim and never did anything like that during world war 2.

He's trying to say that the civilians didn't deserve to be killed in those raids. To call all Germans Nazis is like calling all Americans Republicans or all Russians Communists.

[STEED]

I am so tired of this dribble, how many more years is this going to continual? What's done is done, stop complaining and move on. If Germany wants a memorial to their war dead I have no objections what so ever so please let us have ours.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Dumpfbacke. Have you an idea how many elderly and mothers and children got killed in these attacks? Well, the physically combat-capable men were all away, so what was left were women, elderly people, children for the most.

I stopped reading there, because of all the , i find the argument against a British war memorial hypocritical at best.

Originally Posted by STEED

I am so tired of this dribble, how many more years is this going to continual? What's done is done, stop complaining and move on. If Germany wants a memorial to their war dead I have no objections what so ever so please let us have ours.

Which is basically what i'm trying to say. So the British want to put up a war memorial to their dead in their own bloody country. Big freaking deal! What business is that to the Germans? IMO they should just be quiet about it.