Dresden Bombing. Holocaust?

Fine. Let's take a look at this and try to analyse it with our own brains. It's not like we don't have one and that we cannot make our own points, isn't it ?

You're telling me Taylor rely on one single source which is not cross validated by any other source. I don't find it so impressive.

On it's own, this observation is completely meaningless. Comparatively to Dresden does Taylor give data for other cities ? How many train per days passed through Frankfurt, Postdam, Aachen etc... ? 28 trains per days out of the blue is not saying us much about was going through Dresden in terms of military effort. What where those 28 trains per day carrying ? (Hitlers "paper" divisions ?)
You cite a source from 1999. Was the same info available to the allied decision makers and did this directly lead them to order the fire bombing ? (otherwise, why bother with the argument...).

Throwing data in the air without asking question or trying to make sense of it is loosy work.

How can you compare Rome, a city which the Germans where about to leave (and the allies to enter) to Dresden, a city in the heart of nazi Germany ?

What was the meaning of declaring a city open in such a geographical position, beyond any effective control ?

Neutral inspectors in the middle of total war Germany... Please let's get serious.

What do you think the English would have received for answer if they had declared London an "open city" in the middle of the Blitz. That Goring would have suddely stopped all bombing operations ? That he would have sent Hans Rudel to Downing street to ensure that Churchill was no longer taking his meals there ? In a fantasy world, perhaps but not at a time where the US and British aiforces were looking for things to flatten.

Hey, let's take a break. Whar are we discussing ? I believe it's wether Dresden is a war crime or not.

I'm sure the Spanish Republican could have avoided Guernica by simply surrendering to Franco but that's not the point. Unless you want to underline that a nation should always surrender when being subjected to terror raids.

Is this your justification for terror raids ?

"No Sir, you are the guy scoring cheap propaganda"

"No, I'm not"

"Yes you are"

Oh, man. You didn't care to adress a single point of mine and you keep insisting that I adress all of yours. Do you think it is fair ?

Almost all factories by that time where engaged in militarily related activities. So here is your blank check to firestorm every German city. Congratulations. The airforce reached the same conclusion in 44-45. By the way, how many factories where engaged in war work in Hamburg ? And in Ems, Weser, Spree ? Can you tell me that ? I want to have a comparative assessment so that I can evaluate the real importance of the 127 factories in the global picture.

I gave a souce listing the operational whereabouts of the raid. I see that you did not bother to comment on how this was a proportionate answer to the need to destroy 2 bridges, a railway and 127 factories.

Oh,.. about the 127 factories : How many of these factories where inside the perimeter of the firestormed city center, by the way ? What proportion was destroyed by the raid ?

If you're going to launch numbers at me like torpedoes I'm going to ask you to interpret them in a thoughtful, comprehensive way. Up to now you have been merely throwing them around. But the after-sales service is badly lacking .

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on May 28, 2005 03:51 pm

Hi Chandernagore,

I can only lead you to the sources. I cannot make you follow them up. Whether you think Neutzner is a good source or not doesn't really matter if you haven't read him. You objected to Taylor, so I found you his source. You now object because there is only one source. I would suggest that, if you are really interested in this subject you should at least try to read the sources offered before dismissing them. You never know, perhaps Neutzner offers multiple sources of his own.

Taylor wrote a book entitled "Dresden". Why do you expect him to have comprehensive information on other cities in it?

And why are you asking me these questions? Have you not read Taylor yourself? If not, why are you so dismissive of his work?

So, now that I have found a non-Taylor source that says 28 military trains were passing through, you want to know what was on them. Well, sorry, but I cannot look under the tarpaulins for you. Perhaps Neutzner will tell you. In any case, whether it was tanks, troops, shells, food, uniforms, etc. doesn't much matter, does it? If it was for the army then it is a viable military target. Indeed, if these trains were only full of your notional "paper divisions", they would still have been viable targets.

Given that there was a war on, it is unlikely in the extreme that the railways through Dresden, which was a major East-West and North-South rail hub, never carried military trains. That being so, the onus is on you to demonstrate that no military trains ever passed through Dresden. I don't have to provide evidence that they did. (However, in addition to Neutzner, on the Feldgrau site there was one veteran called Gerhard who stated quite clearly that he was on a train through Dresden. Also, if you read up on the move of the Slovak 2nd Construction Brigade from the Eastern Front to Italy in late 1943, you will find that it too passed through Dresden.)

Why would the same information have to be available to the Allied planners? They had multiple other sources of information from Enigma down. And even without such sources, why on earth would they ever presume that Germany was not making use of several of its main railway lines to the Eastern Front in the middle of a war?

I did not compare Rome and Dresden. If you read my post you will see that I actually said the Germans were definitely aware of the possibility of Open Cities becase they had declared Rome "Open".

Isn't it obvious from the theme of this thread what the purpose of declaring Dresden an Open City would have been? To stop its citizens getting bombed. Isn't that what you want? What you cannot accept is that such a mechanism already existed under international law, and that the Germans knew this perfectly well but consciously and deliberately failed to use it.

Why are you so surprised at the possibility of neutral inspectors in the middle of war torn Germany? I have already told you that the Red Cross already had inspectors in war torn Germany. Doesn't look so impossible now, does it?

And if such neutral inspectors weren't able to operate, whose fault would that have been? The German authorities, of course.

Britain never declared London an Open City and was legitimately bombed because the city continued to serve military purposes in much the same way as Dresden. No German was ever tried for bombing London, were they?

Nope. We are not discussing whether Dresden was a war crime or not. It clearly wasn't. What we are discussing is why on earth you pretend that it was when you have no evidence to present. I can show that in multiple ways Dresden was a legitimate military target. You can't even point to the article of war that made it a war crime. Why not? Simple. It wasn't one.

Nope. Again, if you actually read my post, I really suggested that Germany should have capitulated in about August 1944, when the Western Allied break-out from Normandy made it clear that Germany could not win the war or even hope for a draw. This would have avoided nearly half of all German fatalities, including Dresden. So, in answer to your misdirected question: No, this was not my justification for terror raids.

I'll just post this now and come back.........

........


I do actually answer your points. However, even if I didn't, how would that justify you not answering mine? If you had any real concern for or knowledge of the subject you would answer my points regardless.

I would love to be able to answer your question about the war industry in other cities, but I can't. That is just some research you will have to do for yourself. But it doesn't really matter whether Dresden's factories were producing tanks or boots, does it? Either is a legitimate military target. If you read your Taylor, you will find a whole chapter devoted to Dresden's war industry.

Why does the raid have to be "proportionate"? Nobody asks machine gunners why they don't take single aimed shots in order to be proportionate, do they? All war is overkill. If it wasn't, every army would only expend one bullet for each of its opponents. All war is ideally conducted with as massive a preponderance of resources over the enemy as can be achieved. This kills more enemy and so saves one's own lives.

I don't know what proportion of Dresden's 127 military factories was destroyed by the raid any more than you do. But even if none were, they would still have made Dresden a legitimate target. How many were destroyed is only a measure of the raid's success, not of its original justification.

As you acknowledge that "Almost all factories by that time were engaged in military related activities" you are effectively saying that every town in Germany contained legitimate industrial targets.

As almost every town in Germany also had railways running through it, these same towns also almost all contained legitimate communications targets.

The same is true of military targets. If you read Volume 16 of Tessin's "Verbande und Truppen der Deutschen Wehrmacht" you will find that it contains 820 pages listing the depots in the Reich of about 25 German military formations and units per page in numerical wehrkreis and alphabetical town order. (For your information, Dresden over 1939-45 is on pages 194-196 of Part I. It lists 65 separate units from corps size down to company that had their depots in Dresden during the war.) Every German city and town is in Tessin, and everyone of them contains military installations.

In short, almost every last German town contained legitimate industrial, communications and military targets. Dresden was no exception.

I am sorry if my use of numbers and sources is difficult for you to handle. However, I am not interested in airy, unsupported generalisations. I shall therefore continue to use facts. You may choose to do the opposite, but as this is called "fiction", I do not recommend it.

Yes, of course the bombing of Dresden was a brutal, barbarous act and 25,000 largely innocent German civilians definitely died in it and another 15,000 probably did. There are, indeed, deep moral questions to be asked about it. However, all war is brutal and barbarous and morally questionable.

However the bombing of Dresden was not criminal, beacuse it was just within the then laws of war. Furthermore, while it is linguistically correct that the death by burning of most of the victims can accurately be described as a holocaust, the bombing of Dresden was not the moral equivalent of the so-called "Holocaust" in which some 6 million Jews and a million others died.

Cheers,

Sid.

Well, Sid. I'm not going to make you change your mind nor do I want to. There isn't anything very new in these statements. I already had the same discussions over and over so excuse me for not willing to start it again each time someone in denial pops up. Perhaps someone else will chime in, I hope so for you. Me, I will pass on it . I think it was a war crime (and London too). You think it's ok. No problem. The stinking planet keeps rotating...

Hi Chandernagore,

Of course these arguments aren't new. What was a fact in 1945 remains a fact today.

What you "think" on the subject has no significance if you haven't got the evidence to back it up. I still want to know what your evidence is (1) that Dresden did not contain around 200 legitimate military, industrial and communications targets and (2) what international law was broken that made bombing it a war crime. You have presented almost no evidence at all beyond that some targets were not put out of action.

Furthermore, you dismiss the most recent and authoritative book on the subject without apparently having read it, presumably because it doesn't agree with your preconceived position.

Who said I think the bombing of Dresden is OK? Certainly not me. One thing we are all agreed on is that it was accompanied by a terrible waste of largely innocent human life. There is a perfectly good moral case to be made against area bombing Dresden, but at the time it was not illegal and it was not, therefore, a crime.

Cheers,

Sid.

P.S. Almost 200 factories in Dresden were damaged in the bombing, 136 of them seriously. Who says so? The SS Final Report. 41 of the destroyed factories were reportedly mentioned by name as important to military production. Even factories that were not hit had their production damaged due to the disruption or destruction of much of their work force or communications. Apparently only half the noth-south rail lines were functioning again by the end of the war.................

Hello, Sid ! Do you know Curioso ?

i am sorry to intervene, but haven't these arguments been already been used?
war of the clones part 2?

Part 2 : The return of the killing death.

Hi Indrid,

The facts are always worth repeating.

Besides, some people will not have seen them before and viewing them is not compulsory for those who have.

Cheers,

Sid.

Hi Chandernagore,

I would just like to apologise for the less than tolerant tone of some of my above posts to you.

I have had similar discussions on other sites before, and my tolerance is a little low on this subject through having repeated the same argument several times before.

My apologies.

Sid.

P.S. Curioso? Sounds like an Italian opera singer. Who or what is Curioso?

a member of the forum....look a few pages back on the discussion

Hi Indrid,

I have had a look back to the start of this thread, but I can't find any Curioso contributing to it.

Cheers,

Sid.

Hi Indrid,

I have found Curioso's earlier posts on other threads.

Thanks,

Sid.

sorry. i wanted to say previous discussions on the forum, not specifically this one.