Dresden raid – 70 years on

Unedifying is a very good word.

This thread has added nothing worthwhile for a couple of pages. Its usefulness is over.

It is closed

Moggy
Moderator

I fully understand Charlie. As I said, it’s a shame the mindless elements are being allowed to run rampant on a serious subject. I still require an apology from Edgar for that outrageous slur and John Green’s playground antics should also be constrained. Moderators, get on the case.

John Green, if this is your idea of “comprehensive”, I can see why you think Farage, the UKIPPERs and all the other Little Englanders have any sort of point whatsoever.

When (if?) you post an question that makes any sort of sense, then I may consider answering.

Did you say unedifying, Beermat? Very apt. I think I’ll join you.

I can’t leave because I’m getting rather too much enjoyment from seeing you and your nonsensical ideas being comprehensively demolished by those that have forgotten more than you ever knew.

I remind you that you have failed to answer the question in my last paragraph in #176.

That’s about your level. Nice.

Re 242

One down, one to go.

Really, John Green. And how else would you define the “northernmost counties of England”, other than meaning the counties that are furthest North in England?

I suggest that rather than drawing further attention to your rather sloppy thinking by further pointlessly snide posts, you restrict yourself to Farage hero worship on GD where you can safely be ignored.

Re 225

His knowledge of geography as with much else, appears to be lacking.

We didn’t get it wrong .

Edgar,

Most of your points are so specious as to be not worth even considering, however you make the disgusting allegation that I lay the ‘”blame” for the (falsified) figures of the dead against the men of Bomber Command’.

I have never made such a statement. I require you to withdraw it immediately and apologise.

For the sake of clarity, I made the following statement on page one of this thread:

I would never condemn the men of Bomber Command, or consider that the bombing of Germany was ever the fault of anyone but Hitler and his cronies, but in this case we got it wrong and the people that ordered the attack knew it all along.

Thank you, Beermat. It’s nice to know that there are people here capable of intelligent, rationale debate and it’s a shame that the more mindless elements seem to take over.

“Caught out“, Edgar? Get off your high horse and try being a bit less pompous for once.

And so, when all else fails, you go to the usual refuge of the personal insult; you’ve used the usual tactic of those with an interest in forwarding their own agenda, rather than seeking out the whole truth, and, when challenged, all we get is bluster and name-calling.

It’s regrettable that you and the other Daily Mail types

Wrong again, I don’t read “news”papers, nor do I vote Tory.

have to keep attempting to personalise this debate rather than just refuting points in a reasonable manner, such as the way others like Creaking Door manage to do. See Beermat’s post #187 for some excellent advice which I’d recommend you read and inwardly digest.

If you check, you started it.

Some of us do indeed prefer to know the whole story but I generally find that referring to multiple sources rather than zealously taking one to be the holy grail is the best way of doing this.

But you haven’t referred to “multiple sources,” in fact, when asked for details so that others of us can read them if we wish, you remain utterly silent. Of course, some of us do research to find answers, not “facts” to fit our own agenda, while ignoring what we don’t like.

Regarding the shelters, I am not sure what your point is or why you think the provision of special shelters for the upper echelon is either a) surprising or b) particularly pertinent in regard to the rights or wrongs of the attack

My point is that, once again, the Nazi hierarchy put their own safety before that of the populace, so trying to lay the “blame” for the (falsified) figures of the dead against the men of Bomber Command is specious and deliberately provocative. There are no “rights or wrongs” about the attack, except for those who want there to be; Dresden was seen as a wartime target, with the information available at the time, and it was attacked (just like dozens of other sites on both sides of the North Sea.)
Destruction of old (very old) buildings is sad, but just as many fall victim to the bulldozer, and I suggest you walk into some of Hull’s “ancient” buildings, where you’ll find they’re just a façade, with a brand-new building constructed on a bomb-site and added onto the front; there’s also a memorial garden, with the remnants of totally-destroyed buildings arranged round it, like Henry Moore sculptures.
Cities and towns, everywhere, suffered during the war, and the inhabitants have spent the intervening years rebuilding, and getting on with their lives; continually singling out Dresden, while ignoring Amsterdam, Warsaw, Hamburg, Berlin, London, Coventry and all the other places, is muck-raking of the worst “Torygraph”/Daily Mail type.

Somewhat unedifying – Webpilot was presenting some much-needed actual data, to show that the situation was not as black-and-white as some would like to claim to support their world view. In fact it was done refute my unfounded assumption about the thoughts of ‘the man on the Clapham omnibus’, and very effective it was too in reminding one to assume nothing.

However, the response to these actual facts seems to be to nit-pick about terminology in an attempt to undermine the person presenting them (when it is not even that person’s terminology), and then going off on some irrelevant tangent about something that person didn’t mention! It is the pedant’s equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes, and going ‘la la la, can’t hear you’ when presented facts don’t agree with your prejudices. I am not going to add to this thread any more, it is, in the classic words of Graham Chapman, “too silly”.

Of course the 2 atom bombs made absolutely no difference to the outcome of the war against Japan ! ; )

I see the wink, but I’m still not sure what you’re trying to convey? Imperial Japan was ready to give up before the bombs, and the major concern was really only the unconditional terms and what this would mean for Japan in the short and longer term. A little more diplomacy could have effected a swifter end, in particular with regard to the future of the Chrysanthemum Throne. In the end, surrender wasn’t completely ‘Unconditional’, was it?

Japan may well have been finished in revisionist western eyes….

What you call “revisionism” (thanks…) may well be necessary if a great part of the story has not yet been told. Sometimes it takes decades – centuries, even – for the truth to emerge and for us to understand it. When so much of this story was actually to do with the beginning of the Cold War and a greater power struggle that was yet to play out (one that is indeed still rumbling on…) I think we would be well advised to take a bit of a step back to look at the bigger picture.

An in-depth look at what was actually going on behind the scenes in Japan – from the Japanese point(s) of view – wouldn’t hurt, either. But for that you’ll need to be able to read Japanese…

“Caught out“, Edgar? Get off your high horse and try being a bit less pompous for once. Caught out doing what, exactly? ROFL. You’ve tried to make a song and dance about details of my point on the polling which was mostly you not understanding that which was plainly articulated. Having been unable to argue the point, you then have to revert to more silly stuff about “wriggling” – this sort of post just highlights the paucity of your own argument.

It’s regrettable that you and the other Daily Mail types have to keep attempting to personalise this debate rather than just refuting points in a reasonable manner, such as the way others like Creaking Door manage to do. See Beermat’s post #187 for some excellent advice which I’d recommend you read and inwardly digest.

Some of us do indeed prefer to know the whole story but I generally find that referring to multiple sources rather than zealously taking one to be the holy grail is the best way of doing this.

Regarding the shelters, I am not sure what your point is or why you think the provision of special shelters for the upper echelon is either a) surprising or b) particularly pertinent in regard to the rights or wrongs of the attack

Japan was also starving; with the worst rice harvest for decades. Without the atomic bombs how long would Japan’s military leaders have held-out? Huge civilian casualties (Tokyo ~100,000) seemed to make little impact and nor, probably, would the starving of millions of ‘non-essential’ civilians; no, it needed to be demonstrated that city after city could be erased from existence without even killing a few US servicemen to satisfy the ‘honour’ of a pretence of fighting-back.

I maintain that dropping the bombs was the most humane way the war could possibly have ended.

Stop frothing Edgar!

Oh, please, spare us the hyperbole; you’ve been caught out, so stop wriggling.

I can’t help what other people write.

Doesn’t stop you quoting them, though, does it?
Of course, you don’t bother to refer to Taylor’s book (apart from airily dismissing it,) but some of us prefer to try to find out the whole story. I note, with no surprise whatsoever, that, when others asked about the lack of shelters, you omitted to mention that the upper echelon of the city had ensured their own safety, with the Gauleiter siphoning off resources to have his personal shelter built in his garden, while the general public largely had to fend for themselves.

I would hardly call the 2 Atom bombs a ‘Straw’ LOL 😀

Of course the 2 atom bombs made absolutely no difference to the outcome of the war against Japan ! ; )

Japan may well have been finished in revisionist western eyes but in 1945 things were a little different – which is why I have thus far stayed out of this thread – far too much illogic and viewing history through modern values !

Its almost the weekend – hopefully I will get out a little more ; )

Creaking Door,
I’m sure you do find it difficult to believe (as we’ve had 70 years of hearing something else…) but it’s a fact. You appear to have swallowed the big lie about Little Boy and Fat Man being the straws that broke Japan’s back whole.

You also – perhaps you didn’t realise the irony? – pointed out that Imperial Japan was already surrounded, cut-off from raw material and much of its imported food supply. Imperial Japan was finished, so why the imperative to invade the Japanese mainland at all, and why the need for Little Boy and Fat Man? It’s easier than ever now to see why, and with The Bear flexing its muscles again (even near Cornwall, today) its quite apposite too.

“The saving of millions of Japanese lives…” was and still is a theoretical scenario, just the same as the prevention of huge losses of US servicemen in a full-on invasion of the Japanese mainland was. Pulling back a little from the insistence on Unconditional Surrender could have saved just as many, with the same – ultimate – outcome.

But best save all this for August, perhaps?