Feldgrau.net

A city was a military target,in fact,in a total war, everything is a military target .And,terror attacks were legal in WWII. The meaning of terror attacks is to terrorize (=scare) the civilians,and,as the civilians were a legitimate target,......... If,after the attack on DresdenGermany had capitul...

phylo_roadking wrote:

Not surprising that there were protests after the raid. Even Churchill started to have second thoughts about this type of raid.

Have you actually READ Churchill's letter? Both versions of it?

I have seen both and particularly the first one is revealing.

A city was a military target,in fact,in a total war, everything is a military target .And,terror attacks were legal in WWII. The meaning of terror attacks is to terrorize (=scare) the civilians,and,as the civilians were a legitimate target,......... If,after the attack on DresdenGermany had capitul...

Not surprising that there were protests after the raid. Even Churchill started to have second thoughts about this type of raid. Have you actually READ Churchill's letter? Both versions of it? I have read a text by Churchill. Not that it matters much as the protests were there and had everything to ...

Hans wrote:Didn't do the dead much good. Anyway that's in the past and we havn't learnt a thing. Now we bomb the hell out of anything that annoys us especially if it has oil and no one blinks an eye.

- Hans

That is also a load of nonsense as WE(the west)practice real precisionbombing.

Firebombing a city has nothing to do with attacking military targets. It has everything to do with terror. Not surprising that there were protests after the raid. Even Churchill started to have second thoughts about this type of raid. Only the US daylight attacks really hurt the german war effort. T...

This is not about terror attacks being forbidden or not. It is about Dresden being a mistake or not . it was because it was a terror attack by the way it was executed and terror attacks did never work and at that time of the war were even more useless than ever.

It made always sense to execute daylight precision attacks against industrial targets. The area attacks to destroy the moral of german civilians never worked. The pure terror attacks like that on Dresden were a waste of resources and overkill without much justification. The allies had a tendency to ...

Rather funny that somebody would try to convince me :D of the incorrectness of an existing opinion about the illegality of areabombing. I think I mentioned the existence of the opinion without agreeing with it. I even explained why I disagree with it. But the opinion exists and in the spirit of the ...

Making arrogant statements about the legality of indiscriminate bombing does not change the fact that the opinion concerning its illegality,even during ww2, exists. Not my opinion but it does exist. Contrary to the judges at Nurenberg I do not believe that the principles in the conventions of The Ha...

The attack was intended as a terror attack,not a precision one against targets of economical or military importance In WWII, events had proved that precision bombing at night was next to impossible. Shall we rehash ALL the night precision bombing up to late '41 vs. are bombing debate again, the But...

This is a subject that gets discussed at leat once a year on military history forums :wink: Any city is mostly residential - it's what those residents do for a living that the problem; in 1944, the German Army High Command's Weapons Office listed 127 medium-to-large factories and workshops that wer...

It was certainly a mistake,even more so at the end of the war.Area bombing to terrorise the enemy population had already proven a failure. Precision bombing of targets that affected the enemy war effort were the only ones that worked. There was certainly no enthusiasm among the military leadership f...

I've always felt that after Alamein, Rommel was finished as a competant commander, probably a case of battle-fatigue, and this "strategy" is more evidence of that. No defensive line, however strong, was going to stop the Allies forever. They just had too much stuff. this is as bad as depl...

A withdrawal like that would have had to have been a fighting withdrawal...so you STILL take losses, and end up by default giving away huge amounts of territory to your enemy with as little of a fight as you can get away with No. Not really. I think what Rommel wanted was for a complete withdrawal ...