Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hunter368 said:I see this one getting heated.
My historical sources (University of Milan among them) definitely reported Sept 6 as first bombing of London, no mention of earlier attacks.
Parmigiano said:No Hunter, we are cool guys and don't overheat for a discussion.
Beside, I have only one more day of fuel, because tomorrow is the last day that I am almost alone at office, starting Monday the normal routine will kick in and i'll have no more time for hobbys!
bomber said:I think the cold reality is that wars aren't fought to the Queensbury rules... gouging, punching the kidneys, biting the ears and rabbit punching are not banned.
bomber said:We all like to think that in a war (having not been in one) we'd remain civilised to the end... but is that realistic when what is used to sustain us through the dark times and spur us on for one last push is hate and revenge...
Germany having the World Cup in their ocuntry and doing such a fine job of it should be a lesson to us all.... don't forget, but let it go.....
Simon
the lancaster kicks *** said:yes i believe the He-111s bombed london by accident, but obviously the RAF didn't realise it was an accident, and the LW didn't know they'd bombed london, which is why they were outraged when the RAF carried out a raid on Berlin in responce, the LW, thinking this was unprovoked, then carried out further bombings of london...............
Not to start the thread (and the argument) again, but for anyone interested, I just finished this book and thought it was exelent, IMHO quite unbiased view and an exelent read.I was just reading a review of the book Dresden by Frederick Taylor. Has anyone read this book and if so what did you think?
According to the review of the book there is a certain mythology has grown around the destruction of Dresden.
I myself never realized or gave it much thought that it happened just 3 months before the German surrender. To some it was an act of vengeance, and then there are those who say it was a city that contained many installations of military value (Factories, rail junctions).
From what you know about the air war do you think the mission to destroy Dresden was justified? Or could it have been avoided. I can't seem to find a reason why they would (the allies) think that it would shorten the war by bombing a city like Dresden at that point in the war.
I hope this is not too controversial for just my second post but it happened. And if a books written about it then there must be some interest out there.
What's your opinion?
S! Clipper
So the pattern was - Luftwaffe bomb military targets, cause collateral damage in London - RAF then bomb military targets, cause collateral damage in Berlin. That remained the case until early September (although the Luftwaffe were doing much more bombing, and causing much more collateral damage), when the Luftwaffe began area bombing British cities in an attempt to break civilian morale.
As for Harris.... well here a man that for the good part of the war went to bed every night knowing that boys his potential sons age were dieing at 16,000 ft... every night he did this...
Lets not forget he was a man who although in the forces, I suspect would rather have been playng cricket on a Summer Sunday afternoon rather than sanctioning another raid.. A man who'd rather have been bouncing his grandson on his knee than potentialing sending young dads to their deaths... and after 53,000 deaths within bomber command it must get a bit wearing, He didn't ask for the war, he didn't start it, he just had to spend 6 years of his life maintaining the status quo
Have some compassion for the man.
regards
Simon