1. In your posts above you are on the verge of becoming downright insulting to people. Choose your words more wisely. You have received enough warnings from me in other threads. There are no more.
2. You are a revisionist here and possibly a sympathizer (I believe this more and more every day...).
Your points 1. and 2. seem to be at odd with each other. You ask me not to insult people, then you start to insult me in the next sentence..
3. Quit kidding yourself that the Luftwaffe attacked London, Coventry, Guernica, Warsaw adn Wielun and most other cities for pure military reasons.
I am not kidding myself, I have researched it, so I know
for certain. In London the targets attacked were the London docks. Of the many raids, only three were repraisal raids for (from the German POV, indiscriiminate due to their inaccuracy, though the targets were acceptable) British attacks on German cities.
The target in Coventry was the cities extensive aero industry, plain and simple, which was successfully destroyed. The city itself got its own pounding in the process. Exceptional, hardly.
Take a walk in Győr. There was a Messerschmitt factory there. After 15th AAF visited it, no Messerschmitt factory, and no main street either.
They were not military targets, they were bombed for the pure fact that they were "enemy" cities.Nothing else.
Hermann Göring's general order, issued on 30 June 1940:
The war against England is to be restricted to destructive attacks against industry and air force targets which have weak defensive forces. ... The most thorough study of the target concerned, that is vital points of the target, is a pre-requisite for success. It is also stressed that every effort should be made to avoid unnecessary loss of life amongst the civilian population.
Seems to be at odds with what you seem to believe.
British official POV from Collier, Basil. The Defence of the United Kingdom. HMSO, 1957:
Although the plan adopted by the Luftwaffe early September had mentioned attacks on the population of large cities, detailed records of the raids made during the autumn and the winter of 1940-41 does not suggest that indiscriminate bombing of the civilians was intended. The points of aim selected were largely factories and docks. Other objectives specifically allotted to bomber-crews included the City of London and the governmental quarter rounds Whitehall.
Also at odds. So, can you specifically menion LW attacks on Britain in 1940 that you believe to be terror raids?
There may have been military targets in the city, but that does not warrant the complete destruction of a city.
No city was completely destructed during the Battle of Britain. The industry and shipping, OTOH, was hit hard. Nor elsewhere - Frampol comes close, but it was a sizable village rather than a city, with wooden houses.
Quit trying to church up the Luftwaffe.
I am merely stating the well researched and provable historical facts. Does this bother you?
4. What was the military value of the millions of Jews, Gypsies, Slavs that were exterminated by the Nazis? Are you going to be apologetic to them?
Nope, genocide is genocide, whoever commits it: British in Sout Africa, the Americans on the Philippines, the Belgians in the Kongo, the Japanese in China, the Russians in Ukraine etc. or the Germans in, well, Ukraine again.
That is, however, not the topic of the current discussion. Do you want it to be? Count me out then. Even more boring and pointless discussions than this one.
5. Let me get this straight? It is okay for the Luftwaffe, or any German military branch to commit war crimes but you condemn the Allies for it?
So far this thread has shown opposite trend: white-washing Bomber Command. First it was relativizing it with the "USAAF did the same" arguement, and then the "Luftwaffe started it all" arguement.
The problem with both arguements is that they don't stand up to historical scrunity: the USAAF was certainly not very fond of terror bombing (over Europe. Over Japan it was very fond of it indeed) and Luftwaffe certainly didn't do it with the regularity or being the first or most happy advocate of it.
The Harrissian apology is always that "they sow the wind...". Trouble is, Arthur Harris himself was an active member of the terror bombing club during the 1920s. While Hitler was still a prisoner in some German castle, busy writing the Mein Kampf, Arthur Harris as a young RAF officer was already putting terror bombing into practice in Iraq against tribal rebels, saying that a few bombers destroying an Arab village will "convince" them soon enough, and that the "Arab only understands the heavy hand'. Nope, he didn't need Goering, Hitler or whoever to show him the way or give him an excuse.
I never see you attack the Nazi's for committing crimes or terror bombing.
There's no problem with attacking the Nazis for their crimes or the terror bombings they commited. They've commited enough anyway, so I always wonder why it is neccessary to try so hard to condemn them for crimes they have not commited....?
You see, its always seemed odd to me, that the same politcal system that carefully documented to genocide of millions of Jews etc., would took so much care to hide the alleged "terror bombing" nature of small bomber attacks with a few hundred civillian casulties at best.. which *MUST* be the cause that if we search the LW records for allaged terror raids, the orders written back in the 1940 and after which the attacks were executed, keep repeating airfield, factory, bridge, dock and so on, and so rarely to just hit the see whole city anywhere.
6. Do not skirt around this question. Show me with facts what were the military targets at these locations?
a. Guernica
Target was the infrastructure to aid Francoist advance, by bombing of the bridge accross the river and simultaniously the housing nearby the bridge so it would collapse on the road and block it. The city also had a Republican garrison and a small arms factory, but these weren't direct targets.
Of course why the case of Guernica was so much bloated out of proportion was that
a, Allied press skyrocketed casulties, writing some 3000 or more rather than the 2-300 actually identifiable, some of them soldiers
b, Picasso
c, The fact that it was a Basque town, and the Basque independence movements are currently using it for political aganda against the Spanish "supressors" (talk about political spin with the Italians and Germans bombing a bridge, but not one Spanish plane being there...)
b. Wieluń (I am really interested in this one Kurfurst. What were the military targets, come on enlighten me. Also don't give me the crap about a Polish Cav Brigade being in the City. You don't need to completely destroy a town by aerial bombardment for that reason...).
Polish cavarly brigade advancing to and around the city. Pretty well documented. They bombed these, which is what the Stuka pilots say who bombed, which is what the operational orders for Stukas that day say, too.
It was effective and they routed, Wielun felling the German Army on the first day. The town wasn't 'completely destructed' either - a few dozen Stukas that were there could hardly accomplish such with their small bombload anyway. The small downtown area and the houses around the city square got a couple bombs - this is the picture they are always showing, but kindly compare Wielun's
entire area to that - which is sad but hardly exceptional.
-continued-
