Merged Winston Churchill a war criminal?

[Hubert Cumberdale]

On the other hand the bombing of factories didn't exactly hinder the production, actually the war-production in Germany increased steadily until late 1944 and it was material shortage that in the end halted production, NOT bombing.

Well this is the problem with analysing the results of an operation. We cant do it in a scientifically controlled manner without travelling back in time and having a re-run sans area bombing.

To address the point - Its important to remember that the RAF's bombing effort didnt really take off (literally as well as figuratively) until the Cologne raid in May 1942. Up until then, most raids had been a hundred or so twin-engined medium bombers Wellingtons dropping their bombs in random fields. May have irked some Belgian turnip farmers but hardly did much damage to the German economy.

It was only really in 1943 that regular large scale raids with heavies (Lancasters and Halifaxes) became possible. This is directly relevant to the fact that "war-production in Germany increased steadily until late 1944" If it had been possible to stage such raids as early as 1940, who knows what would have happened to German industrial production for the remainder of the war.

Also, its often stated that "German city X was bombed in May and by July, 80% of production had been restored" as a way of poo-pooing the effect of a raid. However what would have happened if there had been no raid? The production rate by July would have been maybe 110%? So when saying "war-production in Germany increased steadily until late 1944" we also need to ask how much more production would have increased by if no raids had taken place.

Against all of this needs to be weighed the cost. I read somwhere that Bomber Command constituted 5% of British personell but 25% of casualties. Aircrew, particularly pilots and navigators were Britain's best and brightest. Their loss cost the war effort dear. Also, a 4-engined heavy was an expensive piece of kit. It had four Merlins for a start. How many tanks, how many corvettes could you build for the price of one night's bomber losses?

Perhaps these resources would have been better spent eslewhere. I guess we'll never know.

Thanks for your time.

 

[Euromutt]

If the OP's quesion specifically relates to the bombing of Dresden, then no, it was not a war crime on the western Allies' part. The Sovs had actually demanded the western Allies carry out the bombing on the basis that Sov intelligence thought that there would be a large-scale German troop movements by rail through the city that night. This proved to be incorrect--the trains coming through Dresden on the night in question were transporting German refugees fleeing the Soviet army--but that fault is the GRU's, not the RAF's and USAAF's. The Sovs heavily downplayed their involvement in the Dresden bombing because Dresden was going to be in their zone of occupation, so it served their interests to pretend the fault was entirely the British and Americans'.

There were other reasons Dresden got hit, and hit as hard as it was, though these are somewhat ancillary. One is that Dresden was one of the few large German cities that the Allies hadn't bombed yet. Admittedly, that's not a very good reason in and of itself, but it also has to do with the fact that by February 1945, it was obvious to all parties involved not suffering from massive delusional psychoses (like Hitler) that Germany was going to lose, and everybody on the Allied side was getting extremely frustrated that the Germans were continuing to fight (and inflict casualties on the Allies) for what everybody already knew was a lost cause. The Allies didn't have a lot of sympathy for, or empathy with the German people at the time, and really, there was no good reason for them to have done so.

Another reason why the Dresden bombing is something of a manufactroversy is that the death toll has been massively inflated for a very long time. The figure of 100,000 dead has been commonplace, even 250,000, rising to even 500,000 in infrequent cases. These figures have, however, mostly been based on speculation and/or Nazi and communist fabrication, and actual research now indicates that the death was more likely around 18,000, and certainly no higher than 25,000. In this regard, Dresden was unremarkable.

 

[moon1969]

Yes the so called American WW2 heroes are all war criminals
War crimes of Winston Churchill:
Bombing of Dresden
Operation Keelhaul

War crimes of FDR
Bombing of Dresden
Operation Keelhaul
Chenogne massacre
Dachau massacre
Biscari massacre

War crimes of Harry Truman
Hiroshima and Nagasaki

How does it feel when the so called heroes of WW2 are nothing but war criminals? Dwight D. Eisenhower started the Vietnam War.

 

[Thunder]

Moon- are you a fascist? nazi sympathizer?

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

manufactroversy

I like that word.
Can I take a copy home with me?

 

[qwints]

The only "war crime" you list that should seriously be considered is Truman's authorization of the A-bombs, but there certainly is a case to be made for the necessity of those bombings.

Listing the "Dachaue massacre" as a war crime of FDR is ridiculous. It's easy to believe that some Americans got carried away when they saw the condition of the prisoners and executed guards who surrendered, but no one above the commanding officer at the site was responsible for that.

World War II was a dirty, nasty, hellish time. I'm glad I never had to make the decisions the leaders and soldiers there had to make. Moon, we've got no problem with taking a critical look at history, but unfounded, unsourced accusations don't make for meaningful debate.

 

[Ove]

The only "war crime" you list that should seriously be considered is Truman's authorization of the A-bombs, but there certainly is a case to be made for the necessity of those bombings.

Listing the "Dachaue massacre" as a war crime of FDR is ridiculous. It's easy to believe that some Americans got carried away when they saw the condition of the prisoners and executed guards who surrendered, but no one above the commanding officer at the site was responsible for that.

World War II was a dirty, nasty, hellish time. I'm glad I never had to make the decisions the leaders and soldiers there had to make. Moon, we've got no problem with taking a critical look at history, but unfounded, unsourced accusations don't make for meaningful debate.

Sorry but i don't think Moon is interested in a meaningful debate he is clearly a man with a mission, -unfortunately it is a rotten mission.

 

[Alex Libman]

You have to pick your battles:

First you convince the remaining holdouts that Hitler, Stalin, and Hirohito (and company) were war criminals.

Then you get started on FDR - this is a big one.

And then the riff raff (and their colonies too).

 

[Corsair 115]

I do think though that there is a tendency to overlook the cost to the Nazis of area bombing in terms of the resources diverted to civil defence that could otherwise have been directed at the Eastern Front, or North Africa, or Normandy etc.... We are talking about enormous manpower commitments to fight fires and man anti-aircraft defences, huge numbers of 88mm guns that would of served Germany better shooting up T32s rather than pumping shells into her own skies and shift in production from bombers (offensive machines) to fighters (defensive machines). The scientific and technological capital the Germans expended on defending home skies was also massive.

Some numbers can be put to that. Quoting from The Crucible of War 1939-1945 - The Official History of the Royal Canadian Air Force - Volume III by Brereton Greenhous, Stephen J. Harris, William C. Johnston, and William G.P. Rawling:

Of much greater significance... was the extent to which the bomber offensive against Germany constituted a 'Second Front' long before the Allied invasion of Northwest Europe, and even when only Bomber Command was heavily involved in it. In terms of manpower alone, the Germans used between 500,000 to 800,000 workers to repair bomb damage and organize the dispersal of vital industries, labourers who could otherwise have been involved in the direct production of war material, while the Flak arm required some 900,000 men in 1943 and was still 656,000 strong in April 1945 — many of whom might otherwise have played a significant part in the ground war.

The enemy was also forced to allocate considerable equipment to air defence. In March 1942, as the German army was fighting critical battles in Russia and Bomber Command had not yet launched its first 'thousand' raid or its initial battle of the Ruhr, there were already 3,970 heavy Flak guns deployed around German cities which could have been made into mobile artillery or bolstered anti-tank defences in the east. By September 1944 that number had grown to 10,225. Indeed, according to Albert Speer, of the 19,713 88-millimetre and 128-millimetre dual-purpose Flak/anti-tank artillery pieces produced between 1942 and 1944, only 3,172 could be allocated to the army for use in the anti-armour role because of the pressure from air attack. Similarly, the threat posed by Bomber Command's night raids meant that the German night fighter force accounted for a consistently increasing percentage of Luftwaffe front-line strength — more than 20 per cent of the total by December 1944. Several hundred of those on strength in late 1943 and 1944 were machines which could have been used to great advantage in other roles on other fronts.

On the other hand the bombing of factories didn't exactly hinder the production, actually the war-production in Germany increased steadily until late 1944...

Well, there are several reasons for that. One of them is that, for quite a long while, the German economy had not been fully converted to a total war footing, and thus there was a lot of slack which was removed. Another was the response to the bombing itself, by dispersing factories and by moving some production underground or to other hard-to-hit locations.

There were other reasons Dresden got hit, and hit as hard as it was, though these are somewhat ancillary.

Again, it should be noted that the only reason why the raid on Dresden was unusual was because of the creation of a firestorm. Remove that, and the raid becomes much less destructive, both in terms of property and human casualties. Without the firestorm, the results at Dresden would have been no different than the hundreds of raids conducted on other German cities, and thus there would be nothing special about it. The attack itself was conducted in the same way as many prior raids by Bomber Command, carrying the same typical mix of incendiary and high explosive bombs. No special efforts or techniques were undertaken in the mission.

Bomber Command could not create firestorms at will. They were instead the product of unpredictable and rare circumstances (there were perhaps eleven firestorms created during all of WWII).

Another reason why the Dresden bombing is something of a manufactroversy is that the death toll has been massively inflated for a very long time... actual research now indicates that the death was more likely around 18,000, and certainly no higher than 25,000. In this regard, Dresden was unremarkable.

Well, in terms of casualty totals from a raid, the number is certainly high compared to non-firestorm raids. But when compared to other firestorm-producing raids, the numbers are about typical.

Yes the so called American WW2 heroes are all war criminals
War crimes of Winston Churchill:
Bombing of Dresden

War crimes of FDR
Bombing of Dresden

You have still failed to explain why Dresden is a war crime but Hamburg and Kassel are not. Or, indeed, why any other raid on any other German city was not a war crime. Why is Dresden a special case?

 

[gnome]

He did? Six Million dead Jews may have a different opinion.

No doubt he did not consider them deserving of the same respect as enemy soldiers, in his hatred.

I consider the genocide to be an offense greater than war crimes--but it is interesting to ask whether he engaged in war crimes as well...

 

[OlbarStein]

The bombing of Dresden wasn't really different from other bombings. The question remains if these large bombing raids late in the war were still necessary especially when historic city centers and no industrial areas were targeted. Another example is the destruction of Würzburg on 16. March 45.

On the other hand the destruction of Dresden saved the lives of some of the remaining jews there. There were to be deported and supposedly killed the next days. Some of them could flee and hide during the chaos. One of them was Viktor Klemperer who wrote a very interesting diary about the "normal" jewish life in nazi germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Klemperer

 

[gumboot]

No doubt he did not consider them deserving of the same respect as enemy soldiers, in his hatred.

I consider the genocide to be an offense greater than war crimes--but it is interesting to ask whether he engaged in war crimes as well...

I think one of the most fascinating, and frightening, things about Germany and WW2 was that they weren't a mindless bunch of psychotic murdering monsters. The same soldiers that so happily slaughtered Jewish civilians and abused Soviet POWs were the ones that displayed acts of great respect and comradeship to other soldiers and civilians caught up in the war. There's a lesson in that.

 

[OlbarStein]

I think one of the most fascinating, and frightening, things about Germany and WW2 was that they weren't a mindless bunch of psychotic murdering monsters. The same soldiers that so happily slaughtered Jewish civilians and abused Soviet POWs were the ones that displayed acts of great respect and comradeship to other soldiers and civilians caught up in the war. There's a lesson in that.

This happens on every side in every conflict. Nobody really cares about the enemy. The Germans didn't care about anybody else and nobody else was caring about the Germans. To stop a factory you could either destroy the factory or the people working there. The bombing raids tried to reach both goals.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Corsair - assuming those figures are correct - they are simply astounding!

while the Flak arm required some 900,000 men in 1943 and was still 656,000 strong in April 1945

And

there were already 3,970 heavy Flak guns deployed around German cities which could have been made into mobile artillery or bolstered anti-tank defences in the east. By September 1944 that number had grown to 10,225. Indeed, according to Albert Speer, of the 19,713 88-millimetre and 128-millimetre dual-purpose Flak/anti-tank artillery pieces produced between 1942 and 1944, only 3,172 could be allocated to the army for use in the anti-armour role

That really is opinion changing data. Imagine another half a million troops and/or 16,000 anti tank guns!

 

[Old Bob]

2WW was initiated by the British in 1926 and it took 13 years to get going. Churchill wanted war and yes even though he is in our family tree(outer limb) he was a war crim. The victors always make it sound good for themselves. He used to stand in his back garden yelling and shaking his fist at the sky "Why won't they come" If Germany was so bad why did Hilter hold his Army back letting the british troops escape at Dunkirk.?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

2WW was initiated by the British in 1926 and it took 13 years to get going. Churchill wanted war and yes even though he is in our family tree(outer limb) he was a war crim. The victors always make it sound good for themselves. He used to stand in his back garden yelling and shaking his fist at the sky "Why won't they come" If Germany was so bad why did Hilter hold his Army back letting the british troops escape at Dunkirk.?

Well that is certainly very convincing. Any iota of that thing called evidence?

 

[Old Bob]

Well that is certainly very convincing. Any iota of that thing called evidence?

Gord this is me I don't do evidence (according to the list) just facts. The 1926 declaration (a copy) signed by King George V. and the US President. I am sure it was dikum. No doubt it could be sourced out of records. And the stories of how unstable Churchill was comes down the family even though he is on the edge of out family tree. The Gothenburgs (changed to the House of Windsor) are the crims also, and still are.

 

[fromdownunder]

Gord this is me I don't do evidence (according to the list) just facts. The 1926 declaration (a copy) signed by King George V. and the US President. I am sure it was dikum. No doubt it could be sourced out of records. And the stories of how unstable Churchill was comes down the family even though he is on the edge of out family tree. The Gothenburgs (changed to the House of Windsor) are the crims also, and still are.

Since Bob will not be happy until somebody actually comments (and I suspect that this was the main purpose of his posts on this thread anyway, outside of the basic fact that he is an attention whore) , I suppose I might as well, and then maybe he will shut up about the subject:

"WOW! Old Bob - You have Winston Churchill in your family tree" We are all incredibly impressed by this and from now on we will treat you with the respect you deserve"

There - your 15 seconds of fame. Happy now Bob?

Norm

Norm

 

[Agatha]

To what declaration do you refer? The 1926 Balfour declaration, or something else?

Gothenburg is in Sweden not Germany. I assume you mean Saxe-Coburg Gotha.

 

[soylent]

There's a reason most of the war crimes convictions were for either the holocaust or the actual act of starting the war - it was recognised that the scale of destruction exhibited in World War Two was a unique characteristic of the nature of the war.

(a curious factoid: some japanese were convicted as war criminals for their use of water boarding during WWII.)