Jump to content

Germany marks 70th anniversary of destruction of Dresden


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dresden was really unnecessary, especially at that stage of the war. But 70 years on, what really angers me is that neo-fascist movements here use this for their own purposes, conveniently leaving ou

I agree that a line was crossed at Dresden in terms of what is and isn't acceptable. It seems perverse to draw up rules like the Geneva convention to govern the conduct of individuals and governments

I agree: Churchill was, in many ways, a flawed personality. His views on India and Indians (to name one instance) were, respectfully, quite repugnant - then again, so were those of many colonial admin

Precisely. Especially when one considers that Saudi Arabia has been a prime source of funding for terrorism (and one of the countries within the IOC preventing a commemoration of the Munich 1972 attack at the Olympic Games). Oil or no oil, it's beyond me how Germany (to take my country) can be even remotely "allied" to the Saudi regime - and yet at the same time, we (rightly) condemn Bashar al-Assad for his atrocities.

So yeah, the morality at play (if you can even call it that) is highly utilitarian...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the biggest differences between Saudi Arabia and Syria/Lebanon/Iraq is that the majority of Saudi's agree with their government and its stances on many issues. Not the case in SLI. Syria and Lebanon especially were progressive for Muslims countries. When you need foreigners to fight your battles how much local support do you really need?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In many ways the Soviets and Stalin were no better then Hitler and the Germans, millions needlessly perished because of Soviet aggression and inaction and Stalin was just as hungry for other nations' land as Hitler was. Yet one was our ally, the other our enemy.

Except that the one didn't become our ally until 1941, when the other unexpectedly became his enemy after they'd happily trampled through Poland etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're saying Germans only have themselves to blame?

Thats too easy - of course the UK and the USA are responsible for the death of thousands of innocent people in Dresden - and to point at the responsibility of Germany for the death of thousands of innocent victims in Coventry doesn't make their responsibility for 'Dresden' any easier to bear...

Everybody has to bear his/her own responsibility - the raids of Dresden wouldn't have happened without Jan 30th 1933 and therefore the German shouldn't point on others, but RAF and USAF killed thousand of innocent people in this night/day attacks on Dresden is under their responsibility and they have to bear this responsibility...

Edited by Citius Altius Fortius
Link to post
Share on other sites

As the US civil war general, William Sherman (destroyer of Atlanta and pioneer of scorched earth tactics and 'total war') once said in a speech, "War is hell!"

Edited by Mainad
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats too easy - of course the UK and the USA are responsible for the death of thousands of innocent people in Dresden - and to point at the responsibility of Germany for the death of thousands of innocent victims in Coventry doesn't make their responsibility for 'Dresden' any easier to bear...

Everybody has to bear his/her own responsibility - the raids of Dresden wouldn't have happened without Jan 30th 1933 and therefore the German shouldn't point on others, but RAF and USAF killed thousand of innocent people in this night/day attacks on Dresden is under their responsibility and they have to bear this responsibility...

CAF brings it back to the topic at hand...This thread was about an unnecessary act of brutal warfare that was never properly answered for. And made more shocking...it was performed by the Western Allies, who by now, knew better...It's a stain that will never come out in the wash.

Edited by Alexjc
Link to post
Share on other sites

After 6 years of bitter warfare and stumbling across death camps along the way I really don't think there was too many tears shed for the victims of Dresden in the UK in 1945. War is a political and social enterprise and the results of WW2 have defined what we think of as right and wrong today. At the time there was maybe an element of revenge in the motives behind the Dresden attack and can we really judge those who took part in that too harshly now....I think not. I think the support that Germany got after the war in terms of financial help and security more than made up for the last days of the war. The allies created many of the democratic institutions and the constitutional bedrock that have contributed towards the hugely successful country Germany is today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After 6 years of bitter warfare and stumbling across death camps along the way I really don't think there was too many tears shed for the victims of Dresden in the UK in 1945. War is a political and social enterprise and the results of WW2 have defined what we think of as right and wrong today. At the time there was maybe an element of revenge in the motives behind the Dresden attack and can we really judge those who took part in that too harshly now....I think not. I think the support that Germany got after the war in terms of financial help and security more than made up for the last days of the war. The allies created many of the democratic institutions and the constitutional bedrock that have contributed towards the hugely successful country Germany is today.

This. I mean come to think of it, their defeat benefited Germany and Japan greatly. They're technologically advanced, so much more than the US which is the one who supplied the aid to help rebuild their countries. They also have lower crime rate and are far more progressive than the US in terms of civil rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This. I mean come to think of it, their defeat benefited Germany and Japan greatly. They're technologically advanced, so much more than the US which is the one who supplied the aid to help rebuild their countries. They also have lower crime rate and are far more progressive than the US in terms of civil rights.

This reminds me of a spoof comedy film I watched many years ago called " The Mouse that Roared". It was about a tiny European country that was facing bankruptcy and came up with the ingenious idea of declaring war on the United States and then promptly surrendering so it could look forward to all the financial aid the US usually provides for its defeated ememies! As I recaIl, it starred Peter Sellers as the country's foreign minister who came up with the idea! ;)

The_Mouse_That_Roared_British_Poster.jpg

Edited by Mainad
Link to post
Share on other sites

After 6 years of bitter warfare and stumbling across death camps along the way I really don't think there was too many tears shed for the victims of Dresden in the UK in 1945. War is a political and social enterprise and the results of WW2 have defined what we think of as right and wrong today. At the time there was maybe an element of revenge in the motives behind the Dresden attack and can we really judge those who took part in that too harshly now....I think not. I think the support that Germany got after the war in terms of financial help and security more than made up for the last days of the war. The allies created many of the democratic institutions and the constitutional bedrock that have contributed towards the hugely successful country Germany is today.

If the Soviets hadn't gone back on their word and written agreements on a number of issues and relinquished control of the East, the Americans would have let Germany rot. The Americans rebuilt Germany not as any form of goodwill but as a political, self-serving measure as a political and physical barrier to the Soviets. The same is true of Japan.

Edited by Faster
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Soviets hadn't gone back on their word and written agreements on a number of issues and relinquished control of the East, the Americans would have let Germany rot. The Americans rebuilt Germany not as any form of goodwill but as a political, self-serving measure as a political and physical barrier to the Soviets. The same is true of Japan.

This. In fact I believe that had the US gotten the East they would have let Germany rot and kept it as weak as possible while building up Eastern Europe to threaten the Soviets and discourage German nationalism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This. In fact I believe that had the US gotten the East they would have let Germany rot and kept it as weak as possible while building up Eastern Europe to threaten the Soviets and discourage German nationalism.

To be fair, the United Kingdom under Churchill did essentially want to dispense with the rule of law and just execute the Nazi war criminals without a trial - plus, Henry Morgenthau already had ideas about deindustralizing Germany. In other words, there was a school of thought in Western Allied circles that wanted to punish Germany - which had already proved counterproductive after World War I. Fortunately, calmer heads prevailed and we saw the Nuremberg trials, Germany's reemergence as an industrial power (arguably contributing substantially to Europe's overall recovery after the war) and the foundation of a new republic built on the values of democracy, freedom and human rights.

I believe that it's a bit of a slippery slope to argue that the United States would have completely abandoned Germany in the event the Soviets had actually kept their promises in regard to free elections. Yes, I'm sure the military administration of Germany by the Four Powers would have been much harsher on the German public, reconstruction would have been slower and such seminal events like the Berlin Blockade (which brought the Allied forces and Germans closer together) may not have happened. Re-education and de-Nazification might have been much more thorough - on both the civilian and military levels.

Then again, none of this is to say that Kim il-Sung would not have gotten Stalin's permission to invade South Korea. The Korean War was the catalyst that led to the establishment of the new German armed forces - and I suspect that this would have had the effect of a cautious rapprochement between Germans and Allies. In any event, the post-war military administration of Germany would have become costly for the Allies to maintain at top levels - so to maintain a good relationship with Germany and mould it in the West's image would still have been fairly smart politics (and tactics).

Either way, compared to the military nightmare and administrative nightmare that is today's Iraq, (West) Germany got off quite decently. And no, I ain't complaining.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there had been no common enemy (Soviet Union) after the war, then I dare say post Nazi Germany would have been left in the hellish mire it created for itself.... lets not forget it could have surrendered unconditionally at any point leading up to Dresden. The UK and USA had no moral obligation to Germany whatsoever and so to suggest that the allies should feel shame for Dresden now is just ridiculous. It was a human tragedy that I look back on now with regret but not shame.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If there had been no common enemy (Soviet Union) after the war, then I dare say post Nazi Germany would have been left in the hellish mire it created for itself.... lets not forget it could have surrendered unconditionally at any point leading up to Dresden. The UK and USA had no moral obligation to Germany whatsoever and so to suggest that the allies should feel shame for Dresden now is just ridiculous. It was a human tragedy that I look back on now with regret but not shame.

I agree. Of course I feel horrible about living in a country that did that.

However I beg you all to ask yourself how 'shameful' of an event Dresden was. The London blitz, Hitlers destruction of Europe, and the murder of 11 million innocent people by German hands makes Dresden look like kids playing in a sandbox.

The counter to Dresden or Hiroshima/Nagasaki would have been far more deadly towards both sides and would have resulted in even more destruction. Berlin and Tokyo would have been total wastelands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may just be my personal affection for Germany informing this opinion. But I cannot fathom a scenario where Germans, Hindenberg, the Junkers or any other power would have ever consented to Hitler knowing what was to come. Germany was the first country to be invaded by the Nazis, and Hitler and the diehard true-believer Nazis did horrendous things to their own.

Also stop comparing the Blitz to what the Allies did to Germany. 1.1 million German civilians died during the War, less then 70'000 Brits died. Estonia suffered almost as many civilian deaths. No British city burned so intensely that it created its own weather. The Blitz is among Nazi Germany's least crimes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Of course I feel horrible about living in a country that did that.

However I beg you all to ask yourself how 'shameful' of an event Dresden was. The London blitz, Hitlers destruction of Europe, and the murder of 11 million innocent people by German hands makes Dresden look like kids playing in a sandbox.

The counter to Dresden or Hiroshima/Nagasaki would have been far more deadly towards both sides and would have resulted in even more destruction. Berlin and Tokyo would have been total wastelands.

No need to apologize...As CAF has written, it was all Germany's doing...and and of course no one truly wins in war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to apologize...As CAF has written, it was all Germany's doing...and and of course no one truly wins in war.

Well except for the US...

Every single world war or war that we 'win' results in the US gaining something positive from it. Our revolution and War of 1812 resulted in the US existing, the Spanish American war saw the US become the dominant force in North America and gain the Mexican Cession, The Imperial wars resulted in the US gaining Caribbean control, WWI saw the US become a global power and its economy boom, WWII saw the US become the dominant force in the world next to the USSR and its economy boom, and the Cold War saw the US become the sole global power.

The US makes off like a bandit when they win wars with other countries.

This may just be my personal affection for Germany informing this opinion. But I cannot fathom a scenario where Germans, Hindenberg, the Junkers or any other power would have ever consented to Hitler knowing what was to come. Germany was the first country to be invaded by the Nazis, and Hitler and the diehard true-believer Nazis did horrendous things to their own.

Also stop comparing the Blitz to what the Allies did to Germany. 1.1 million German civilians died during the War, less then 70'000 Brits died. Estonia suffered almost as many civilian deaths. No British city burned so intensely that it created its own weather. The Blitz is among Nazi Germany's least crimes.

I would agree, but I highly doubt any sane American would support complete annihilation of three entire cities. However, when you talk of these things the silent majority does not matter because the silent majority was silent and could not and did not stop the atrocities from being committed.

I'm sure most Germans did not support what the Nazi's did, but their opinions did not matter at the time because they did not have the power or capability to liberate their own country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well except for the US...

Every single world war or war that we 'win' results in the US gaining something positive from it. Our revolution and War of 1812 resulted in the US existing

The War of 1812 was American aggression and ended status quo ante bellum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada's done pretty damn well in their World Wars too BR2028. World War I is a major turning point in Canadian history because it solidified our autonomy from Britain, War of 1812 we fended off the Americans and World War II we played a critical role in ending the war at Normandy and up through the Netherlands. The U.S. and Canada also benefited from leaving those wars without the expenses and damage of the European countries.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada's done pretty damn well in their World Wars too BR2028. World War I is a major turning point in Canadian history because it solidified our autonomy from Britain, War of 1812 we fended off the Americans and World War II we played a critical role in ending the war at Normandy and up through the Netherlands. The U.S. and Canada also benefited from leaving those wars without the expenses and damage of the European countries.

Well if you put it that way...New Zealand and Australia also walked away from the two great conficts with pride, even though it was done with great sacrifice. National pride and a final break from mother Great Britain also propped up by an amazing post war economic boom that only cooled in the late 70s and relit in the mid 90s and still going....

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may just be my personal affection for Germany informing this opinion. But I cannot fathom a scenario where Germans, Hindenberg, the Junkers or any other power would have ever consented to Hitler knowing what was to come. Germany was the first country to be invaded by the Nazis, and Hitler and the diehard true-believer Nazis did horrendous things to their own.

Also stop comparing the Blitz to what the Allies did to Germany. 1.1 million German civilians died during the War, less then 70'000 Brits died. Estonia suffered almost as many civilian deaths. No British city burned so intensely that it created its own weather. The Blitz is among Nazi Germany's least crimes.

Yes, Faster it most certainly is your personal affection for Germany and personal dislike for Britain that makes you post stuff like this!

I have to laugh at how apologists for the Nazis like you try to make out that the Nazis were some kind of alien species from outer space that invaded innocent Germany and forced the innocent Germans to do their bidding! Newsflash Faster!: The Nazis WERE Germans, quite often just ordinary Germans and until the latter stages of the war, when incidents like the Dresden bombing occurred, the vast majority of them were firmly behind Hitler!

I'm sure you think that the bombing of British cities was just a bit of fun (well it 'only' happened in Britain didn't it, a country you famously dislike?) and I'll put your theory to my mother who came within a whisker of being killed when the house next door to her was destroyed one night during that fun,'what's all the fuss about this little ol' blitz'? Her aunt and a close neighbour and friend were not so lucky!

Millions of Jews and innocent people in Europe perished because of the war begun by Germany and her legitimate government (the Nazis didn't come to power via an armed coup but through a power-sharing agreement with other German parties) and I'm sure they will all feel that the balance was fully redressed when 35,000 Germans were killed in Dresden one night!

My advice: get your biased, pro-German and anti-British hat off your head Faster and learn to look at things more realistically and objectively!

Edited by Mainad
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...