Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


View Poll Results: Was the strategic bombing of German cities during World War II justified?
The bombing of cities is a normal strategy of warfare, irrespective of who started the war. 17 18.09%
It was totally justified, because Germany started the war. 4 4.26%
It was justified as a means of retaliation, since Germany also bombed cities. 12 12.77%
Although morally ambiguous today, the bombing should not be judged with today’s standards. 27 28.72%
It may have been legitimate in the beginning, but should have been stopped later on in the war. 9 9.57%
It was morally wrong from the beginning, no matter what crimes were committed by Germany. 23 24.47%
I am undecided. 2 2.13%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 20th, 2012, 12:12 PM   #511

Perix's Avatar
Golan&Imbarligator
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Romania
Posts: 7,944

i think it was more retaliation than hope for effectiveness. I've choosen "It may have been legitimate in the beginning, but should have been stopped later on in the war"
Perix is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 20th, 2012, 12:36 PM   #512

Rocksteadyeddie's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 300

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perix View Post
i think it was more retaliation than hope for effectiveness. I've choosen "It may have been legitimate in the beginning, but should have been stopped later on in the war"

Maybe but I still feel very uneasy about the true motivations.
I do realize that if I had been alive during the war I probably would have supported the bombing of Germany. Doesn't make it right though in retrospect imho. You may as well walk into a nursery and toss in a hand granade.
Rocksteadyeddie is offline  
Old February 20th, 2012, 02:50 PM   #513

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
Ok, it sounds a bit different now, but nevertheless the "I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our right*ful posi*tion among the nations" stands. So Churchill had changed his mind already in 1938. What was responsible for it and when did it happen then?
I know of no favourable references to Hitler by Churchill without a qualification of some sort. I think Linschoten is correct in that 'a Hitler' refers not to Hitler and his creed as such, but a 'strong man' leader.
redcoat is offline  
Old February 20th, 2012, 02:52 PM   #514

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perix View Post
i think it was more retaliation than hope for effectiveness. I've choosen "It may have been legitimate in the beginning, but should have been stopped later on in the war"
It doesn't work that way, if it was legal in 1941 it's still legal in 1945.
redcoat is offline  
Old February 20th, 2012, 02:59 PM   #515

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 13,421

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcoat View Post
I know of no favourable references to Hitler by Churchill without a qualification of some sort. I think Linschoten is correct in that 'a Hitler' refers not to Hitler and his creed as such, but a 'strong man' leader.
Ok, I accept that. But then his statement was at least unwise. As I said, you don't get a small "strong man".
beorna is online now  
Old February 20th, 2012, 03:56 PM   #516

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,709

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
Ok, I accept that. But then his statement was at least unwise. As I said, you don't get a small "strong man".
Not really, he was just making his position clear. In that he didn't oppose a strong Germany as such, but he did oppose a Germany which used threats and aggression to achieve it's aims within Europe.
redcoat is offline  
Old February 20th, 2012, 09:35 PM   #517

Perix's Avatar
Golan&Imbarligator
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Romania
Posts: 7,944

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocksteadyeddie View Post
I do realize that if I had been alive during the war I probably would have supported the bombing of Germany.
Of course! Maybe I suportedeither, if english. But I doubt I'd standed upon my feelings if would had images from bombed cities, like today
Perix is offline  
Old February 20th, 2012, 09:36 PM   #518

Perix's Avatar
Golan&Imbarligator
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Romania
Posts: 7,944

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcoat View Post
It doesn't work that way, if it was legal in 1941 it's still legal in 1945.
Yes, but is not about legal
Perix is offline  
Old February 21st, 2012, 08:10 AM   #519
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,749

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linschoten View Post
Support for eugenics, and even for sterilization of certain classes of people, notably the mentally deficient, was surprisingly common before the war, among people both of left and right wing views. An interesting article on Churchill's views on the matter here:
Churchill and Eugenics
According to that article, legislation was actually passed in Canada between the wars to permit involuntary sterilization of the mentally deficient.
It was mostly the Left who supported eugenics.

In fact, Guardian journalist Jonathan Freedland - a lefty - has written a novel called Pantheon which is set in 1940, about a topic which he calls "the left's dirty little secret."

The novel (which Freedland wrote under the pseudomym Sam Bourne) follows an Oxford academic deemed unfit to serve in the war against Germany and his desperate search to find his missing wife and child. The story turns, however, on what could be called the dirty little secret of the Anglo-American left – the attraction of some of the greatest minds of the 20th century, from Bertrand Russell to George Bernard Shaw and John Maynard Keynes, towards an idea that would now be deemed horribly close to Nazism. That idea is eugenics. In conversation with James Purnell, Jonathan discusses why so many luminaries, especially on the left, were drawn to the notion of breeding a better class of man – and what the legacy of that past might mean for today.
Brunel is offline  
Old February 22nd, 2012, 06:54 AM   #520
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 564
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linschoten View Post
It's absurd to blame the allies for the German occupation of Hungary! Hungary was allied to Germany, with Hungarians fighting on the Eastern front, and then engaged in nnegotiations with the allies (talk of pursiut of self-interest!); the fact that it was playing that double game was led to the occupation.
Did I blame the allies for anything? I think I've just written down some facts. Like it or not.
mofli87 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
bombing, cities, german, war


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greatest of their time - Cities/towns/capitals in world history Lord Keviv Ancient History 133 April 13th, 2014 10:06 PM
10 cities of the Lost World spellbanisher Ancient History 12 April 25th, 2011 04:18 PM
German Bombing White Dog War and Military History 40 December 5th, 2010 04:24 PM
Seaman remembers first German air raid of Second World War History Matters War and Military History 0 October 17th, 2009 08:13 AM
Good Book About World War 2 German U-Boats. Optiow History Book Reviews 0 September 28th, 2009 10:54 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.