Was firebombing Germany and Austria justified?

Question

As a peacenik is difficult for me to "justified" mass death and destruction. Is the kind of wars I do not wish it not even to my enemy. However, in the case for Nazi Germany I admit remorse. Yes, we bombed the hell the country in trying to defeat that crazy bastard of Hitler. And large numbers of Germans, and Austrians , civilians were killed. But they supported Hitler. And KNEW what the Nazis were doing to the Jews and others in the extermination camps like Auschwitz, Buchenwald and others. They should have known the consequences. What do you think?

Answer 1

Probably not justified, but then again those that try to humanize or moralize total war will most likely be the losers....that to me is the lesson of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki..

Answer 2

I don't think the firebombing was really justified. However for the time it was an extremely effective in wiping out lots of factories, transportation hubs etc. The allies had very few options available and this was considered effective.

You must take into account that the average German did not have access to the information about the concentration camps and the extermination. The gov't controlled the media and released certain information that told the masses that the Jews and others arrested were going to work camps. Many suspected that something else was happening and some did find out or found out some info but most never knew of the full extent until after the war.

The Germans knew what to expect if they lost the war as they had suffered a lot after WW1. The conditions in Germany before Hitler came to power were poor. No jobs, high inflation, restricted travel, occupation etc. Hitler changed a lot and created jobs etc, pushed forward things like synthetic oil production. Yes he was a monster and deserved to be removed from power, but when he came to power he gave the germans hope of a brighter future. When he got power he gave them what they wanted (not the war, remember he came to power 6 years prior to the war).

Answer 3

It is sheer supposition to assume that 'all' Germans and Austrians new about the secret death camps built in occupied terratories in 1942 or along remote sections of Germany. How many American citizens in 1877 were aware of the Indian massacres conducted by the U.S. Calvary?

The firebombings of non-military cities such as Dresden causing massive loss of civilian life has been much debated to its strategic value. Some suggest those non-strategic bombings were done out of sheer vindictiveness on part of the allies towards the German people.

Answer 4

The net result of mass terror bombing is that it did not contribute to ending the war by one atom. What defeated Germany was the destruction of the army in the field by tactical air strikes and the cutting off oil and other raw materials, and capturing German territory.
Bombings like Dresden and Tokyo added to the carnage of war but did not really effect the outcome. Even after Dresden was bombed to smithereens the Germans were still able to mass forces(what was left of them) against the Russians as Hitler was more interested in holding Berlin in the east and the Ruhr in the West.

Answer 5

No.

The negative effects far outweigh the positive effects.

Yes, industry and supplies were destroyed, but they could have been destroyed by conventional bombing. There was no need to wipe out substantial numbers of civilians.

If I recall correctly the first firebombing was of Hamburg and it was a "lets see if it works" operation. The largest firebombing campaign in Europe was Operation Thunderclap, of which the bombing of Dresden was a part, and it was a "lets see how it works on a large scale".

War planners eventually agreed that it was not an effective strategy.

edit- contrary to popular belief- Dresden was a legitimate military target. It was one of the few untouched manufacturing centers and was the primary supply and replacement hub for the Eastern Front.

Answer 6

Not just Hitler. Too simplistic. What was your solution? Go in and offer them a peace pipe? That would have made them overthrow him. Pure raw force, naked aggression and out and out violence has accomplished more then anything else in history. In reality more Russians were killed by Germans then any other group. Was that okay? The Germans bombed London almost into extinction. Was that okay? It is war. And all the good wishes in the world can never stop it, nor change it.

Answer 7

YES!
Killing people in the most effective and frightful way is how wars are won. A fire has potential to yield more damage beyond the direct damage from a blast. It was a damned effective use of the material at hand. Worked good in Japan too.

Answer 8

This kind of bombing and collateral damage, ie. civilian casualties happened before and after the firebombing of Germany&Austria, and we don't hear many debates on their validity or justification. There seems to be a pattern, and I don't see how this one should be different.
So I'd say yes, it was.

Answer 9

till there is is yet another miracle (undergo in thoughts Cordoba?), Germany will win this tournament. i do no longer think of it is going to be by utilising a extensive margin, yet despite if it genuinely would be sufficient to get rid of Austria (who performed nicely above expectancies) and to accede into the subsequent around. of path, Austria did conjure up the miracle of Cordoba (despite if it is now an prolonged time in the past), so do no longer be shocked approximately despite the suited consequence may be...