When talking about strategic bombing from the ally (spoiler!)

Hello, I feel like it’s verry important to mention the military significance of the city since it help to explain why did it got bomb ,it should be done like what you did in sabaton on the atomic bombing (I still think these were terrible but my problem with strategic bombing is the way that nazi apologist/wehraboo will use them wich prevent sane discussion on the subject[often as whataboutism I’ve remarked])

Can we knock it off with the Wheraboo nonsense? No one cares what a bunch of edgelords on Reddit think.


I tend to care because thanks to them a heck lot of myth are in pop history (such as the classic “hitler should have listen to his general” or “hitler have delayed the me 262” [I guess the engine problem and the fact that they changed the undercarriage during the test don’t count even though messerschmitt alredady designed a bomber variant before the presentation to hitler] or the classic “sherman ronson” )

There is a major difference between “I don’t agree with what erwinrommelfan2005 said on Reddit” to “The Allies were justified in bombarding civilians long after the war had already been decided”.

Also, by acknowledging these ‘myths’ you contribute far more to spreading them, rather than debunking them.

1 Like

With all due respect, as a potential Wheraboo, whataboutism is a terrible thought terminating cliche, and hypocrisy IS important in susing out propaganda. You want to talk about about whataboutism, you need to be VERY careful and consider A. the callousness of the operations, B moral equivalency in terms of destruction of lives and property ie, proportionality, C, viable workarounds D. Care made to minimize the destruction of civilian life. And that would in practice mean the entire weeks’ episode focusing on the the moral costs of the bombing.

It is not whataboutism to compare similar events, like the famine part of the Holocaust and the Bengal famine, because on the surface, there are similarities. They ARE differences upon further examination, but the British government DOES deserve condemnation for not having those food supplies sent on priority to Bengal EVEN IF it ended up feeding the Japanese instead. Because both are driven by an inhumane callousness where everyone is expendable to Endseig. How much condemnation is something that yes, merits fact finding and not summary dismissal.

Because in the end Lawful evil is as evil as Choatic Evil. The North Korean government was just as evil in the 1970s as it is today, but it committed less atrocities because it had greater access to the resources that allowed it to feed the appetites of the elites. Being gentler because of pragmatism and being gentler because you have principles look entirely the same when times are sufficiently good. And that’s why so called whataboutism is important. Because the moral character of the system implies it’s trustworthiness.

Any notion of the military value of a city is counteracted by the entrenching morale effect of being bombed as well. You DO objectively increase the suffering of the enemy camp, you DO NOT necessarily quicken the war or save lives. Because war is not about numbers or production figures, war is politics by other means, and brutalizing the enemy population makes it less viable to resist the regime you’re actually fighting. Any allies you might have in the enemy camp are further discredited with every civilian life lost.

Further in the interests of education I present to you Military History Visualized, hich is most definately NOT a Wehrboo outfit:

Discussion of civilian bombing begins at 1:30 and thus these lessons that bombing cities don’t work were known well before World War 2 and were ignored.

There is value in strategic bombing that is way more moral: hitting the transportation infrastructure, which does not involve dropping huge bomb payloads in populated areas. Paralyze the trains, and the factories are made inert.

One wrong does not justify necessarily another. The behavior of the Nazi regime was abhorrent, but there’s no utility in being as brutal as them. It’s ineffective, a waste of resources, and bad for business. And that’s 90% of the reason the Nazis were utterly destroyed.

1 Like

Couldn’t have said it better myself. In fact, you don’t even need to go to another channel to hear about the ineffectiveness of bombing the population as it has already been discussed in the War Against Humanity episodes.

1 Like

I agree with what you said but I still think that whataboutism shouldn’t be use during debate

Hi when talking about strategic bombing and levelling of Cities and the thousands of deaths is incurred there’s one thing bat I don’t believe it’s considered, Revenge I’m not saying it’s right and that allies killing Germans or Japanese by the hundreds and thousands was any better then Japanese and the Germans killing our people. A lot of the allies being war criminals firebombing German cities Etc really took hold in the seventies when the Vietnam War protests reached its peak. To make my point we all saw the tragic events of 9/11 how many people in the western world after watching Two Towers come down and the bodies being dug out of the rubble wanted to send military over there and kill everyone involved. There was one story that they believed detract bin Laden the building near School or possibly in the school basement because it was a school the Coalition forces did not bomb it . I’m wondering how many people who are ready to condemn the people who lived through World War II who took part in the bombings in Europe and Asia when seeing that they had a chance to kill Bin Laden and some of his cronies didn’t because they would have had to bomb a school , watched this and thought so what had a chance to get him do it! . and for the sake of argument it said they did bomb the school kill Bin Laden in a bunch of his cronies responsible for 9/11 but also unfortunately killed a couple of hundreds to school kids. Would they be so quick to have the Coalition forces condemned as war criminals especially if it can be shown that in one strike they got people who are responsible for the terrorist tragedy. most people remember watching events on 9/11 on television or living through it would celebrate. It might not be right but it’s Human Nature and in 2051 when people are remembering the 50th anniversary of the attack there would No Doubt be several people who we’re not born and have no direct memory of 9/11 be commenting on some kind of form how the coalition forces we’re responsible for killing help less civilian children and are somehow as guilty as the people who hijacked the planes in the first place.

9/11 doesn’t really apply here. (BTW I was in 6th/7th Grade when that happened and still remember that afternoon perfectly) Using the Bin Laden example, that means that 90% of the Allied bombings should’ve taken place over Berlin, in the hope that they would kill Hitler.

Revenge also doesn’t hold up. During Orthodox Easter in 1944, the Allies bombarded the Bulgarian capital of Sofia. The targets were 100% civilian. What was the reason for revenge? Did the British want revenge for the Battle of Doiran in 1918? Most of the pilots probably weren’t even born then. Unless someone thinks that the State Library, the Ivan Vazov Theatre or the National Archive were hosting some secret Wunderwaffe factories.


now that is actually a good example on a legit dubious choice made by ally when it come to bombing city (for me dresden is a verry bad since the city had military significance and it wasn’t bombed just to kill ciilian[dresden was a logistical center and it had 110 factory+2 railway hub and flak unit])

1 Like

Hi I’m not condoning in any way Mass bombing but I do think there is a Revenge Factor there, when Arthur Harris took over bomber command for the Royal Air Force I saw a video of him addressing the people of Britain. He said in short " the German think they can bomb everyone else and no one is going to a bomb them and that strategic bombing never won a war we shall see " I’m only writing this to make a point that when your family and friends are killed and you watched as your neighbourhood gets destroyed you can’t help but wait till the day can you can hit them back. I held the bin Laden thing up and example of how Human Nature is. When a couple of Bin Laden’s senior lieutenantes were killed when a missile from a drone hit their car and they were destroyed not knowing who got them most people didn’t shed a tear that they were killed. And remember the V1 and V2 Rockets who called that because stood for vengeance .

1 Like

Anyone in for a historic scientific look.

While military history visualization is great at visualizing this video with it “lessons not leaned” is not good at best, intentionally deceptive at worst.

1 the presenter selects Madrid to compare with the strategic Bombing campaign against continental European tagets and guess Japanese from the UK. The presenter OMITS tthat Madrid was on the front line AND that the fascists decided on a few days of bombing houses AFTER failing to take the city through ground fighting. Apples and Oranges. Note:

Also the anti-fascist an Maquis “advisor” Hemingway probably said these few days of bombings had no effect and hardened the defenders as the attackers were defeated. Quotes should only be used in comparable context. Hemingway was around in WW2 and to my knowledge never asserted that the bombing hardened(I don’t know everything so prove me wrong)

Moreover he doesn’t seem to have a clue about developments. The Army Air Force did upgun its bombers kept tinkering with better tactics and used long range escort fighters when that didn’t work well enough (they could have used the P-47 earlier).

Another vicious personal attack. Appearantly AAF leadership wanted strategic bombing to get an independent Air Force. Well now every country has an independent Air Force for good reasons and they wanted an independent Air Force before during and after WW2. It never occurred (or he omits again) to the presenter that after the trench horrors Of WW1 might have also been a reason to destroy oil supply, Marshalling yards etc.

I am not saying anything about his other videos but this 10 minute wannabe history snack has nothing to do with descent research. Note I also did an sometimes do these exercises with TG history snack and while I might have taken another angle there research is cum laude material.

Btw tip for reading books like I learned in Uni, read intro, read conclusion and thern start checking if the arguments check and for logical fallacies.

Of course it Is more fun to read and pretend not to know the outcome

Hi , I believe that the majority of the condemnation directed at bomber forces really took hold in the seventies when people wear protesting the war in Vietnam until recently Royal Air Force didn’t even have metals commemorating the brave people of bomber command because it caused controversy they had one aircrew Europe or something like that but no one commemorating bomber crews , that has recently changed , approximately 55000 aircrew where killed in the bombing raids against the Axis powers

1 Like

Yes, the crews got a bad deal in the end. Noting the obvious that the Lancs also bombed Peenemunde, the Tirpitz and many other military targets. I find bombing horrible too but they didn’t do it for sightseeing. They had a war, continents to liberate and a war to win and the Holocaust to stop.

The strategy was to lose more material and less blood. The greatest fear was Mandy other Sommes.

As for the critique discredited books like the Devil’s tinderbox or the nonsense video posted here doesn’t help.

In 2020 the outcome of the war is history, for them not. Not sure if we would have acted differently had we have been in the same situation.

I also wonder if david irving didn’t contributed to this with his “600000 people died at dresden” thing (I remember reading that he ignore survivor letter that didn’t agreed with his view)

1 Like

How does bombing 80-year-old grandpa Hans’ house contribute to stopping the Holocaust?


I don’t think bomber command would target a sole house considering that the bomber might not even hit ,if a city has an industrial center or has been used for logistic ,then I think it contributed to stop the holocaust (also during world war 2 ,these kind of thing were seen as legal ,they weren’t ban until 1949)

1 Like