WWII boming debate

[Erik Rutins]

As a reminder to everyone, let's please keep this on topic - so the discussion should be about WWII and the historical bombing campaign and A-Bomb decision. Although that is a controversial topic, it's also an interesting one. Veering into discussions of modern times, extrapolating it to generalizations of the US or other countries, etc. is not staying on topic.

Also, as a general reminder - no personal attacks, stay civil, keep your cool and play nice with others.

Regards,

- Erik

[Marauders]

Veering into discussions of modern times, extrapolating it to generalizations of the US or other countries, etc. is not staying on topic.

I teach history and government, and I ask my students these questions, as they are relevant.
 
One must consider the fact that people who lived in a different generation and under different circumstances had different views, but one must also consider that they lived in a time that was modern to them and their contemporaries.  In order to ask if the bombings of WWII were justified, we must examine international law as it stood at the time, what war crimes the losers of the war were convicted of after the war, and what new internation law was created as a reaction to the war.
 
We may also note that this discussion has modern relevance or parable.  It is a simple thing to say we were at war, and while at war their are no boundaries of warfare, but this not a constant state.  If we make that justification, then we can do little to not allow others to make that justification when we are viewed as the aggressor.  The United States was bombed at Pearl Harbor, which was certainly an act of war, but until September 11, 2001, the United States has not been exposed to the end of the spear on its native soil for over a half century.  It is relevant that we do not have a civilian population that, since the Civil War, has not had to suffer under the conditions that we often view so casually.
 
If my students can discuss this rationally, I would expect that the more experienced readers of this forum could do so as well.  If that is against the board policy, it is a shame, because if only a narrow view of history is observed, it will serve much less purpose to discuss this here.  As often is the case, there is no true right or wrong to these questions, there are only logical arguments for or against, and even those have shaded answers.
 
The ethics of warfare have long been a topic for debate, and they will long be in the future.
 

[mack2]

Germans/Japan started it, their populations bought into it, I would have had no problem with wiping out their entire populations if that was what had to happen to win the war.

[DEB]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

The ethics of warfare have long been a topic for debate, and they will long be in the future.

But; as you were reminded, they are not the precise topic of debate here.

(Eric was just reminding you of the forum rules, from which you were straying. It all gets too complex otherwise.)

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Marauders
If my students can discuss this rationally, I would expect that the more experienced readers of this forum could do so as well. If that is against the board policy, it is a shame, because if only a narrow view of history is observed, it will serve much less purpose to discuss this here. As often is the case, there is no true right or wrong to these questions, there are only logical arguments for or against, and even those have shaded answers.

Your students have an arbiter in the room and will be graded. As for our forum denizens: it usually ends up being a few that bring the rest down.

Matrix was quite open to deeper discussions and it caused them a lot of grief that eventually resulted in a stricter policy. Even with its limited scope, this discussion pushes that envelope. Kudos to Erik for being slow on the trigger.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Marauders
We may also note that this discussion has modern relevance or parable.

It certainly does, but that's out of the scope of discussion on this forum.

If my students can discuss this rationally, I would expect that the more experienced readers of this forum could do so as well.

Well, let me respond to these points in general to explain my experience on this to all.

Most here can, but some can't. I wish I could let such discussions go and trust that everyone would remain civil and rational. Due to past experience, we now keep discussions focused on the past and try to stay away from current politics, religion, etc. Keep in mind that what seems impersonal to you may be personal to someone else (perhaps one of their ancestors was involved) so controversial topics, especially those that involve as much passion as this one, must be approached carefully here.

What you also may not be aware of is the fact that this topic has a history, it started on the UV forum and was moved here. There's already been some friction in previous incarnations of this thread.

It's important to keep in mind that these boards serve as a place for our customers to share their interests, not as a place for one customer to upset another. Remember, we're here to sell games, not alienate people. [;)] There are a lot of other places where discussions are no-holds-barred, this isn't one of 'em. We want all customers to feel welcome here. While it's true that some people need a thicker skin and we'll allow a certain amount of latitude, we have become pretty cautious about letting things go.

With that said, unfortunately the lowest priority item on my list is forum moderation, so it is often infrequent and there are often threads that slip entirely under my radar (and that of the other Matrix staff). For this reason, sometimes it seems that our moderation is uneven (and it is, but because of lack of time and attention, not a difference in standards).

Regards,

- Erik

[IronDuke_slith]

Well, in a probably vain attempt to drag back to topic, I would have to say that the Allied bombing campaign of Germany (unfortunately, I can't speak with any knowledge of the PTO) was absolutely pivotal to the Allied victory.

Suggesting that the German production figures went up anyway misses the point completely, that they didn't go up by much. Before total war was called and the economy fully mobilised, the Germans were not even running plants at three shifts per day. There was slack in the system and it was bombing's achievement that industrial expansion and that slack only amounted to the increases that it did.

Secondly, the bombing of cities had a number of deadly effects over and above deaths among war workers. To begin with, the Allies essentially dismantled the German transportation system in 1944/45. In 1945, factories were liberated in Germany that still had full tank parks, the vehicles immobilised because trains were hardly running. All train lines led through cities. The destruction of the cities fouled mile after mile of track at strategic points (rail lines generally met and intersected at Cities) with rubble. The marshalling yards inside cities were destroyed, engines blown up and repair facilities crippled. Simply turning engines around was difficult.

At it's height, over 1 million personnel (a number of who'm could have fought at the front) were deployed manning flak defences. Over 55000 anti aircraft pieces were deployed to defend the Reich. Many were of 88 calibre and if not shooting at Allied bombers would have been taking down Allied tanks at the front. Thousands of tonnes of concrete and other raw materials created shelters and flak towers.

Production suffered as much through the crippling of the railways as it did through direct bombing. Towards the end, entire factories sat idle because the railways could not get supplies of raw materials to them to produce their weapons, nor take the completed kit away.

Finally, the bombing forced the Germans to deploy hundreds of fighters on home soil, effectively ceding control of the air just about everywhere else. More importantly, this fighter force was decimated when the P-51 arrived in large numbers and began escorting the bombers. Over several months, the Luftwaffe was chooped to pieces in a series of gruelling attritional battles. With their losse high, their aircraft often sabotaged by foreign workers and their oil plants and railways bombed to the point that fuel was in short supply and replacement pilots could not be given much air time, the Luftwaffe was knocked out of the war.

All of this was a direct result of the Allied bomber offensive. We can call it immoral, we can deplore the killing of civilians, but we shouldn't lose sight of its pivotal role in the defeat of Nazi Germany.

regards,
IronDuke

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Has anyone googled boming to see what exactly it has to do with WW2?

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Phatguy]

ORIGINAL: mack2

Germans/Japan started it, their populations bought into it, I would have had no problem with wiping out their entire populations if that was what had to happen to win the war.

Yup...agree

[panzers]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Imagine this for a moment. Truman tells McArthur..

...pass along to the Japanese, we will break our aggreement of no seperate peace with the communist, accept their surrender with the Emporer condition as soon as the Germans surrender. This is done.

There is no Iwo Jima
There is no Okinawa
No Hiroshima
No Nagasaki
No Korean War
China probably doesn´t go Communist
Possibly no Vietnam

You see? I just won WW2. Saved a lot of lives and stuck it to Uncle Joe all at the same time. Still came out smelling like a flower.

That´s why all this came out again in Korea when McArthur and Truman had their dust up. I´m sure McArthur threw it up in Trumans face they wouldn´t even be fighting Korea if he had just accepted Japanese surrender back in 44´.
Interesting thiought. Woulda, shoulda, coulda, when it comes to war, there are so many little things like this that get overlooked. You have to think about what was going on at the time though. We were already getting in numerous situations of slaughter and torture from the internment camps just because we had the audacity to surrender to them.(I.E. Their bushido code). So I'm sure Truman, (and Roosevelt at the time) and his general staff had quite an ax to grind.

Bad call.

[Doggie]

So one measly American Commodore sailed into Tokyo Bay with a few black powder cannons and brought the whole Japanese Empire to it's knees?  We need to dig this guy up and clone him.
 
Nice how every famine, insurection, and glass of spilt milk ends up being blamed on western colonialism.  Yep, life in Zimbabwe is soooo much better now that the colonialists are gone.  Interesting that the Phillipinos who were subjected to so much cruelty by the evil Americans risked being literally skinned alive for attempting to smuggle food and water to their American tormentors and streets are named after Dougout Doug, this while the Japanese can't establish a military cemetary in that country without the locals turning it into a latrine.

[Marauders]

Most here can, but some can't. I wish I could let such discussions go and trust that everyone would remain civil and rational. Due to past experience, we now keep discussions focused on the past and try to stay away from current politics, religion, etc. Keep in mind that what seems impersonal to you may be personal to someone else (perhaps one of their ancestors was involved) so controversial topics, especially those that involve as much passion as this one, must be approached carefully here.

It's important to keep in mind that these boards serve as a place for our customers to share their interests, not as a place for one customer to upset another. Remember, we're here to sell games, not alienate people. There are a lot of other places where discussions are no-holds-barred, this isn't one of 'em. We want all customers to feel welcome here. While it's true that some people need a thicker skin and we'll allow a certain amount of latitude, we have become pretty cautious about letting things go.

Erik, I agree. This isn't a political board, and we don't want to get into the ad hominem fights that some people enjoy getting into when logic fails. It is a common problem on boards with access by the public.

My point was that there is little value in the examination of this topic in a vacuum.

Next topic: burning witches that weigh the same as a duck: good logic or bad?

[ilovestrategy]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Imagine this for a moment. Truman tells McArthur..

...pass along to the Japanese, we will break our aggreement of no seperate peace with the communist, accept their surrender with the Emporer condition as soon as the Germans surrender. This is done.

There is no Iwo Jima
There is no Okinawa
No Hiroshima
No Nagasaki
No Korean War
China probably doesn´t go Communist
Possibly no Vietnam

You see? I just won WW2. Saved a lot of lives and stuck it to Uncle Joe all at the same time. Still came out smelling like a flower.

That´s why all this came out again in Korea when McArthur and Truman had their dust up. I´m sure McArthur threw it up in Trumans face they wouldn´t even be fighting Korea if he had just accepted Japanese surrender back in 44´.

Bad call.

I'm confused. I thought the Japanese were fighting to the last man and gave up in 45 because of the A bombs.
Did the Japanese really offer to surrender in 44? Can someone set me straight? [&:]

[panzers]

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Imagine this for a moment. Truman tells McArthur..

...pass along to the Japanese, we will break our aggreement of no seperate peace with the communist, accept their surrender with the Emporer condition as soon as the Germans surrender. This is done.

There is no Iwo Jima
There is no Okinawa
No Hiroshima
No Nagasaki
No Korean War
China probably doesn´t go Communist
Possibly no Vietnam

You see? I just won WW2. Saved a lot of lives and stuck it to Uncle Joe all at the same time. Still came out smelling like a flower.

That´s why all this came out again in Korea when McArthur and Truman had their dust up. I´m sure McArthur threw it up in Trumans face they wouldn´t even be fighting Korea if he had just accepted Japanese surrender back in 44´.

Bad call.

I'm confused. I thought the Japanese were fighting to the last man and gave up in 45 because of the A bombs.
Did the Japanese really offer to surrender in 44? Can someone set me straight? [&:]

I was wondering about that myself when you consider they still to this day abide by the bushido code of the Samaraii era.

[panzers]

ORIGINAL: IronDuke


Well, in a probably vain attempt to drag back to topic, I would have to say that the Allied bombing campaign of Germany (unfortunately, I can't speak with any knowledge of the PTO) was absolutely pivotal to the Allied victory.

Suggesting that the German production figures went up anyway misses the point completely, that they didn't go up by much. Before total war was called and the economy fully mobilised, the Germans were not even running plants at three shifts per day. There was slack in the system and it was bombing's achievement that industrial expansion and that slack only amounted to the increases that it did.

Secondly, the bombing of cities had a number of deadly effects over and above deaths among war workers. To begin with, the Allies essentially dismantled the German transportation system in 1944/45. In 1945, factories were liberated in Germany that still had full tank parks, the vehicles immobilised because trains were hardly running. All train lines led through cities. The destruction of the cities fouled mile after mile of track at strategic points (rail lines generally met and intersected at Cities) with rubble. The marshalling yards inside cities were destroyed, engines blown up and repair facilities crippled. Simply turning engines around was difficult.

At it's height, over 1 million personnel (a number of who'm could have fought at the front) were deployed manning flak defences. Over 55000 anti aircraft pieces were deployed to defend the Reich. Many were of 88 calibre and if not shooting at Allied bombers would have been taking down Allied tanks at the front. Thousands of tonnes of concrete and other raw materials created shelters and flak towers.

Production suffered as much through the crippling of the railways as it did through direct bombing. Towards the end, entire factories sat idle because the railways could not get supplies of raw materials to them to produce their weapons, nor take the completed kit away.

Finally, the bombing forced the Germans to deploy hundreds of fighters on home soil, effectively ceding control of the air just about everywhere else. More importantly, this fighter force was decimated when the P-51 arrived in large numbers and began escorting the bombers. Over several months, the Luftwaffe was chooped to pieces in a series of gruelling attritional battles. With their losse high, their aircraft often sabotaged by foreign workers and their oil plants and railways bombed to the point that fuel was in short supply and replacement pilots could not be given much air time, the Luftwaffe was knocked out of the war.

All of this was a direct result of the Allied bomber offensive. We can call it immoral, we can deplore the killing of civilians, but we shouldn't lose sight of its pivotal role in the defeat of Nazi Germany.

regards,
IronDuke

Right on the money buddy!

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Germays industrial might never came on line till 1943, their fault.
 
The Japanese for the most part were useing WWI weapons.
 
The Allied bombing Campaine had some effect vs the Germans. With rail lines disrupted the newer weapons could not reach the front in any numbers.
 
As far as the A-Bombs on Japan. OOPS!! But you have to remember that every Mom and Pop shop in town were producing some kind of bomb or bullet that were all ment to kill American Troops.
 
The raids on the Japanese capital killed more people than the Atomic raids.

[Charles2222]

Just something of a guess here and definitely not definitive, but the Japanese had peace feelers through the USSR. I'm not sure what year that was going on, be that '44 or '45, but it was going on, and the USA decided to ignore it. I can't recall if they were asking for more, back then, than what they got or not.

[bradfordkay]

My understanding is that the Japanese did not start sending out peace feelers to the Soviets until spring of '45, and that the Soviets never gave an official reply while also not informing the allies about these feelers. The Soviets at this time knew that Germany was about done and were thus looking to join the war against Japan in order to recoup some of their losses from 1905.

[Ike99]

I'm confused. I thought the Japanese were fighting to the last man and gave up in 45 because of the A bombs.

BARE PEACE BID U. S. REBUFFED 7 MONTHS AGO
Chicago Daily Tribune
Aug 19, 1945

¨Release of censorship restrictions in the United States makes it possible to announce that Japan's first peace bid was relayed to the White House seven months ago....¨


Wiki
¨These proposals, sent through both British and American channels were assembled by General Douglas MacArthur into a 40-page dossier and given to President Roosevelt on the 2nd of February, two days before the Yalta conference. The dossier was reportedly dismissed by Roosevelt out of hand - the proposals contained all had the condition that Emperor's position would be assured, albeit possibly as a puppet ruler. At this time, however, the Allied policy was to accept only an unconditional offer of surrender, although the eventual August settlement did keep the position of emperor in place.¨

[sullafelix]

Churchill with his idiotic " unconditional surrender" statement that Roosevelt just went along with caused more damage than anything else. The propaganda being put out by some top Alled brass was that Germany was to be turned into an agrarian society with no industry etc.. So it is qiuite possible, especially given their later statements. That the German generals would have been much more open to a revolt against hitler. As it was they felt they were in a rock and a hard place. They had to fight to the last because they had no idea of what the Allies planned to do if they lost the War.
 
 As far as the Japanese everyone in the know, knew they were beaten by 1943. They totally blew their war plan by being affected by the " victory disease " and they knew it. The only condition they ever really asked for was an Allied statement that the emperor was not to be touched. They of course would not have allowed themselves to be taken over by the Allies as they were. But, given their past and present history would have surely given us everything else we asked for. Even the bomb did not have to be dropped. We could have starved them into submission in a year at the most.
 
 Herbert Hover wrote a book and one of his tenets was what did it matter if the USSR or Germany controlled Europe. Roosevelt by giving into stalin and giving him eastern Europe was either going insane or nuts to begin with. It lead us into the pretty much horror filled last 60 years. Now we have a belligerent China and a resurgent Russia that we have no control over and no ties to. Besides all the money that we pour into both countries to have them thumb their noses at.