So it goes . . .

[Housey]

My knee jerk reaction to the OP's post and run tactic is, lolstockhausen

He is light on detail so far, just chuntterring and as a world class chuntter monster I can see the signs

 

[SPG]

War is about victory. Anything to aid that victory swiftly and less casualty`s to your side is fair game. There are no civilians, just death/pain and sorrow because as they say "we are all in it together"

 

[fatiain]

No, coventry was a metal works industry, bombing it would have a big effect on our arms production.

That and the fact Coventry is an absolute hole.

 

[FTM]

In no way would I suggest that Britain invented terrorism or the deliberate targeting of civilians, any more than I believe that the Syrians invented the"Barrel Bomb". Man has been contaminating water and food for millennia.

My point is that we recently recalled the death fifty years ago of Winston "I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas" Churchill who must have been happy (in advance) of the firebombing of Dresden and was an enthusiastic advocate of fairly extreme warfare. Last year we had a fair amount of jingoistic posturing about the "Great" War, there was a tendency to gloss over the fact that the Germans, French, Belgians and many others also suffered at the whim of a bunch of inbred lunatics. This is likely to continue for another three or four years. Every year we get reminded of the Holocaust - but consistently fail to learn anything from any of these "Remembrances".

As someone has pointed over, Dresden was a very long time ago and anyhow the Germans started it and they (and the Japanese) were much worse than we were so we have every right to feel superior and justified in prosecuting wars around the world - because we are the "Good Guys" . . . although it is perhaps good to note that we no longer believe that we have some Celestial Fairy on our side?

Incidentally, in response to an early poster, if you want to get a quick insight into Dresden, Wikipedia is a handy start point. I would also recommend "Slaughterhouse Five" by Kurt Vonnegut which is a damned good read. "Bomber" by Len Deighton is also worth reading although it doesn't necessarily refer to Dresden.

As I say, yet another great learning opportunity which will doubtless be ignored on the basis that we (and our allies of the particular moment) are the "Good Guys".

I would say we did learn something from ww2...the 2 countries have since become strong trading partners and despite what tabloid papers will have you think , there seems to be no long standing animosity between the populations

many ex- soldiers will tell you they bear no ill will against the majority of germans or the soldiers they faced. it wasnt a war of ideology for britain, it was just something that had to be done

and the germans that suffered recognised their folly of supporting Hitler and the disastrous road he took them down..which accounts for the collective guilt they still seem to suffer even though theres not many of their generation left.

 

[Castiel]

I fail to see how. Your original point seemed to be that the deliberate targeting of civilians was a phenomena that began in the American Civil War. My argument is that there never was a shift. Historically civilians were targeted as often as not.

There was a shift in the political and official acceptance and persecution of a specific tactic openly in a modern industrialise nation.

My example of the Spanish civilians being targeted does not support the 'blurred lines' point unless you're suggesting that the French believed these civilians were explicitly involved in guerilla activity. But there is ample proof many of these actions were intended purely as punitive measures and had nothing to do with those civilians being suspected of being guerillas.

Actually it does, as you cannot tell a guerrilla from a civilian. While I am sure collective punishment was indeed used, again it was not like Sherman's endorsement of Hard War as a specific targeted strategic position open,y supported and officially ordered.

It also ignores my example of Vendée where there was a clear policy of destroying civilian infrastructure and civilians, with no reason to believe this related to blurred lines. It was actual policy to destroy civilian infrastructure.

No it doesn't, again this was essentially a revolution which involved the militarisation of civilians...I accept that it essentially turned into a genocide, but it is not the same as the example I gave with Sherman. No one is saying that atrocities and killing of civilians did not happen before, what I am saying is that Sherman's 'Hard War' was the first in which it was an officially endorsed accepted tactic in a modern industrialised setting against undefended and non-combatative civilian populations.

 

[do_ron_ron]

Read yours, because indiscriminate bombing of civilians is exactly what Dresden is an example of. It also arguable that it is not an example of an act of terrorism as it did have legitimate military importance, even if the civilian casualties and nature of the firebombing overshadowed that.

Legitimate military importance?

April 1945. The war is obviously going to be over very shortly. Few targets left to bomb due to military advance. Harris's stated objective to kill civilians to disrupt German war effort.

Dresden - packed full of civilians fleeing the Soviets. The official death toll is on the low side given the tide of civilians fleeing the Soviets.

Totally unnecessary from a military point of view. The Soviets occupied it a couple of weeks later.

 

[FTM]

you could also look at Japan and the USA...bitter enemies in ww2 but since, trusted trading partners, adopted national sports and a love of both cultures.

contrast that with other countries across the world who still squabble and bicker over centuries old incidents

 

[Tefal]

i think when you reach the point of total war where everyone is basilica involved in producing or supporting the military, you've all got to accept you're now a military target.

why should the man who makes the gun be any more protected than the man who carries it?

 

[Castiel]

Legitimate military importance?

April 1945. The war is obviously going to be over very shortly. Few targets left to bomb due to military advance. Harris's stated objective to kill civilians to disrupt German war effort.

Dresden - packed full of civilians fleeing the Soviets. The official death toll is on the low side given the tide of civilians fleeing the Soviets.

Totally unnecessary from a military point of view. The Soviets occupied it a couple of weeks later.

Which is as I said....arguable. Hence the thread and reams of books, articles, justifications and criticisms over the last 70 years.

 

[FTM]

Legitimate military importance?

April 1945. The war is obviously going to be over very shortly. Few targets left to bomb due to military advance. Harris's stated objective to kill civilians to disrupt German war effort.

Dresden - packed full of civilians fleeing the Soviets. The official death toll is on the low side given the tide of civilians fleeing the Soviets.

Totally unnecessary from a military point of view. The Soviets occupied it a couple of weeks later.

they wanted the fleeing civilians back on the road to clog up the transport network I am guessing..if they are not moving they are not blocking roads

 

[anything I don't mind]

When will we stop "anniversaries" for everything. it is ridiculous. I hope we have seen the end of ww1 anniversary now, especially all the stupid opium flowers. Its not like we are going to forgot without some stupid anniversary every year.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

When will we stop "anniversaries" for everything. it is ridiculous. I hope we have seen the end of ww1 anniversary now, especially all the stupid opium flowers. Its not like we are going to forgot without some stupid anniversary every year.

to qoute Icewind Dale "They say that history is the greatest of all teachers, and that tales of past deeds define who we are in the present, and what we shall be in the future. It is said that such tales shall with each telling illuminate us all with the light of truth"

We need to remember stuff like this (WW1/WW2) so we never repeat again ever. Its the darkest days humanity for sure, thankfully it has resulted in a a lot of changes for the better overall

 

[anything I don't mind]

We can remember it without the poppies and without marking the day.

 

[Housey]

We can remember it without the poppies and without marking the day.

Or you can ignore it and let those who wish to show their respect to all wars, the purpose of remberance day, do their thing.

 

[Hades]

When will we stop "anniversaries" for everything. it is ridiculous. I hope we have seen the end of ww1 anniversary now, especially all the stupid opium flowers. Its not like we are going to forgot without some stupid anniversary every year.

The poppy has become more than just a symbol for WW1. It's now a mark of rememberance for all the fallen British, commonwealth and allied soldiers of modern wars.

 

[markweatherill]

What I have always thought was that the carpet bombing of civilians was the origin of the term 'Holocaust' in respect of WWII, and that it was hijacked later. I don't know if that is true though.

 

[TheMightyTen]

The armed merchant fleet and treasure ships? Many of whom were privateers themselves and who were routinely captured rather than sunk.

The fishing vessels again were routinely boarded, fishermen captured and questioned as to the lie of the land, charting waters and so on.

The majority of merchant fleet attacked were not the historically more glamorous targets you mention, they were small coastal luggers carrying mundane items supplying the Spanish economy, many of them were not even from a belligerent nation but made themselves a target by process of the supply. There's at least one instance of the English attacking a group of fishing boats working off a shoal specifically to "Deny their majesties enemys of victuals for persecution of acts against their person" [sic] (I'm desperately trying to find the source for you but can't lay my hand on it right at this moment, it is in my notes at home so will have to look when I get back tonight)

Which were largely never officially declared, the opposite in fact, with a series of short campaigns in response to seizure of goods, ships, and personnel. The Chinese also, as far I can remember, attacked the Royal Navy as the RN we're engaged in stopping British Merchants vessels from entering Canton. And more importantly given all the opposition and criticism of Lord Palmerston and the war itself here in Britain, it can hardly be said it was entirely legitimised by parliament, at least The First Opium War.

Also, were not many of the engagements against actual fortified emplacements, with the battles being between British (and French) forces and vastly more numerous Chinese Forces who were outmatched by technology rather than brutality? Did the Chinese not capture and torture British, French and American diplomatic envoys, civilians and journalists which led to the destruction of the Summer palaces to try and stop the Chinese from using kidnapping and torture?


The disgrace of the Opium Wars wasn't in how the wars were persecuted, but in the actual drug trade and its defence thereof itself. So it's not really a valid example.

In many respects you are right, although I would argue the wars were philosophically about more than the drug trade, (although yes that was the fundamental) but I think one of the big problems is the definition of, in this case, "Official Sanction" (aren't these historical arguments always one of grey expressions and interpretation ) There are plenty of cabinet papers from the government around that time actively encouraging and promoting methods and even the cajoling of Horse Guards and Admiralty to seek all means to bring about a positive outcome for the Western axis of powers.

To this day, 2 batteries of the Royal Artillery, 127 & 129 both carry the "China" battle honour and have the Chinese dragon as their badge, these "honours" were earned in the Opium wars, isn't that also a form of official sanction as well?

Yes Sherman wrote it in orders and aims, but a verbal order issued in theatre carries no less significance and unpublicised backroom agreements are as valid, but that is just my opinion and you are of a different one. It's why there is no such thing as black and white history and why I love it so much

 

[LockyOK]

I would say we did learn something from ww2...the 2 countries have since become strong trading partners and despite what tabloid papers will have you think , there seems to be no long standing animosity between the populations

many ex- soldiers will tell you they bear no ill will against the majority of germans or the soldiers they faced. it wasnt a war of ideology for britain, it was just something that had to be done

and the germans that suffered recognised their folly of supporting Hitler and the disastrous road he took them down..which accounts for the collective guilt they still seem to suffer even though theres not many of their generation left.

Those are fair comments. Britain, France, Germany and Italy are now allies although as you suggest, when one hears the ravings of the Tory Eurosceptics and sees the rise of UKIP it is hard to believe.

I can't claim to have spoken to many (or indeed any) veterans of World War II about their feelings in relation to Germany or Germans. However, I have in the past heard people say that buying any German or Japanese goods is treachery.

As it happens, the Allies did learn something from the disastrous Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I and made strenuous efforts to rebuild Germany (Marshall Plan) and Japan along less warlike lines; both countries now have fairly strong anti-militaristic attitudes although that seems to be waning.

What concerns me is that we still seem regularly to see fairly vicious minor wars around the world and Britain is all too often involved in one way or another in these conflicts. In the case of Britain there usually seems to be a compelling political or commercial justification.

We could for instance probably bring much more economic pressure to bear on Russia over Ukraine but it would be somewhat uncomfortable and it is after all "a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing".

It also saddens me that what little is left of a manufacturing industry in the UK seems to be overly preoccupied with devising new ways of killing people and then selling the product on to pretty much anyone.

 

[SPG]

Wrong.

The poppy has become a political football and nationalistic ****ocks. That in its own way upsets me being ex-serviceman.


We should think far far harder about sending them into conflict in the first place. It no longer seems like a last resort for the majority of UK politics.

 

[balky12]

When will we stop "anniversaries" for everything. it is ridiculous. I hope we have seen the end of ww1 anniversary now, especially all the stupid opium flowers. Its not like we are going to forgot without some stupid anniversary every year.

Oh boy. I would bury your head in the sand until this thread dies.

The 'stupid opium flowers' mean much more than the anniversary of WW1...