The Empire is finished, no foreign lands to seize....

[grounded]

[/quote]

Under the circumstances, I don't personally have an issue with it.  The historians can fight it out. No matter what I say, I'm sure you have a counter argument.

But I'm not arguing that the Allies conducted the war immaculately or that some of their decisions can't be second-guessed afterwards. Dresden was one of a number of cities firebombed by both sides. The writing was on the wall for the Germans by that time (same as the Japanese when Tokyo was firebombed the following month), and they still would not countenance

I suppose my point is more a hypothetical one. Is it justifiable to carry out war crimes(arguable by some) for the greater good? I think in this specific case you dont have an issue with it and thats fair enough. My point is why not just call a spade a spade.
   And you are right, looking back and judging historical actions and in particularly military ones is fraught with difficulty. Those top military brass didnt have access to the information we have now and had to base their strategy on the limited intel they had.
        If there is one thing that ww2 shows is the amount of negotiating and deals that went on behind closed doors. No doubt the evidence of it has been destroyed but you can bet yer bottom dollar a deal would have been struck between Germany and the Allies had Hitler been removed, as the allies realised the threat the Soviet Union posed.
      So to say the writing was on the wall for the axis powers is only partially true, because as events proved during the war anything could and did happen.
           
           
     
         

[J70]

You don't think that by the early months of 1945 it was all but over for the Axis powers? I guess you could make some kind of argument for Japan holding out for a bit, but Germany?

By that time, the Red Army was already in eastern Germany, closing in on Berlin, and the Allies had crossed the Rhine.

https://omniatlas.com/maps/europe/19450324/

[Eamonnca1]

Well the Germans flattened Coventry long before the Brits ever got near Dresden. Germany was the aggressor, not Britain. Again, war is a very dirty business, a World War is a particularly dirty business, and a World War against the most evil regime in human history is the dirtiest business of all. Germany was not in any sense a reasonable enemy. You can't fight according to gentlemen's rules against a totally unreasonable and undeniably evil enemy. There was nothing inevitable about victory. The war would not have been won without bombing from the air. It was all out war.

I don't think you can compare it to the Siege of Drogheda at all, you can compare Drogheda to what the Nazis did all across eastern Europe alright. You can probably compare Dresden to the atomic bombs in a way. The argument for the atomic bombs was that they shocked Japan so much that they brought about an earlier surrender than would otherwise have occurred. I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with that argument - I would probably tend against it because the civilian toll was so great and the nature of the weapon used was so shocking and destructive - but I can see the argument and how many people might consider it valid.

So it's okay to flatten a city full of civilians with conventional bombs but not okay to do the exact same thing with a nuclear weapon? What's the difference?

My belief is that they had to. Should any air bombing at all have been part of the war effort in your view?

Of course it should. They didn't have laser-guided weapons in those days but they still had the ability to target industrial areas which could be regarded as legitimate targets. But they chose to also deliberately target residential areas. In fact the USAF had a test range consisting of mocked up homes made of the same materials as typical Japanese homes. They used it to perfect the technique of incendiary bombing to ignite firestorms in residential areas. If that's not a war crime I don't know what is.

Hiroshima killed nearly 150k, Nagasaki nearly another 100k. Dresden is estimated to have had a death toll of around 25k.

By any stretch of the imagination, whether by casualties or by the means used, Dresden does not compare to the atomic bombs.

So the fact that 25,000 dead is less than 100,000 dead makes it okay?



"I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed! But I do promise you no more than ten to twenty million dead, tops! Er, depending on the breaks."

[Jell 0 Biafra]

A very interesting article arguing that it was not in fact the atomic bombs that caused Japan's surrender.  https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-bomb-didn-t-beat-japan-stalin-did?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Interesting argument indeed.

However, surely some research must have been done back in the day on the thinking of those in power in Japan?

Assuming the author's opinion is correct, did every single one of those involved toe the line and, forever more, falsely promote the decisiveness of the atomic bombings?

Has there been any revisionism in Japan?

I don't know the answer to any of these questions.  I had always thought the second bombing was sheer malevolence, given that the Japanese surely would have surrendered just to avoid a second bombing.  But not if this author is correct.   

[grounded]

You don't think that by the early months of 1945 it was all but over for the Axis powers? I guess you could make some kind of argument for Japan holding out for a bit, but Germany?

By that time, the Red Army was already in eastern Germany, closing in on Berlin, and the Allies had crossed the Rhine.

https://omniatlas.com/maps/europe/19450324/

The battle of the bulge was a disaster for Germany alright, and but for that they could have held out on the western front for much longer. But you're right, that given the resources the allies had at their disposal, that the end result was inevitable.
        However, a German regime change  even at this late stage could have altered the end outcome of the war drastically. Churchill and Roosevelt had long before altered their sights to Stalin and the iron curtain.
         Certainly, it is well known that most if not all German forces would much prefer to surrender to the western allies than the dreaded Soviets. An agreed surrender in favour of the west, may have freed sufficient troops and materials to at least have reduced the eastern european land grab by the soviets.
      All what ifs and maybe's but im sure the blueprints of a plan had been devised to thwart old Joseph. 
         

[Jell 0 Biafra]

This article on Churchill showed up on my newsfeed today.  Timely, given the direction of this thread. A good read.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/01/winston-churchill-british-empire-colonialism?fbclid=IwAR1Tr1kPIxqqp21KT47dXXDoDpVDb1kT2JgHnQtfcDURkV9LhKTWxviSMKg

[red hander]

Was Hess on an official peace mission to try and get the Brits to stand aside while Hitler invaded Russia?

His mission was to meet some high ranking earl in Scotland who'd expressed pro Nazi sentiments before the war. The true extent of pro Nazi views in royal family at time is still to come out. There is evidence to suggest Edward, the chinless wonder who abdicated, provided the Germans with info about French defences in the Ardennes region following a tour there in his role as army officer that led to Hitler completely changing his invasion plans for France in 1940. He also deserted after the Germans did invade, angering that old bastard Churchill so much that he wanted to have him shot for cowardice in face of enemy. Anthony Blunt, who was exposed as a Soviet spy in 70s/80s while keeper of the queen's art, was dispatched at end of war by royal family to scour German files for anything that would expose old Eddie boy's treachery, all this stuff was seized and given to the Saxe Coburg Gothas in Buck House, presumably to be destroyed. Would explain the kid glove treatment Blunt received after he was outed as spy, considering what secrets he knew. Also suggestions the king's other brother, who died in 'mysterious' wartime plane crash, had been up to his neck in pro Nazi treachery to collaborate with Hitler in event of successful invasion of Britain.

[Rossfan]

If Hess had been sent a year earlier before they started bombing English cities there's every chance an upper class coup might have succeeded.

[Main Street]

Russia Today  news reports are a good watch,  in almost orgasm mode reporting on mass protests  against racist policing tactics  across Europe.
The one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue, cocooned inside a coffin, will be glad to hear that hundreds of drunken racists defended his location,  i.e. until they departed after running out of lager.

RT had their camera crew do a vox pop with passerbys in Newcastle at the foot of the monument to Earl Grey, an alleged slavery adherent. One passerby was asked "what was noteworthy about Earl Grey?"  He replied  "tea".

[sid waddell]

Russia Today  news reports are a good watch,  in almost orgasm mode reporting on mass protests  against racist policing tactics  across Europe.
The one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue, cocooned inside a coffin, will be glad to hear that hundreds of drunken racists defended his location,  i.e. until they departed after running out of lager.

RT had their camera crew do a vox pop with passerbys in Newcastle at the foot of the monument to Earl Grey, an alleged slavery adherent. One passerby was asked "what was noteworthy about Earl Grey?"  He replied  "tea".

Russia Today is a propaganda channel for the fascist, mafia state Russian regime.

That's the reason they are in "orgasm mode".

Russia Today frames its reporting to highlight extremism and division in western societies for the purposes of boosting extremism in these societies. The Russian regime wants to end democracy worldwide wherever it can and have client quasi-dictators come to power.

If it can't have that, it desires to have countries become ungovernable through internal division and conflict, by boosting division, extremists and extremism.

In the UK, it was a promoter and funder of Brexit, and the far right of the Tory party, UKIP, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his fascist yobs and the likes are those it seeks to benefit.

Perhaps you could name these "one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue". 

The statement doesn't even make any sense. I'm not sure what "hankering after the welfare of the legacy of a statue" is.

[Eamonnca1]

Russia Today  news reports are a good watch,  in almost orgasm mode reporting on mass protests  against racist policing tactics  across Europe.
The one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue, cocooned inside a coffin, will be glad to hear that hundreds of drunken racists defended his location,  i.e. until they departed after running out of lager.

RT had their camera crew do a vox pop with passerbys in Newcastle at the foot of the monument to Earl Grey, an alleged slavery adherent. One passerby was asked "what was noteworthy about Earl Grey?"  He replied  "tea".

Russia Today is a propaganda channel for the fascist, mafia state Russian regime.

That's the reason they are in "orgasm mode".

Russia Today frames its reporting to highlight extremism and division in western societies for the purposes of boosting extremism in these societies. The Russian regime wants to end democracy worldwide wherever it can and have client quasi-dictators come to power.

If it can't have that, it desires to have countries become ungovernable through internal division and conflict, by boosting division, extremists and extremism.

In the UK, it was a promoter and funder of Brexit, and the far right of the Tory party, UKIP, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his fascist yobs and the likes are those it seeks to benefit.

Perhaps you could name these "one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue". 

The statement doesn't even make any sense. I'm not sure what "hankering after the welfare of the legacy of a statue" is.

Last time I watched RT they were defending Russian soccer hooligans as being very much maligned and misunderstood. I had a good chuckle and never watched it again. The propaganda is fairly blatant. I'm surprised they're allowed to broadcast in the UK.

[johnnycool]

Russia Today  news reports are a good watch,  in almost orgasm mode reporting on mass protests  against racist policing tactics  across Europe.
The one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue, cocooned inside a coffin, will be glad to hear that hundreds of drunken racists defended his location,  i.e. until they departed after running out of lager.

RT had their camera crew do a vox pop with passerbys in Newcastle at the foot of the monument to Earl Grey, an alleged slavery adherent. One passerby was asked "what was noteworthy about Earl Grey?"  He replied  "tea".

Russia Today is a propaganda channel for the fascist, mafia state Russian regime.

That's the reason they are in "orgasm mode".

Russia Today frames its reporting to highlight extremism and division in western societies for the purposes of boosting extremism in these societies. The Russian regime wants to end democracy worldwide wherever it can and have client quasi-dictators come to power.

If it can't have that, it desires to have countries become ungovernable through internal division and conflict, by boosting division, extremists and extremism.

In the UK, it was a promoter and funder of Brexit, and the far right of the Tory party, UKIP, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his fascist yobs and the likes are those it seeks to benefit.

Perhaps you could name these "one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue". 

The statement doesn't even make any sense. I'm not sure what "hankering after the welfare of the legacy of a statue" is.

Last time I watched RT they were defending Russian soccer hooligans as being very much maligned and misunderstood. I had a good chuckle and never watched it again. The propaganda is fairly blatant. I'm surprised they're allowed to broadcast in the UK.

It's unadultered propoganda, but interesting in the same way you'd watch Fox news or the likes so that you don't source your information in an echo chamber.

[LeoMc]

You don't think that by the early months of 1945 it was all but over for the Axis powers? I guess you could make some kind of argument for Japan holding out for a bit, but Germany?

By that time, the Red Army was already in eastern Germany, closing in on Berlin, and the Allies had crossed the Rhine.

https://omniatlas.com/maps/europe/19450324/

IMO They were on the back foot from mid 44, and any fighting was just postponing the inevitable defeat. Memory of the years following 1918 would still have been raw.

I have always thought WW1 was a more close run thing. If the Germans had held off from all out submarine war for an additional few months until the Russian revolution and that collapse on the Eastern front they could have broke through on the West. It would have been a very different Century

[Eamonnca1]

Russia Today  news reports are a good watch,  in almost orgasm mode reporting on mass protests  against racist policing tactics  across Europe.
The one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue, cocooned inside a coffin, will be glad to hear that hundreds of drunken racists defended his location,  i.e. until they departed after running out of lager.

RT had their camera crew do a vox pop with passerbys in Newcastle at the foot of the monument to Earl Grey, an alleged slavery adherent. One passerby was asked "what was noteworthy about Earl Grey?"  He replied  "tea".

Russia Today is a propaganda channel for the fascist, mafia state Russian regime.

That's the reason they are in "orgasm mode".

Russia Today frames its reporting to highlight extremism and division in western societies for the purposes of boosting extremism in these societies. The Russian regime wants to end democracy worldwide wherever it can and have client quasi-dictators come to power.

If it can't have that, it desires to have countries become ungovernable through internal division and conflict, by boosting division, extremists and extremism.

In the UK, it was a promoter and funder of Brexit, and the far right of the Tory party, UKIP, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his fascist yobs and the likes are those it seeks to benefit.

Perhaps you could name these "one or two on this board who hanker after the welfare of the legacy of the racist to the bone  imperialist Winston Churchill's statue". 

The statement doesn't even make any sense. I'm not sure what "hankering after the welfare of the legacy of a statue" is.

Last time I watched RT they were defending Russian soccer hooligans as being very much maligned and misunderstood. I had a good chuckle and never watched it again. The propaganda is fairly blatant. I'm surprised they're allowed to broadcast in the UK.

It's unadultered propoganda, but interesting in the same way you'd watch Fox news or the likes so that you don't source your information in an echo chamber.

I don't mind getting alternative viewpoints, but when a source is known for blatant lies and misinformation like Fox then there's no benefit in watching it. People who watch Fox are consistently less informed about the world than people who watch no TV news at all. That said, I'm not averse to occasionally reading the opinion section of the Newsletter to try and get an insight into the unionist mind.