And neither do you Barry. Not to worry. When you pass on we shall commission a nice statue of you and on the plinth will be the legend “Barry The Tolerant.”
ps - You had a mention on Fiverweb the other day as Sotonians resident racist. Well done mate. You have now officially joined the ranks of Sour Mash, Batman and hypocondriac!
Historical fact or codshit?
They wanted to drop the bomb for other reasons.
In July, Secretary of the Navy James V. Forrestal’s diary described the latest cables as “real evidence of a Japanese desire to get out of the war . . . .”
You see you let yourself down, where have I ever said anything racist.
You’re better than that lad.
Ah sorry Barry. I didnt realise that the Nazis werent looking to kill civilians when they started the Blitz or flattened Coventry.
Here is a quote for you from a history book “Hitler believed that by targetting civilians he could force the British to surrender and on 7th September 1940 began his daily bombing campaign. London was the main target but other major cities were targetted.”
SOG please just stop, why was Coventry targeted?
Why were the London docks targeted?
Transport centres, munitions centres and military targets were the primary objective, bombing houses saps the will but it won’t stop the war effort or resistance.
I am not saying that industrial targets werent included. But look at maps of where the bombs fell. They were not all “military” targets by any means and they were looking to break the will of the population. Our Bomber Command would argue that the heavy bombing campaigns against Germany shortened the end of the war in the same way the use of H bomds did in Japan.
Some more info on Dresden and why Bomber Command thought it a legit target -
The city boasted that it was one of the foremost industrial locations in the Reich and 127 factories had secretly been switched to war work, making bomb-aiming apparatus, searchlights and parts for V1 flying bombs, to name just a few. Dresden was also about to take a more active role in the fighting. The German High Command had designated it as a defensive military strongpoint against the Russian advance from the east. It was also a vital link in the German rail network - 28 military transports a day came through Dresden with troops and tanks. The city was a war factory, a fortress and a transport hub. This made it a legitimate target for the bombers.
Please just stop, Dresden wasn’t a legitimate target at all, the war was won, it had few if any anti aircraft guns as they had been taken out, no Luftwaffe at all.
I’ll give you a clue, what did Dresden was incredibly important to Germany but bomber command didn’t bomb there, they bomb the City centre.
A fortress? What shit are you reading off the internet, Dresden was defenceless.
Also this was a show off to the Russians.
A liberal saying the bombing of Dresden was justified through his ignorance and the accused racist by said ignorant liberal saying the bombing was unjustified and cruel.
This website, if nothing else it’ll make you chuckle.
No more defenceless than london, Coventry, Birmingham, Liverpool etc etc. The Russians would have just walked through Dresden would they?
Here is a quote from another history book for you - “Because the Battle of Britain had failed, Hitler thought that by bombing the British into submission he would be able to invade them. Another reason for Hitler starting the Blitz was to disrupt the British economy and industry. From November 1940, the Luftwaffe began to concentrate on other British cities.”
It isnt me you need to tell to stop, it is published historians.
As for bombing the likes of Dresden and Cologne, would you say that anything done to try and shorten the war was a good thing? You seem to think that dropping atomic bombs on Japan was, so what is the difference?
I didnt say that I was justifying the bombing of Dresden. I am saying that Bomber Command justified it and gave reasons for that, which you have chosen to ignore as you do everything that doesnt suit your agenda. There was far more civilian destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but you dont seem to have a problem with that.
My eyes are watering, what does Blitzkrieg mean?
Take this further and think about it?
Answer the question, whopper!
Of course I have a problem with it but the US didn’'t and they rightly justified their actions as they didn’t want to lose more men in attrional warfare, Dresden is to the East of Germany so the Russians/Soviets would be fighting them, well not fighting as there was no opposition.
Women and children were the vast majority of deaths, they bombed the City deliberately with specific incendiary devices designed to cause firestorms.
Call me soft but just up there you wrote it was a legitimate target for bombers.
The World’s longest blitzkrieg…
No answers Barry? Codshit is is then.
Firestorms, high explosives, atom bombs. Is one any better than the other?
As you seem to like history so much but usually miss the plot entirely, here is another helpful quote for you regarding Nazi tactics…
“The huge fear generated by the Guernica bombing during the Spanish Civil War convinced many people that a civilian population could be bombed into submission. The theory was that the population, in constant fear of a sudden and violent death, would put pressure on their government to surrender. If that government did not surrender, then the population would take to the streets, riot and overthrow the government. The whole point of a sustained bombing campaign was to destroy a nation’s morale.”
You might also like to research the use by the Nazi’s of the V1 and V2 rockets which were fired randomly at this country in their thousands from 1944. Their aim was poor so they couldnt be used to pinpoint specific targets. Instead they were used to terrify the cilivilian population.
As we know, the Blitz tactic did not work and whilst inflcting a huge death toll and damage to our cities and towns, had the opposite effect on morale.
I was born just 9 years after the end of WW2. I lived in London and played on the old bomb sites. My family would tell me many tales of the war and the Blitz in general. They weren’t just bombed, they were also straffed by machine gun fire. Civilians were just as much targets as the docks or industrial units.
Why would you have a problem with something that brought about the end of the war in the Pacific? The Russians were part of the Allied forces. If Germany had not invaded Russian and kept on attacking us, we would have been screwed so the Russians played a big part in the final victory. As for Dresden being defenceless, who come the Russian had to fight every inch of the way to Berlin? Bomber Command argue that they made it easier for the Russian advance by sofening up various targets. Why is that wrong? Women and children died in bombing all over Europe, not just in Dresden. The Germans also used incendiary devices. If we had the H Bomb, dont you think we would have used that instead? If if it saved more lives in the long run and brought about the fall of a tyranical regime and shortened the war, is that a bad thing?
Thats a theory not proof,the well known thought process is the US after taking some islands before wanted a quick ending, where was Japanese surrender? How could that be passed to the population? Who resisted to be taken prisoner let alone surrender?
Off for a beer.
There’s more evidence for this than your Hollywood history.
Off from the kids again. Why is it that your happy to give Murdoch 3x the price of a season ticket again?
Tell us the History of Lee(remember him?), when and why the statue went up, if you can squeeze it in between getting pissed and avoiding the family, that’d be great. Then we can go onto the real reason for dropping those bombs.
Be warned, there’s no Muslims involved. Not one.