American and British forces bombarded Dresden in Germany on February 13 1945

[AdmiralAnthony]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

There is so much sentimental crap and distortion of facts in this thread it makes me sick.

By all means please leave if you don't like this forum. No-one here will miss you.

[madjackmcmad]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

At least I use facts an reason to debate.

Apart from that 'fact' you haven't. You've spouted your own personal opinion on a subject then gone on a diatribe about how the likes of me are responsible for a fucked up world when i've done nothing but agree Dresden was a terrible moment in human history but i'd certainly have no hesitation in doing it again were I in 1945 asked to make that call.

it's neither my nor your opinion, it's just right or wrong. See?

According to who? Morals are subjective and fluctuate all the time. As does right and wrong. Do you see what I'm getting at? Some muslim cultures consider nothing is wrong with stoning. Westerners think they are backward fucks from the stoneage.

'It's just right and wrong' is such wet cop out BS because they fucking change depending on your own POV!! Unless there is this universal 'right and wrong' governing body i've not heard about.

Therefore what is considered 'righteous' and 'wrong' do change and are always in flux.

There is so much sentimental crap and distortion of facts in this thread it makes me sick.

I'm thinking the exact same thing about you.

[LondonFox]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Quite. So why where you all so shocked on 7/7? If you're gonna make an omelett you have to break some eggs, no?

We weren't shocked... who said we were? The UK has dealt with pathetic terrorists and bombs going off in our lands for longer than most nations would ever dream of... IRA anyone?

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

You did most of that yourselves Don't blame the Luftwaffe, blame your own architects and city planners.

Oh... teeheehee that's funny isn't it. Most of the bad buildings in the UK were built post WW2 actually... but who's being realistic here..

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Really? Seriously? You've just completely underminded yourself.

How? I am merely lowering myself to madjackmcmad's level in order to make sense to him.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

By the way how does it feel to belong to a nation which sided itself with Nazi Germany during WWII? Not your finest hour eh? Although with respect you did famously against the Russians in 1939-40.

I feel nothing. But you clearly don't know the history of Finland do you? Siding with Nazi Germany was not our finest hour, but it was the only chance we had to survive as a nation. Look what happened to the whole of Eastern Europe. Finnish politicans very skillfully manoeuvred between two giants (The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany) and Finland remained unconquered. We tried to befriend Britain and France but their ties to the Soviet Union made such a friendship impossible. We actually had to fight both the Russians and ze Germans but we remained free. Finland had no ideological ties to Nazi Germany, we were a democratic country taking advantage of the Nazi war machine. However, I agree that the way the Winter War and the Continuation War are being glorified in Finland is sad and stupid.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

Apart from that 'fact' you haven't. You've spouted your own personal opinion on a subject then gone on a diatribe about how the likes of me are responsible for a fucked up world when i've done nothing but agree Dresden was a terrible moment in human history but i'd certainly have no hesitation in doing it again were I in 1945 asked to make that call.

No I haven't. You say you yourself would actually have no problem giving the order to murder those people would it be necessary. That just means you do not understand the meaning of morality. I would not shoot one person even if I could save a million lives. Stop this utilitarianist bullshit!

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

According to who?

Why does it matter?

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

Morals are subjective and fluctuate all the time. As does right and wrong. Do you see what I'm getting at? Some muslim cultures consider nothing is wrong with stoning. Westerners think they are backward fucks from the stoneage.

Stoning is dead wrong. Why do you side with those muslims who support it? Why not with those who don't? It's not about culture. Fuck culture, it's a human construct, just like religion. There are religious nutters in the western world as well, but that doesn't mean the western cultures support lynching.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

It's just right and wrong' is such wet cop out BS because they fucking change depending on your own POV!! Unless there is this universal 'right and wrong' governing body i've not heard about.

Lol, you just slammed great minds like Plato, Socrates and Kant with your ignorant opinion. I'm not trying to be arrogant but please read a bit about morals before making a fool of yourself. Why do you think right or wrong have to be attached to some physical being?? They just are, and we as humans have to figure out what the right thing is. The most egoist, ignorant and arrogant thing to say is that my morals are always correct because I just happen to think they are. I mean wtf??

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

Therefore what is considered 'righteous' and 'wrong' do change and are always in flux.

What is considered right is not the same as what really is right. Do you think killing people in the arenas of Rome was morally right just because it happened long ago? Or burning women in the 17th century? Killing Jews in the 20th century? War, murder, rape etc is always wrong, always was wrong, and always will be. But as you say maybe society will become brutal in the future and murder will be legalized. I for one do not think that makes it right.

Originally Posted by LondonFox

We weren't shocked... who said we were? The UK has dealt with pathetic terrorists and bombs going off in our lands for longer than most nations would ever dream of... IRA anyone?

You weren't shocked? What kind of reaction is that?

Originally Posted by LondonFox

Oh... teeheehee that's funny isn't it. Most of the bad buildings in the UK were built post WW2 actually... but who's being realistic here

No it's not funny, it's sad. Ever heard of post-war modernisation? In the 50s many British cities looked very much like they did before the war and could have been perfectly restored and rebuilt. Then came the modernists. Terrible road planning, suburbanisation, depopulation, large-scale demolition and slum clearing resulted in the cities we see today. Most German cities onther other hand are still densely built, urban, denesly populated and well organized places. Not always attractive though. And don't get me wrong, Britain has some fantastic cities, it's just they could be much better.

[LondonFox]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

You weren't shocked? What kind of reaction is that?

The reaction of someone who would expect something of the sort to happen eventually. You take an active role on the world stage.. unlike most other European nations who couldn't care less about whats happening beyond their own borders and something like this is bound to happen... that's not to say it isn't sad.. but its hardly a surprise.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

No it's not funny, it's sad. Ever heard of post-war modernisation?

Yup, the UK is currently experiencing massive modernisation projects up and down the country.. some of the biggest in Europe.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

In the 50s many British cities looked very much like they did before the war and could have been perfectly restored and rebuilt. Then came the modernists. Terrible road planning, suburbanisation, depopulation, large-scale demolition and slum clearing resulted in the cities we see today. Most German cities onther other hand are still densely built, urban, denesly populated and well organized places. Not always attractive though. And don't get me wrong, Britain has some fantastic cities, it's just they could be much better.

Yeah, but the UK was broke for the next 40 or 50 years after the war... and we had to actually repay our debts to the US before we could start to get on our feet properly again.. so stuff was done on the cheap... unlike Germany that had its debt slate wiped clear before repayments were to be made... meaning great investment to get back on their feet was made for free more or less... you might say they weren't the real losers of WW2.

[skit_uk]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Look what happened to the whole of Eastern Europe. Finnish politicans very skillfully manoeuvred between two giants (The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany) and Finland remained unconquered.

Finland remained unconquered because they fought a very fierce war against Russia and refused to be overran, they managed to delay the advance of the Russians and inflict massive losses on them. Eventually Britain, the US and Sweden started to dispatch troops and war machinery to Finland, this caused the Russians to agree to only modest land gains in Finland.
As one Russian general said at the time "We have won just enough land to bury our dead"

If it wasn't for the British and other standing up against the Russians and backing that with military might then the outcome would be very different.

[madjackmcmad]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

How? I am merely lowering myself to madjackmcmad's level in order to make sense to him.

Man, how big is that ego You know for someone who said that the man who resorts to abuse has lost the argument you're making a pretty good case yourself.

I would not shoot one person even if I could save a million lives. Stop this utilitarianist bullshit!

Would you shoot a suicide bomber dead if it saved a whole marketplace? I would.

You are also only too eager to go along with a regime gassing 6 million to save your own countrys bacon, it seems. I believe that was the right thing to do too btw, even if the regime you sided with was abhorrent.

Stoning is dead wrong. Why do you side with those muslims who support it?

I believe it is wrong too, but other people don't. What makes us right and them wrong? Why do you constantly misrepresent what i've said in your ramblings? Point out to me where I 'side with muslims'. Are you islamophobic Bricks? (See, two can play at that game)

Lol, you just slammed great minds like Plato, Socrates and Kant with your ignorant opinion. I'm not trying to be arrogant but please read a bit about morals before making a fool of yourself. Why do you think right or wrong have to be attached to some physical being?? They just are, and we as humans have to figure out what the right thing is. The most egoist, ignorant and arrogant thing to say is that my morals are always correct because I just happen to think they are. I mean wtf??

A load of sensationalist dribble considering a) I've constantly said war is a situation where humanity has lost its morals b) I've not once declared that my views are set in stone 'right' (infact this is what YOU are doing) and c) You're the biggest egotist by far on this thread.

And for christsake don't go quoting Plato & Socrates at me as though they are the definition of reality. I'm a human being, i'll think for myself.

Killing Jews in the 20th century?

Yet Finland went along with a regime that practised it. Was Finland wrong to side with this regime or not?

[LondonFox]

Where the fuck is Finland anyway? You've made this country up I swear...

Do people look like this in Finland?

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by skit_uk

Finland remained unconquered because they fought a very fierce war against Russia and refused to be overran, they managed to delay the advance of the Russians and inflict massive losses on them. Eventually Britain, the US and Sweden started to dispatch troops and war machinery to Finland, this caused the Russians to agree to only modest land gains in Finland.
As one Russian general said at the time "We have won just enough land to bury our dead"

If it wasn't for the British and other standing up against the Russians and backing that with military might then the outcome would be very different.

Not really. Britain and France did offer help, but it was small and their main goal was to occupy Sweden so that the Germans wouldn't get their hands on Swedish ore. The Russians pulled out, because they did not want to confront Britain and France. France and Britain, however, did not want to confront Russia either so it is very much in doubt that they would have risked losing an alley over Finland. It was fierce fighting and luck that saved Finland. In the Continuation War we were saved by, besides fierce fighting again, German weapons and the great conflict between Germany and the Soviet Union.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

Man, how big is that ego You know for someone who said that the man who resorts to abuse has lost the argument you're making a pretty good case yourself.

It wasn't meant as an insult. What else can I do, you simply can't understand me?

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

You are also only too eager to go along with a regime gassing 6 million to save your own countrys bacon, it seems. I believe that was the right thing to do too btw, even if the regime you sided with was abhorrent.

Eh? How exactly did we "go along" with them? We simply took advantage of them and in the end even had to fight them.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

I believe it is wrong too, but other people don't. What makes us right and them wrong? Why do you constantly misrepresent what i've said in your ramblings? Point out to me where I 'side with muslims'. Are you islamophobic Bricks? (See, two can play at that game)

You contradict yourself. Don't you see? You claim that it is ok in that culture to....That means you identify that culture with those individuals of the culture who believe stoning (or whatever) is right. There are millions of people in the Middle East who think stoning is wrong, why not speak for them?

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

A load of sensationalist dribble considering a) I've constantly said war is a situation where humanity has lost its morals b) I've not once declared that my views are set in stone 'right' (infact this is what YOU are doing) and c) You're the biggest egotist by far on this thread.

Humanity doesn't lose its morals, it hides them. What I am saying is that right and wrong is absolute (that very much means it is out of my control to manipulate them to fit my views). You on the other hand say that everybody form their one opinions on what is wrong and right which means that every human being takes on the role of God. I.e. "whatever I want to believe is right is right for me, our opinions just differ". This is egoist and arrogant.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

And for christsake don't go quoting Plato & Socrates at me as though they are the definition of reality. I'm a human being, i'll think for myself.

It may come as a surprise to you but reading and learning actually improves you own individual thinking. For example music architecture are not merely about opinons and taste. If you are not musical and don't know shit about architecture you are simply ignorant and need to educate yourself.

I've discussed this a hundred times with people just like you who think they are so independent. I've heard your arguments so many times before, just from other people. You lot are so independent.

Originally Posted by madjackmcmad

Yet Finland went along with a regime that practised it. Was Finland wrong to side with this regime or not?

Yeah, we helped them murder the jews. I mean all those infamous Finnish concentration camps..

[AdmiralAnthony]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Look what happened to the whole of Eastern Europe.

Stalingrad 1942/1943.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

You say you yourself would actually have no problem giving the order to murder those people would it be necessary. That just means you do not understand the meaning of morality. I would not shoot one person even if I could save a million lives.

You would not shoot one person to save 1 million lives? Wow good job you are not a leader who has to make that choice. I would do it without hesitation. Any sane human being would do that. No one person is worth saving at the cost of a million deaths. You are very ignorant. If you yourself are forced into that actual situation I guarantee you will shoot the person in front of you in order to save a city of a million people being wiped out, and to say you wouldn't is wholly a lie in itself.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

What is considered right is not the same as what really is right. Killing Jews in the 20th century? War, murder, rape etc is always wrong, always was wrong, and always will be.

Have you been to Belsen or Buchenwald or Auschwitz? HAVE YOU BEEN TO THEM?? ANY OF THEM?? It's no isn't it? Until you have been to one of these camps (Ive been to Buchenwald in 2005) your opinion, with respect, can be royaly shoved up your ass.

Buchenwald liberation photos:




In February 1945 at the time of the Dresden Bombing raid, the Allies had still not crossed the Rhine River. German resistance was furocious, Market Garden had been a failure, the Americans had fought bitterly in the battle of the Bulge, the Soviets were struggling a little on the Eastern front, Britain was still being bombed by V2 rockets and first hand accounts and pictures were coming in of the German concentration camps and the horrors within.
Faced with this information and the fact that there was evidence to believe that Germany could hold on until November, and in the back of their minds the Allies knowing the Germans will still pursuing development of a Nuclear Bomb, all measures neccessary to end the war at the earliest opportunity were taken. The loss of innocent life is always regrettable and sad but when faced with a Total War scenario and when faced with a regeime as sickenning as the Nazi's the Dresden Bombing was wholly justified.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Britain has some fantastic cities, it's just they could be much better.

Fuck off, your Finnish cities were hardly touched during WWII. We got bombed to shit by the German Airforce, why don't you do a bit of history reading on the Second World War and what the Germans did before you post bullshit on this forum.

The Blitz

[skit_uk]

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

In February 1945 at the time of the Dresden Bombing raid, the Allies had still not crossed the Rhine River. German resistance was furocious, Market Garden had been a failure, the Americans had fought bitterly in the battle of the Bulge, the Soviets were struggling a little on the Eastern front, Britain was still being bombed by V2 rockets and first hand accounts and pictures were coming in of the German concentration camps and the horrors within.
Faced with this information and the fact that there was evidence to believe that Germany could hold on until November, and in the back of their minds the Allies knowing the Germans will still pursuing development of a Nuclear Bomb, all measures neccessary to end the war at the earliest opportunity were taken. The loss of innocent life is always regrettable and sad but when faced with a Total War scenario and when faced with a regeime as sickenning as the Nazi's the Dresden Bombing was wholly justified.

This sums it up nicely. It's all well and good to start pinning blame on people and events many years after the war when we have accurate histories from both sides. Think what it was like for the allies commanders and politicians at the time the decision to target Dresden was being made. The fog of war, the uncertainty of German strengths, not knowing if the Germans had a V3 or V4 that could swing the war in the Germans favour. In the situation they found themselves in they needed to keep the momentum on the Allies side and finish the Germans off before they could recover.

Dresden was a military tactic, the holocust was the slaughter of an entire race of people for ideological reasons. You can not compare the two.

[gothicform]

In February 1945 at the time of the Dresden Bombing raid, the Allies had still not crossed the Rhine River. German resistance was furocious, Market Garden had been a failure, the Americans had fought bitterly in the battle of the Bulge, the Soviets were struggling a little on the Eastern front, Britain was still being bombed by V2 rockets and first hand accounts and pictures were coming in of the German concentration camps and the horrors within.
Faced with this information and the fact that there was evidence to believe that Germany could hold on until November, and in the back of their minds the Allies knowing the Germans will still pursuing development of a Nuclear Bomb, all measures neccessary to end the war at the earliest opportunity were taken. The loss of innocent life is always regrettable and sad but when faced with a Total War scenario and when faced with a regeime as sickenning as the Nazi's the Dresden Bombing was wholly justified.

quite... dresden was followed by a rapid german collapse of resistance on both fronts. on the eastern front this was linked in part to the bombing itself. one need only look at the russian military maps from the period to see they were advancing towards dresden and the surrounding area in force - the idea then being to advance into germany and south from there too. it's hard to say what would have happened had we not bombed dresden but perhaps this shows the scale of the combat to be expected -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Offensive

one of the big mistakes of world war 2 was that the british did not use the undeniably massive destructive power of bomber command to just blitz a way through the germans more.

here's wesel after bomber command visited, the town wouldn't surrender and there were approaching british troops. that dead space in the middle where the craters are flattened out into nothing is where a ten tonne bomb was dropped.

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Stalingrad 1942/1943.

And your point is?

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

You would not shoot one person to save 1 million lives? Wow good job you are not a leader who has to make that choice. I would do it without hesitation. Any sane human being would do that. No one person is worth saving at the cost of a million deaths. You are very ignorant.

To shoot the guy would mean depriving him/her of all the things that makes us human beings.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

If you yourself are forced into that actual situation I guarantee you will shoot the person in front of you in order to save a city of a million people being wiped out, and to say you wouldn't is wholly a lie in itself.

Unlike you I don't base what is right and wrong on what I would do in a particular situation. Maybe I would shoot the person, but that would just make me immoral. See? What you or I would do in a situation is not what makes something right or wrong.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Have you been to Belsen or Buchenwald or Auschwitz? HAVE YOU BEEN TO THEM?? ANY OF THEM?? It's no isn't it? Until you have been to one of these camps (Ive been to Buchenwald in 2005) your opinion, with respect, can be royaly shoved up your ass. Buchenwald liberation photos

I was going, but the trip was then cancelled I will go someday. However, that is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Again what are you trying to prove? Are you disagreeing with me that killing is wrong regardless of space and time?? You make no sense.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

In February 1945 at the time of the Dresden Bombing raid, the Allies had still not crossed the Rhine River. German resistance was furocious, Market Garden had been a failure, the Americans had fought bitterly in the battle of the Bulge, the Soviets were struggling a little on the Eastern front, Britain was still being bombed by V2 rockets and first hand accounts and pictures were coming in of the German concentration camps and the horrors within.
Faced with this information and the fact that there was evidence to believe that Germany could hold on until November, and in the back of their minds the Allies knowing the Germans will still pursuing development of a Nuclear Bomb, all measures neccessary to end the war at the earliest opportunity were taken. The loss of innocent life is always regrettable and sad but when faced with a Total War scenario and when faced with a regeime as sickenning as the Nazi's the Dresden Bombing was wholly justified.

Most ill-informed post ever! Germany was finished in 1944 and on the brink of collapse by 1945.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

“Dresden, the seventh largest city in Germany and not much smaller than Manchester is also the largest unbombed builtup area the enemy has got. In the midst of winter with refugees pouring westward and troops to be rested, roofs are at a premium, not only to give shelter to workers, refugees, and troops alike, but to house the administrative services displaced from other areas. At one time well known for its china, Dresden has developed into an industrial city of first-class importance.... The intentions of the attack are to hit the enemy where he will feel it most, behind an already partially collapsed front... and incidentally to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do."

So basically it was a mass attack on civilians, and as stated in the article posted (which you probably ignored) civilians were deliberately attacked with bombs and machine guns. It was also a message to the Russians. There was no fucking need for it, just like there was no need for the atomic attacks on Japan. And don't get me started on the Germans a-bomb nonsense. Hitler cared nothing for that project.

Sigh.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Fuck off, your Finnish cities were hardly touched during WWII. We got bombed to shit by the German Airforce, why don't you do a bit of history reading on the Second World War and what the Germans did before you post bullshit on this forum.

Hardly touched? And what do you base that on? Nothing as usual. Hundreds of Russian and American planes attacked Helsinki, on the 26th of February 929 planes attacked the city, dropping 16 500 bombs (2600 tons). The Russian attack on Helsinki was just as great as the Allied attack on Dresden (number of planes that is) but thanks to the outstanding airdefense of Helsinki, unexperienced Russians pilots and not very big planes the city was saved from large scale destruction. However, the Russians thought they had pretty muched plattened the city. It was not until after the war that they discovered how small the damage was in relation to the massive efforts by the Russians to destroy the city.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

The Blitz

Very good. That is indeed the Blitz. 40 000 dead. About the same numer of people killed by the RAF in a couple of hours during the bombing of Hamburg.

[AdmiralAnthony]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

And your point is?

My point is that you cannot understand the devestation Nazi Germany was creating on the Eastern Front or on all fronts for that matter. The German desire to exterminate people and destroy everything had an affect on those who made the political and military decisions during the war.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

To shoot the guy would mean depriving him/her of all the things that makes us human beings.

Human beings are savages deep down. Always have been always will be. You're trying to distinguish between what is morally acceptable and what under the circumstances is the only right choice to make.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Unlike you I don't base what is right and wrong on what I would do in a particular situation. Maybe I would shoot the person, but that would just make me immoral. See? What you or I would do in a situation is not what makes something right or wrong.

This would not make you immoral. You are already placed in an immoral situation, there is only now a right choice and a wrong choice. 1 death or a million deaths what's it gonna be?

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

I was going, but the trip was then cancelled I will go someday. However, that is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Again what are you trying to prove? Are you disagreeing with me that killing is wrong regardless of space and time?? You make no sense.

Good then shut your mouth as you have no idea what immoral and abhorrent a regeime the Nazi's were, and what we were fighting against.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Most ill-informed post ever! Germany was finished in 1944 and on the brink of collapse by 1945.

"Sneezes"...sorry i'm alergic to complete and utter bullshit.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

So basically it was a mass attack on civilians, and as stated in the article posted (which you probably ignored) civilians were deliberately attacked with bombs and machine guns. It was also a message to the Russians. There was no fucking need for it, just like there was no need for the atomic attacks on Japan. And don't get me started on the Germans a-bomb nonsense. Hitler cared nothing for that project.

No it was a mass attack on a strateigically important city of industry, infrastructure (which connected it to other important areas), and a German military rendevous point. The fact there were civilians living and working there is beside the point.
If Hezbollah sets up a number of biological tipped rocket in Gaza ready for imminent firing over the border to Israel, it is entirely the fault of Hezbollah that they have allowed the launch site or indeed the whole of Gaza to be an acceptable target for retailiation by the Israelis with a nuclear weapon, regardless whether their are innocent civilians in the area, to ensure that all the biological tipped rockets are destroyed.

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Very good. That is indeed the Blitz. 40 000 dead. About the same numer of people killed by the RAF in a couple of hours during the bombing of Hamburg.

Leviticus chapter 24:20 ..fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has injured the other, so he is to be injured.. so says the word of God.

[gothicform]

Most ill-informed post ever! Germany was finished in 1944 and on the brink of collapse by 1945.

except it wasn't. until german resistance collapsed in feb/mar 1945 everyone expected the war to go on until november 1945. germany certainly wasn't finished for the people who were dying in concentration camps by the million.

[AdmiralAnthony]

Originally Posted by gothicform

except it wasn't. Germany certainly wasn't finished for the people who were dying in concentration camps by the million.

Another good point which i was going to type down but forgot.

Mr Bricks, "Germany 'finished' in 1944" go tell that to the relatives of the 6 million jews who were exterminated.

The Allies used overwhelming force (yes extra civilians died as a result of this) to end the war early. By ending the war early, POW's and others in concentration camps survived, less allied troops died, less civilians as a whole died because the war was not prolonged.

[Aesir]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

Yeah, we helped them murder the jews. I mean all those infamous Finnish concentration camps..

gonna throw bricks some help here, my wife's family is from St Petersburg and the Finn's made their line NW of St Petersburg pretty porous and never advanced far into russian territory so they actually were kind of neutral in the particular area of conflict.

[Crash_N]

Disclaimer: this is just for humour's sake, I'm on the "British side"

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

My point is that you cannot understand the devestation Nazi Germany was creating on the Eastern Front or on all fronts for that matter. The German desire to exterminate people and destroy everything had an affect on those who made the political and military decisions during the war.

And neither can you so shut it!

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Human beings are savages deep down. Always have been always will be. You're trying to distinguish between what is morally acceptable and what under the circumstances is the only right choice to make.

Maybe according to your Hitlerian views. I highy disagree.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

This would not make you immoral. You are already placed in an immoral situation, there is only now a right choice and a wrong choice. 1 death or a million deaths what's it gonna be?

As I said maybe I would do it. Doesn't make it right.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Good then shut your mouth as you have no idea what immoral and abhorrent a regeime the Nazi's were, and what we were fighting against.

Oh stop talking like you were there, I read books you looks at pictures and watch movies.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

"Sneezes"...sorry i'm alergic to complete and utter bullshit.

Once the Russians had broken the back of Wehrmacht Germany was finished. Are yo seriously telling me bombing Dresden made a difference? It didn't.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

No it was a mass attack on a strateigically important city of industry, infrastructure (which connected it to other important areas), and a German military rendevous point. The fact there were civilians living and working there is beside the point.
If Hezbollah sets up a number of biological tipped rocket in Gaza ready for imminent firing over the border to Israel, it is entirely the fault of Hezbollah that they have allowed the launch site or indeed the whole of Gaza to be an acceptable target for retailiation by the Israelis with a nuclear weapon, regardless whether their are innocent civilians in the area, to ensure that all the biological tipped rockets are destroyed.

Then why was the infrastructure and much of sthe industry left intact? Why were they not even included on the RAF maps? They were deliberately targeting civilians. Ffs Churchill himself said that the whole idea was to blow Germany off the map, killing as many people as possible.

Originally Posted by AdmiralAnthony

Leviticus chapter 24:20 ..fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has injured the other, so he is to be injured.. so says the word of God.

You are insane. I mean if it's in the Bible it has to be true! Oh boy what a serious historian we've got here! Just go away.

[Mr Bricks]

Can't you see your own hypocaracy? Admiring Bomber Command and pictures of utterly destroyed German cities while at the same time saying how terrible and destructive the Nazis were. You should be ashamed of yourselves!