Why was Dresden firebombed?

In the last days of WWII, the allies firebombed the "open city" of Dresden. At that time, Dresden was considered an "open city". That is, supposedly, there were no military facilities maintained there by the Nazis == except for some extensive P.O.W. camps holding allied prisoners. Yet, Dresden was incinerated by carpet bombings of incendiary devices. Tens of thousands were people -- including allied P.O.W.s and a picturesque city of churches, medievil architecture and factories producing porcelain and china were destroyed. The Germans maintained that the city had no military value and the Allies never revealed the reason it was bombed. The argument that the city was bombed "by accident" holds no credence as the city lights were never extinguished during air raids in an effort to clearly "mark" the city as being a non target or open city. Why was Dresden bombed? Do you suppose that there might have been secret military targets there? This is still one of the enduring mysteries of WWII

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden


A CONSPIRACY OOO! Maybe the Nazis were making undead soldiers made of steel and flesh who shot nuclear weapons from their fingers and toes! I doubt there was anything secret or crazy there, it isn't a conspiracy just bad politics and an even worse target.

Edit - added comment


[edit on 22-6-2005 by CaptainJailew]
ed to shorten link

[edit on 22-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Dresden wasn't the only victim of fire bombings, I think something like eighty thousand people died in Japan in one fire when they fire bombed Tokyo, they also fire bombed several other japanese cities. Allied War Crimes. Also interesting to note, Japan tried to surrender two weeks before we dropped the first of two nuclear devices on them.

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden


A CONSPIRACY OOO! Maybe the Nazis were making undead soldiers made of steel and flesh who shot nuclear weapons from their fingers and toes! I doubt there was anything secret or crazy there, it isn't a conspiracy just bad politics and an even worse target.

Edit - added comment
[edit on 22-6-2005 by CaptainJailew]

your added comment aside, thank you for the link. It did explain some aspects of the raid. Still, I wonder why the allies would stage such a raid, knowing the atrocious cost to civilian life that would result -- especially knowing that allied POWs camps were located there. Furthermore, the allies knowingly violated the Geneva Agreement in targeted for the knowledgable destruction of 22 hospitals. Was this really, ultimately, a political move by the allies to demonstrate air power to the Russians?

ed to shorten link

[edit on 22-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

Yeah, its not a conspiracy...

Just a few thousand well-planned deaths, is all people. Its not like the people we are talking about like to plan mega-Death events. oh wait, thats what they live for...

Yes, we need to look at the bombing of Dresden closer. It is a key event, much like the Japanese being willing to surrender PRIOR to the Atomic Bombs being dropped (the estimates of how many people would die in case of invasion, are ridiculous, because invasion was never necessary, even a public test of the Bomb would have done the trick).

It shows us that EXAMPLES were made in many countries, "Don't think it couldn't happen to you"

We can make the world cheer for your death, basically.

"We control the presses, we control the Japs and the Russians, we play both sides, Nazi and Allies, we kill civilians, we start countries where ever we want, even if it will cause 60 years of conflict, because we CAN. And afterwards, WE are the good guys"

Dresden was a sacrifice by fire, to make the world take notice.

It was ushering a new era, not of peace, but a silent, knowing fear. This was translated into the Cold War, and later realized again (^^^), with the public murder of JFK.

Originally posted by akilles
Yeah, its not a conspiracy...

Just a few thousand well-planned deaths, is all people. Its not like the people we are talking about like to plan mega-Death events. oh wait, thats what they live for...

Yes, we need to look at the bombing of Dresden closer. It is a key event, much like the Japanese being willing to surrender PRIOR to the Atomic Bombs being dropped (the estimates of how many people would die in case of invasion, are ridiculous, because invasion was never necessary, even a public test of the Bomb would have done the trick).

It shows us that EXAMPLES were made in many countries, "Don't think it couldn't happen to you"

We can make the world cheer for your death, basically.

"We control the presses, we control the Japs and the Russians, we play both sides, Nazi and Allies, we kill civilians, we start countries where ever we want, even if it will cause 60 years of conflict, because we CAN. And afterwards, WE are the good guys"

Dresden was a sacrifice by fire, to make the world take notice.

It was ushering a new era, not of peace, but a silent, knowing fear. This was translated into the Cold War, and later realized again (^^^), with the public murder of JFK.

You say that Japan would have surrendered before the atomic bomb was used and even a test bombing would have doen the trick. How then do you explain the fact that Japan refused to surrender after the first bomb was dropped??

Do you think Japan would have ised the bom on us?

Dresden is no conspiracy, I thought this was common knowledge of why.

The Germans accidentally bombed a non military UK town and killed thousands. The British commanders thought it had been done on purpose and so paid them back in a similar manner.

I don't agree with the desicion, but..

No conspracy, it was an eye for an eye type deal.

Originally posted by twitchy
Also interesting to note, Japan tried to surrender two weeks before we dropped the first of two nuclear devices on them.

That is ridiculous. The U.S., Britain and U.S.S.R. warned Japan through the Potsdam Declaration to surrender or face obliteration by a new weapon. Japan refused.

Although some civil agencies in Japan may have wanted the government to surrender, all the power was held by the military and the Emporer who had no intention of surrender until after the nuclear weapons were used.

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by twitchy
Also interesting to note, Japan tried to surrender two weeks before we dropped the first of two nuclear devices on them.

That is ridiculous. The U.S., Britain and U.S.S.R. warned Japan through the Potsdam Declaration to surrender or face obliteration by a new weapon. Japan refused.

Although some civil agencies in Japan may have wanted the government to surrender, all the power was held by the military and the Emporer who had no intention of surrender until after the nuclear weapons were used.

Way to go off topic, both of you.

Japan "allegedly" was willing to surrender before the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They supposedly sent word through the Russians, with whom they still had some diplomatic relation. However, this "surrender" came with terms outlined by the Japanese. This was unacceptable to the allies, who wanted nothing short of an unconditional surrender. It has also been said that Russia kept this overture from Japan secret from the US, as it had its own plans to invade and occupy part or all of Japan from the North.

With an imminent Soviet invasion, as well as a US land invasion that would have resulted in at least a million more deaths (regardless of what certain ATS members want to tell you), President Truman made the choice to drop the first and subsequently the second atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What those who are against the decision we made to drop the A-bombs won't tell you is that surrender was unheard of to the Japanese. Not only would we have faced a still formiddable Japanese army, but we very well would have had to battle every last Japanese man, woman and child for control of Japan. Just looking at the casualty figures leading up to the A-bombs being dropped will show you that fighting was still fierce and casualties were still high. Yet these numbers would have been relatively small compared to those resulting from a mainland invasion of Japan.

I think another factor, which I mentioned above and is often overlooked, is the likelyhood of the Soviets invading Japan from the north. This would have ultimately resulted in a divided Japan as we see today with Korea. Thus, millions more people would be living under the iron fist of tyranny. Citizens of "North Japan" would probably be feasting on their dead relatives in local cemetaries just as they are in North Korea today.

It wasn't an easy decision to make. The results were horrible. It's awful that it ever had to come to that. But it was the right decision at the time. And please, lets not act like the Japanese were Saints. The crimes against humanity that were committed by their armed forces, especially in places like Manchuria and the rest of China, were unspeakable. And don't get me started on that awful Death March they put our troops on...

"Allegedly" implies what? Link or a legit source indicating or clarifying such word use, maybe?

Try this:

The Potsdam Declaration of July 26, issued by the Allied powers and calling for "unconditional surrender," was not acceptable to the Japanese military, despite the declaration's threat that failure to surrender would be met by "complete destruction" of the military and the "utter devastation of the Japanese home land." Following ten days of Japanese silence, the atomic bomb was dropped on August 6, 1945, on the city of Hiroshima.

The Decision to Use the Bomb

Don't mind twitchy, he is continuing to read from those historical revisionist sites.


As for the firebombing of Dresden, I would concur with Kriz_4.




seekerof

[edit on 22-6-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
your added comment aside, thank you for the link. It did explain some aspects of the raid. Still, I wonder why the allies would stage such a raid, knowing the atrocious cost to civilian life that would result -- especially knowing that allied POWs camps were located there. Furthermore, the allies knowingly violated the Geneva Agreement in targeted for the knowledgable destruction of 22 hospitals. Was this really, ultimately, a political move by the allies to demonstrate air power to the Russians?

Oh Tyrant, I was simply poking fun because I am often the same way. In this instance though I do honestly believe that it was a case of retaliation as well as a demonstrable show of force to the Russians as a precursor to the Cold War. As Rasputin has said there were even thoughts entertained at the end of WWII to invade Russia while they were weak to ensure their collapse and prevent them from becoming an adversary. Even then we were enemies, the alliance was shaky at best.