Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (202151)	11/14/2001 2:25:59 AM
From: Walkingshadow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

<< Think Dresden. Or perhaps Hiroshima- that was a pretty good carpet bomb. >> Dresden was arguably the single greatest example of a carpet bomb, killing more civilians that Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined after [I believe] a solid week of 24/7 incendiary bombing. Estimates range from 135,000 to as high as 250,000, but the firebombing of Tokyo (estimated 100,000 dead) may also have eclipsed the estimated casualties from the nuclear blasts. Dresden had little or no impact on the Nazi's ability to wage war, but did kill enormous numbers of women, children, and old men (all the young men were fighting the war). If I recall correctly, evidently many of them died not from the fire per se, but from suffocation since the constant inferno sucked all air into itself, reportedly causing hurricane-force winds. And the bombing of Dresden accomplished nothing militarily, other than a holocaust. Dresden was firebombed only 10 weeks before Germany surrendered; the war was all but over. Dresden was filled with refugees and peasants, and had zero military value. Further, this from an article in the L.A. Times: <<.....a postwar U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that such bombing did little to erode civilian morale or impede war production. >> eppc.org The primary reason for the devastation in both Dresden and Tokyo was that both cities were primarily built of wood, so comparatively smaller tonnage caused enormous damage. By contrast, high-explosive and incendiary bombing of largely stone cities such as Berlin caused far fewer casualties, despite the tonnage being far greater. Regarding Hiroshima, another good carpet bombing, but again the target was not particularly strategic, largely destroyed residential and urban areas. Partly, that's because extensive bombing over the space of years had destroyed much of the infrastructure in Japan already, and Japan's ability to wage war at that point was practically nonexistent. But I believe that, as was true in Dresden, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fairly anticlimactic, since the war was already all but over. At that point in 1945, Japan could no longer mount a serious attack. It's Navy and Air Force was almost completely destroyed thanks to decisive naval battles, and our ground troops were rapidly gobbling up every bit of territory they once controlled outside of the main islands of Japan itself. However, it might have avoided an invasion of Japan, and if so, prevented what was estimated to be 1 million American casualties. These considerations again lead me to the conclusion I've maintained all along: carpet bombing is of little military or strategic value unless carried out unrelentingly over the course of years, and is frequently actually counterproductive. Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki are three prime examples of the phenomena that those witnessing these think that they are having far more effect than is the case. All three examples had practically no strategic effect in the military sense. But they did manage to vaporize at least 300,000 non-combatants. Personally, I call that worse than simply a wasted effort. It is flat wrong, particularly in light of the fact that both wars were already over. But, JMVHO, of course.... Walkingshadow