Dresden was a German city that was a target of concentrated firebombing by American and British Bomber Command during WW2. American and British Bomber Command often disagreed on targets, both in purpose and in choice - American Bomber Command in Europe prioritized industrial targets; British Bomber Command preferred ‘terror bombing’ in retaliation for Nazi bombers over British cities (American Bomber Command over Japan embraced terror bombing). Dresden, however, was both a large industrial and logistics hub and a prominent German city; furthermore, the Soviets requested that Dresden be targeted to relieve pressure on the Eastern Front, as many Nazi troops and equipment passed through Dresden on their way to the Eastern Front.
Dresden was… obliterated. The full force of both the British and American air forces in Europe were concentrated on the city, and the firebombing was so intense that it created self-sustaining wind systems during the burning - a phenomenon known as a ‘firestorm’. Naturally, this is a very distressing event, and many of the civilians in Dresden remembered the situation with horror.
Nazi propaganda played up the bombing, however, increasing the claimed civilian deaths by an order of magnitude (~25,000 dead in reality - 200,000 claimed by the Nazis), and the revulsion towards firebombing and attacks on cities in the postwar period has led many to embrace such revisionism to claim that not only was Dresden unnecessary (debatable, but a legitimate objection) but a defenseless and militarily irrelevant target (both demonstrably untrue).
It was pushed quite hard by a postwar historian by the name of David Irving, who was later discredited for being… well, a pro-Nazi piece of shit. But at the time Slaughterhouse 5 came out, it could still pass amongst the public as cutting-edge popular history, so Vonnegut being taken in by it is more a reflection of the time.
Once again I’m reminded of the notion that had a genocidal maniac not decided to invade Europe, then firebomb cities, they may have not been firebombed themselves.
When everyone is punching everyone in the face nobody is right, unless someone started punching everyone else in the face and then decided to attempt to genocide everyone they didn’t like, then …. And I can’t express this strongly enough, you punch Nazis as hard as you can
I’m not saying that the Nazis didn’t need to be stopped, but a war crime is a war crime and I hate people who pretend that killing tens of thousands of civilians is ever necessary. Just live up to it and don’t pretend everything the Allies did was good.
Where explanation daddy?
Dresden was a German city that was a target of concentrated firebombing by American and British Bomber Command during WW2. American and British Bomber Command often disagreed on targets, both in purpose and in choice - American Bomber Command in Europe prioritized industrial targets; British Bomber Command preferred ‘terror bombing’ in retaliation for Nazi bombers over British cities (American Bomber Command over Japan embraced terror bombing). Dresden, however, was both a large industrial and logistics hub and a prominent German city; furthermore, the Soviets requested that Dresden be targeted to relieve pressure on the Eastern Front, as many Nazi troops and equipment passed through Dresden on their way to the Eastern Front.
Dresden was… obliterated. The full force of both the British and American air forces in Europe were concentrated on the city, and the firebombing was so intense that it created self-sustaining wind systems during the burning - a phenomenon known as a ‘firestorm’. Naturally, this is a very distressing event, and many of the civilians in Dresden remembered the situation with horror.
Nazi propaganda played up the bombing, however, increasing the claimed civilian deaths by an order of magnitude (~25,000 dead in reality - 200,000 claimed by the Nazis), and the revulsion towards firebombing and attacks on cities in the postwar period has led many to embrace such revisionism to claim that not only was Dresden unnecessary (debatable, but a legitimate objection) but a defenseless and militarily irrelevant target (both demonstrably untrue).
Holy shit, the number in Slaughterhouse 5 is from Nazi propaganda and I believed it for like 20 years. Thanks for the correction!
It was pushed quite hard by a postwar historian by the name of David Irving, who was later discredited for being… well, a pro-Nazi piece of shit. But at the time Slaughterhouse 5 came out, it could still pass amongst the public as cutting-edge popular history, so Vonnegut being taken in by it is more a reflection of the time.
Kurt Vonnegut did actually go through Dresden during the war though. Some aspects of the story in Slaughterhouse 5 were his own observations.
The number of deaths cited are what’s in question.
well… so it goes
Also just read the Wikipedia and the strength of each side in the conflict:
Nazi Germany:
UK&US:
Bomber Harris was not fucking around.
Same, and I just finished the book for the 5th time last week!
What I do believe is that firebombing a city or dropping nukes on one is only a war crime if you lose the war.
Once again I’m reminded of the notion that had a genocidal maniac not decided to invade Europe, then firebomb cities, they may have not been firebombed themselves.
When everyone is punching everyone in the face nobody is right, unless someone started punching everyone else in the face and then decided to attempt to genocide everyone they didn’t like, then …. And I can’t express this strongly enough, you punch Nazis as hard as you can
I’m not saying that the Nazis didn’t need to be stopped, but a war crime is a war crime and I hate people who pretend that killing tens of thousands of civilians is ever necessary. Just live up to it and don’t pretend everything the Allies did was good.