Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
150. Dresden, remember who it was aimed at.
Wed Aug 7, 2013, 03:27 AM
Aug 2013

Dresden, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki were aimed as a warning to a specific enemy, the Soviet Union. The warning was simple, the west had the ability to bomb cities and kill all of the residents of those cities. Notice the aim was NOT at Germany or Japan, those countries were already defeated just the formal surrender and terms of the surrender were in question when the above bombings occurred, but the Soviet Union.

These bombings had NOTHING to do with repaying the Japanese for whatever they had done, it had everything to do with how to deal with the Soviet Union. In the west, we tend to take a view that without western Aid, Hitler would have defeated the Soviet Union. While western aid helped the Soviet Union in its war with Germany (and Stalin's bad tactical decisions at the beginning of the German Invasion did not help the Soviet Union), the German Army was stopped and put on the retreat with most of that aid still in the supply line. i.e. it was mostly Soviet Resources that the Red Army use to stop the Germans and put them on the retreat NOT western aid.

Now, by the time of Stalingrad in the winter of 1942-1943, Western Aid was a significant assistance to the Soviet's fight with Germany, but by most accounts, the Red Army would still taken Berlin without that aid, but one or two years later then when it did. Once Stalin called back the Generals he had purged in the late 1930s and gave them the freedom to do what they wanted to do, the German gains of 1941 became a thing of the past. Another factor in the 1941 offensive is indications that Germany did not attack an Army on the Defensive, but one about to attack. The difference is best shown in how the Soviet Army acted in the first months of the war. The Red Army acted like it was NOT falling back on its own supply lines, in fact it appears the Germans had captured must of the supplies intended for the Soviet Army. In an army on the defensive you want your supplies at a safe distance to your rear, so the enemy can not reach it and if you have to, you retreat to those supplies. It is an army that is going to attack that wants its supplies up close, so the army can have such supplies follow them when it attacks. Such supplies were close to the Soviet Forces on the Frontier with Germany and thus indications that the Soviet Army was going to attack. In many ways to attack such an army first, is to destroy it for you easily separate it from its supplies as you surround that army and take the supplies for your own use.

I bring the concept of a Soviet attack being planned in 1941 to show that since the Germans attack first and it was attacking an army set to attack not defend, once those frontier forces were defeated it made the whole operation easier for the Germany Army. The person to blame for this was Stalin (along with his dismissal of many of the top officers of the Red Army during the purges of the late 1930s).

I also bring the above up, for once those losses were made up (by moving troops from elsewhere) the Soviet Red Army was able to stop the German Army at the Gates of Moscow and send it into retreat. The German army would go on the offensive in 1942, but it would be on the weak southern front NOT any attack on Moscow and that attacked also ended up in defeat. By 1943 the Soviet Army was the better of the two armies on the Eastern Front and that would continue till Berlin fell to the Russians in 1945.

I bring this up for Dresden was done to impress the Russians as they entered Germany. Even after the invasion of Normandy, most German Troops stayed on the Eastern Front. That was the main front, what was happening in Italy and France was, at best, a secondary concern for the Germans.

As to the Russians, they had the supplies to keep their army in the field. In many ways the much smaller western armies were having a hard time to match. The US Supply lines across France collapsed in September 1945 and no further offensive operations was possible after that date (Operation Market Garden was the last real effort to attack till spring). German resistance in the west was weak compared to what they were doing in the East and this became apparent as the supply problems eased in the West as Spring began (The Battle of the Budge ended more due to German shortages of fuel, men and equipment then anything the western allies did, not that the western allies did not put up a good fight, but both armies were working within very tight supply problems which lead to the success of the attack and its eventual failure).

Thus by winter of 1945, it was clear Germany would be under Ally occupation by summer and what the Western Allies and Russia were doing was more to impress each other then to deal with problems being created by the German Army. Out of this concern came Dresden. It was the largest city that had NOT been attacked from the air. It was an older city, where a fire storm could occur if enough bombs were dropped. Thus the older center city was the target, not the military bases and factories in the suburbs (to few wooden buildings to cause a fire storm in those locations). The Allies wanted the Russians to see what a Fire Storm caused by Incendiary bombs would look like. That appears to have been the goal, but a goal no one wanted to talk about for the Russians were technically allies and the Germans were suppose to be the real targets.

My point is Dresden had NOTHING to do with vengeance, it has everything to do with impressing the Russians.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Its funny that they did it today. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #1
Bataan Death March survivors would strongly disagree Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #2
Then what do you consider the millions who died from Hiroshima and Nagasaki? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #5
Victims of Hirohito and Tojo's aggression. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #14
If that makes you sleep better at night. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #16
I'm 45, it had nothing to do with me. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #24
So the truth of what happened in the past has nothing to do with us? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #26
That's not what I said. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #37
It is very ARROGANT... SkyDaddy7 Aug 2013 #154
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. liberal N proud Aug 2013 #113
Really? You're going with that? Deep13 Aug 2013 #115
Don't you love when they tell you to pick up a history book BainsBane Aug 2013 #140
It wasn't millions, it was roughly 250,000. William769 Aug 2013 #21
Hey!! my grand parents were holocoust victims!! dont think i ignore that!! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #40
I find this statement hard to believe. William769 Aug 2013 #46
Post removed Post removed Aug 2013 #48
I'm not denying anything. just trying to understand your battles. William769 Aug 2013 #49
Btw, my grand mom was a nurse and she Volunteered in the Korean war darkangel218 Aug 2013 #53
Your family members are more accurately defined as Jenoch Aug 2013 #109
I didnt bring up the holocaust in the equation!! can you read???? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #112
You didn't bring it up but your replied Jenoch Aug 2013 #116
25% of Hiroshima's civilian population fled ahead of the bombing because we warned them. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #63
Completely wrong. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #66
I never said alot more people died from the A bombs than the holocaust! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #68
Well, let me quote you. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #72
Read the whole thing!! Will brought up the holocaust and tried to tie it up to H&N! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #74
I'm not going to apologize for anything. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #77
And how many do you think have died of tyroid cancer and other radiation consequences?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #79
I already told you that number. About 650,000. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #80
So 650,000.00 dead people in two days wasnt enough for you darkangel218 Aug 2013 #85
Random words does not constitute a counter-argument. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #87
There wasn't 650,000 dead in two days. hughee99 Aug 2013 #146
There were roughly Jenoch Aug 2013 #105
Who the fuck conpared the Holocaust with thw A bomb victims?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #110
You wrote that your grandparents were Jenoch Aug 2013 #114
Thats not at all what i meant, and you know it!! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #117
I did not know your meaning when I wrote my reply. Jenoch Aug 2013 #118
Thanks.. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #120
I like Japan too, but they were vicious enemies Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #51
If Japan haqd an A bomb they would have used it Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #52
And you know that how? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #54
From what they did to other innocent people Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #55
I know WWII. i dont need to look it up. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #56
Unit 731. Glanders. Anthrax. 'Rotten leg syndrome'. Bubonic Plague. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #61
By their indiscriminate use of chemical and biological weapons against civilians. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #60
Millions? paleotn Aug 2013 #62
There were 200,000.00 who died in the initial strike darkangel218 Aug 2013 #73
Cite your source for millions, plural. Because the Japanese Government recognizes 650k from ALL AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #75
200,000 who died instantly. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #83
You are completely pulling numbers out of your butt. Chernobyl is not comparable. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #86
Your own source doesn't even agree with you. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #89
Care to get a heart??? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #92
I know, it's really hard to admit when you've made a mistake. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #93
You accused me of saying something erroneus abouy the holocaust darkangel218 Aug 2013 #97
400k IS a lot. But it is not MILLIONS. You do the victims a disservice when you make things up. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #99
Also, make sure you KEEP me on your ignore list this time. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #95
Post removed Post removed Aug 2013 #122
Perhaps if you read the entire thread AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #139
not that many kurtharp Aug 2013 #81
900,000.00 is pretty close to a million!! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #107
And those 900K had N.O.T.H.I.N.G. to do with H or N. TheMadMonk Aug 2013 #136
Didn't you post these Jenoch Aug 2013 #102
"Millions" didn't die at Hiroshima & Nagasaki. Bucky Aug 2013 #123
Necessary acts of vengeance. Just like Dresden. TheMadMonk Aug 2013 #132
Dresden, remember who it was aimed at. happyslug Aug 2013 #150
Millions??? The estimates are much less then the 100,000 people killed in the March 10 Firebomb raid happyslug Aug 2013 #135
Millions did not die from the two atomic blasts... rexcat Aug 2013 #155
Millions? LOL. tabasco Aug 2013 #156
Or those of Nanking, among others. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #17
Would you bomb another country with nukes if given the possibility? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #70
**yawn** 1945=/=2013 nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #108
This seems like a binary way of thinking. Aristus Aug 2013 #119
OK. How about millions more in China Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #125
I think you tried to change the subject just then. Aristus Aug 2013 #129
Go back and read the post I responded to originally Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #131
They never were victims hack89 Aug 2013 #4
Oh please!! the civilians who fuking died were not professional soldiers, darkangel218 Aug 2013 #6
Were the Nazi's victims too? hack89 Aug 2013 #7
The Germans were victims of the Nazis... Deep13 Aug 2013 #18
don't blame the USA for that PatrynXX Aug 2013 #11
and no matter how you slice it PatrynXX Aug 2013 #13
Hirohito? Yes. Deep13 Aug 2013 #22
Do you think the victims of Nagasaki would cheer a warship being built? nt geek tragedy Aug 2013 #39
Yes they would. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #43
How would they feel about Japan invading Manchuria again? nt geek tragedy Aug 2013 #45
And what arw the chances they will do that?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #50
What were the chances 5 years before they did it the first time? AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #69
I didnt ask you. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #71
The same way people usually feel about hypotheticals too absurd to acknowledge. (nt) Posteritatis Aug 2013 #64
A destroyer? Really more of a aircraft carrier.. EX500rider Aug 2013 #76
My money is on drones. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #78
You're right. 10+ million innocent Chinese civilians. Just for starters. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #67
2 for 1 happy hour today? Kali Aug 2013 #143
both cities were military targets Niceguy1 Aug 2013 #151
Japan was the villain, not the victim, of World War II. geek tragedy Aug 2013 #8
Yah. do you ever admit our country did anything wrong?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #20
What did the U.S. do wrong prior to the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor? Drunken Irishman Aug 2013 #30
I didnt ask you, DI. my question was for geek tragedy. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #32
It's an open question... Drunken Irishman Aug 2013 #33
This is a discussion forum. If you only want one person to reply, you can message them. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #82
I expect an answer from the specific poster i asked. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #84
People do not sit by their keyboards mashing the F5 button. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #88
The US was the villain in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, one of the villains of post-colonial Vietnam, geek tragedy Aug 2013 #38
Alrite, fair enough. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #44
Indeed! William769 Aug 2013 #25
BS, Will. and you know it. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #28
I have looked at the pictures. William769 Aug 2013 #36
But wait, youre yoo hang up on Pearl Harbour to see the horrors of the A bombs. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #31
What I'm hung up on is what the Axis did to this world. William769 Aug 2013 #41
If, you want to John2 Aug 2013 #103
History Godot51 Aug 2013 #130
Your phrasing is making it out like Japan was a victim of US aggression during WW2 penultimate Aug 2013 #157
Maybe when the sea level rises it can be useful for living on. Gregorian Aug 2013 #3
Nice try Grego diverdownjt Aug 2013 #12
ahhh.. so they wanna sink Sea Shepherd right PatrynXX Aug 2013 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author guyton Aug 2013 #10
that is the oddest looking "destroyer" I've ever seen. n/t boomer55 Aug 2013 #15
That flat-top is a destroyer like my barking spider is Beethoven Eleanors38 Aug 2013 #58
Nice to see I was not the only one thinking that. ManiacJoe Aug 2013 #133
Yes, and not totally unprecedented, either. sofa king Aug 2013 #148
what? heaven05 Aug 2013 #19
Fukushima cant be " cleaned"... darkangel218 Aug 2013 #23
yeah heaven05 Aug 2013 #29
All nuclear plants should be shut down. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #35
no heaven05 Aug 2013 #42
Um, you realize some nuclear reactors exist PURELY to provide isotopes useful for AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #90
Large industrial nations can walk and chew gum at the same time. (nt) Posteritatis Aug 2013 #27
it's heaven05 Aug 2013 #34
So how does an aircraft carrier fit into their pascifist constituiton? nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #47
What about our own aircraft carriers?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #57
So you don't know either then. Deep13 Aug 2013 #59
I missed the part in the constitution where we are now pacifists AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #91
Why do you think we vote for democrats, to be warmongers??? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #94
I think we should engage in non-aggression. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #96
Woosh!! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #98
Third time you've said it. About as accurate as your claim of 'millions' upthread. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #100
Officially it's an ASW/SAR ship. (nt) Posteritatis Aug 2013 #65
What's "SAR?" nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #104
Search and Rescue Posteritatis Aug 2013 #121
thanks. nt Deep13 Aug 2013 #126
They classify it as a destroyer despite obviously being a helicopter carrier. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #138
our helicopter ships don't look like this one. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #142
Not one single Japanese person alive today bears any responsibility whatsoever for kestrel91316 Aug 2013 #101
So should we cheer the building more weapons? AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #106
Well, they *are* our allies. Bucky Aug 2013 #124
Weapons have a funny way of getting used, once invested it. AtheistCrusader Aug 2013 #141
An apropos comment in a Hiroshima thread Bucky Aug 2013 #144
"Claptrap" jberryhill Aug 2013 #111
No shit. snort Aug 2013 #128
I was hoping Japan would set an example to the world that this kind of stuff is obsolete. Spitfire of ATJ Aug 2013 #127
Let's nuke 'em! burnodo Aug 2013 #134
Tried it twice already. Didn't work jberryhill Aug 2013 #137
uh Bucky Aug 2013 #145
Three times, if you count them doing it to themselves! jberryhill Aug 2013 #147
More pix on HuffPo: Rhiannon12866 Aug 2013 #149
How long before it's in space? onehandle Aug 2013 #152
About a brazillion years. Angleae Aug 2013 #153
Can you really blame Japan for wanting build its defenses? penultimate Aug 2013 #158
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Japan Unveils Biggest War...»Reply #150