1. The Colonge raid preceded Hamburg. 2. The smallest object throughout most of the war bombers could hit was a city. 3. Effectiveness cannot only be measured against German industrial production figures. It must also take into account the enormous amount of air-power and 88mm guns the Germans had to withdraw from other fronts as a result of the air offensive.
This argument is often made when the British try to justify their crimes and genocides. I am sorry but what you are saying is false. In truth, the Germans had to withdraw from the front because they were outnumbered 20 to one by those "innocent" Allies who would rape and child-abuse anything that could not escape fast enough. The bombing had no impact on the war effort, other than murdering children and women by burning them alive with Phosphorous by the thousands - a gruesome death and an outstanding atrocity, unmatched in mankind's history. The US Government admitted after the war, that , quote "The bombing of German cities was sadly useless". I am not surprised the British government did not admit the same, after all it was Winston Churchill who was reponsible warlord for the deliberate extermination of over half a Million german civilians - and this number is excluding the Dresden Genocide.
Kurt Vonneguts lecture is on youtube, he talks about Dresden and how after getting out him and his friend were strafed several times by allied aircraft. mass murder of civilians is indefensible now, as then. Some of the descriptions of what happened in Dresden are horrific but we are taught to see Germans as sub human therefore cannot empathise with them.
Something very creepy about this discussion. Do sane people talk with such detachment to the horror inflicted? Intellectuals such as Freeman are an inherent contradiction; Communists one day, pacifists another day, and completely detached from suffering of others.
He's neither detached or indifferent to the raid's or their purpose, he's maintaining a sense of proportion. People who are actively engaged in the necessary brutality of war must be able to do that .
It is not always that people are detached when they speak calmly and try to be objective. On the contrary, if something is too traumatic, you would try to stay reserved. In another part of this interview he said that terrible things were happening on both sides during these two years of war when he served in the army, doing statistics of bombing, but he could not do anything about that. It means that he certainly did not like it. He also said that it is good that a good part of the duration of the war he was too young to be taken to the army.
Yes. People like Freeman are nerds obsessed with solving problems. You give them a problem, how to kill more german civilians, they might be disturbed for a moment but at the end they will rationally try to resolve it as an any other math problem. That's why he was so "passionate" about the firestorms and how to trigger them. Also they tend to think about morality the same way, as any other math problem which needs to be solved. So you will hear things like if we kill 10k people here, 100k will survive there and those kind of nonsense.
I remember the entire video and some of it is missing ,in particular a reference to the similarity of British State with German State . I seem to recall it was related to a conversation about Boorman . Why did yee guys memory hole this section section?
A Phoenician describing his destruction campaign? And strange weaponry? Interesting. "Fire storm", "apocalypse", and "100 mph winds" don't make much sense.
The idea of "terror bombing" civilians rather than military targets was regarded by many as a war crime only three decades earlier. In the interim, the RAF had been busy bombing civilians in the British Empire. "Bomber" Harris was involved in the bombing and gassing of the Kurds who refused to submit to the new King of Iraq in the 1930's, even though he was only responsible for air logistics there. He attached bombs to his transport aircraft so that his pilots could "join in the fun." The RAF also bombed villages in the North-West Frontier which were not paying taxes to the British Raj. Supposedly the villagers were given enough notice so that they could be away from their houses before they were destroyed. Rather like how the Israeli army destroys Arab houses in the Occupied Territories. There was an international conference which aimed, but failed, to ban bombing of civilian targets. The British representative did not agree, since aerial bombardment was a useful measure to deploy in "police actions" in the colonies. All of this was before the German bombing of Guernica, which was regarded as an atrocity at the time.
It should even be noted that the Fnglish assisted fascist Franco by naval blockade. They took care that the Red will not be victorious in Europe. Thus the bombing of Guernica was certainly considered a success by the Fnglish. Nowadays the point with the finger on the Germans !
The Fnglish supported fascist Franco by a naval blockade. Thus the Fnglish considered the Guernica bombing a success. Now hey point with the finger on the Germans !
I think terror bombing was the objective. Winston already knew that British will have to occupy Germany as he mentioned about living space . So he wanted the nazis among the locals to understand what Britain is capable of and strike fear in their hearts. It was cruel but in war you dont know what happens . Essentially winston brought war to the German drawing room.
The Fnglish were able as much as they were backed by the oligarchs that orchestrated and financed this war. The good thing is, these same oligarchs made the Fnglish pay for more than half a century for this war. The Fenglish needed to convert their empire into the Common Wealth !
Nonsense!. Terror bombing doesn't come into it !. Harris's directive was to destroy the enemy's infrastructure, his work force and manufacturing output to such an extent that his capability and willingness to wage war was extinguished. He and his bomber force did that as quickly, efficiently and economically was possible at that time.
It was a crime against humanity of the highest order. They had scientists testing the ways how to make bombs more distructable for civilian houses and how to trigger the firestorm effect. If this was done by Germans we wouldn't have any second thoughts about whether to call this pure evil and the regime that ordered it.
Arthur *"I'll call children Nazis and burn them to cinders"* Harris. Winston *"I'll sleep with the Devil for muh beautiful Empire"* Churchill. God [speaking softly]: "Hmmmm. I don't like that..." *Guess who had the last word?*
Comes across as emotional dissonance more than being pleased. Must've been tough for him to cast aside his pacifist ideals and past actions. I prefer him admitting his actions than hiding them...
Yes, I watched the video where he said he was a pacifist and then came straight to this one - there's an incredible disparity in the impression he gives in each one.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[2/2] ประสบการณ์ขนหัวลุกจากตำนานวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T_kFecQw7Ds/mqdefault.jpg)
1. The Colonge raid preceded Hamburg. 2. The smallest object throughout most of the war bombers could hit was a city. 3. Effectiveness cannot only be measured against German industrial production figures. It must also take into account the enormous amount of air-power and 88mm guns the Germans had to withdraw from other fronts as a result of the air offensive.
This argument is often made when the British try to justify their crimes and genocides. I am sorry but what you are saying is false. In truth, the Germans had to withdraw from the front because they were outnumbered 20 to one by those "innocent" Allies who would rape and child-abuse anything that could not escape fast enough. The bombing had no impact on the war effort, other than murdering children and women by burning them alive with Phosphorous by the thousands - a gruesome death and an outstanding atrocity, unmatched in mankind's history.
The US Government admitted after the war, that , quote
"The bombing of German cities was sadly useless".
I am not surprised the British government did not admit the same, after all it was Winston Churchill who was reponsible warlord for the deliberate extermination of over half a Million german civilians - and this number is excluding the Dresden Genocide.
@@fureuropa-gegennwo1259 the only true part here is that the bombings were mostly useless, everything else is completely wrong lol
@@fureuropa-gegennwo1259i don't see any argument
Kurt Vonneguts lecture is on youtube, he talks about Dresden and how after getting out him and his friend were strafed several times by allied aircraft. mass murder of civilians is indefensible now, as then. Some of the descriptions of what happened in Dresden are horrific but we are taught to see Germans as sub human therefore cannot empathise with them.
Something very creepy about this discussion. Do sane people talk with such detachment to the horror inflicted? Intellectuals such as Freeman are an inherent contradiction; Communists one day, pacifists another day, and completely detached from suffering of others.
He's neither detached or indifferent to the raid's or their purpose, he's maintaining a sense of proportion. People who are actively engaged in the necessary brutality of war must be able to do that .
It is not always that people are detached when they speak calmly and try to be objective. On the contrary, if something is too traumatic, you would try to stay reserved. In another part of this interview he said that terrible things were happening on both sides during these two years of war when he served in the army, doing statistics of bombing, but he could not do anything about that. It means that he certainly did not like it. He also said that it is good that a good part of the duration of the war he was too young to be taken to the army.
@@orlovae1 don't see your point?!
We are shaped by the times we live in. For him, WW2 was a formative event. A certain acceptance of massive civilian casualties is expected
Yes. People like Freeman are nerds obsessed with solving problems. You give them a problem, how to kill more german civilians, they might be disturbed for a moment but at the end they will rationally try to resolve it as an any other math problem. That's why he was so "passionate" about the firestorms and how to trigger them. Also they tend to think about morality the same way, as any other math problem which needs to be solved. So you will hear things like if we kill 10k people here, 100k will survive there and those kind of nonsense.
I remember the entire video and some of it is missing ,in particular a reference to the similarity of British State with German State .
I seem to recall it was related to a conversation about Boorman .
Why did yee guys memory hole this section section?
I hope this guy has his own little firestorm in hell.
A Phoenician describing his destruction campaign? And strange weaponry? Interesting. "Fire storm", "apocalypse", and "100 mph winds" don't make much sense.
Well there actually was a firestorm in Dresden. You can google firestorm.
The idea of "terror bombing" civilians rather than military targets was regarded by many as a war crime only three decades earlier. In the interim, the RAF had been busy bombing civilians in the British Empire.
"Bomber" Harris was involved in the bombing and gassing of the Kurds who refused to submit to the new King of Iraq in the 1930's, even though he was only responsible for air logistics there. He attached bombs to his transport aircraft so that his pilots could "join in the fun."
The RAF also bombed villages in the North-West Frontier which were not paying taxes to the British Raj. Supposedly the villagers were given enough notice so that they could be away from their houses before they were destroyed. Rather like how the Israeli army destroys Arab houses in the Occupied Territories.
There was an international conference which aimed, but failed, to ban bombing of civilian targets. The British representative did not agree, since aerial bombardment was a useful measure to deploy in "police actions" in the colonies.
All of this was before the German bombing of Guernica, which was regarded as an atrocity at the time.
It should even be noted that the Fnglish assisted fascist Franco by naval blockade.
They took care that the Red will not be victorious in Europe.
Thus the bombing of Guernica was certainly considered a success by the Fnglish.
Nowadays the point with the finger on the Germans !
The Fnglish supported fascist Franco by a naval blockade.
Thus the Fnglish considered the Guernica bombing a success.
Now hey point with the finger on the Germans !
He is probably imagining they were the bullies from 8 to 12 at boarding school
@@LL-wc4wn May be !
Nonsense
I think terror bombing was the objective. Winston already knew that British will have to occupy Germany as he mentioned about living space . So he wanted the nazis among the locals to understand what Britain is capable of and strike fear in their hearts. It was cruel but in war you dont know what happens . Essentially winston brought war to the German drawing room.
The Fnglish were able as much as they were backed by the oligarchs that orchestrated and financed this war.
The good thing is, these same oligarchs made the Fnglish pay for more than half a century for this war.
The Fenglish needed to convert their empire into the Common Wealth !
Nonsense!. Terror bombing doesn't come into it !. Harris's directive was to destroy the enemy's infrastructure, his work force and manufacturing output to such an extent that his capability and willingness to wage war was extinguished. He and his bomber force did that as quickly, efficiently and economically was possible at that time.
Yeah the Germans learned that being cruel to another group can backfire
It was a crime against humanity of the highest order. They had scientists testing the ways how to make bombs more distructable for civilian houses and how to trigger the firestorm effect. If this was done by Germans we wouldn't have any second thoughts about whether to call this pure evil and the regime that ordered it.
Maui Hawaii probably hit by firestorm weapon.
Arthur *"I'll call children Nazis and burn them to cinders"* Harris.
Winston *"I'll sleep with the Devil for muh beautiful Empire"* Churchill.
God [speaking softly]: "Hmmmm. I don't like that..."
*Guess who had the last word?*
He seems rather pleased with himself.
It’s war
Comes across as emotional dissonance more than being pleased. Must've been tough for him to cast aside his pacifist ideals and past actions. I prefer him admitting his actions than hiding them...
Strange sentiments for an avowed pacifist
wtf, what a monster, did he said he was a pacifist XD
Yes, I watched the video where he said he was a pacifist and then came straight to this one - there's an incredible disparity in the impression he gives in each one.
What a evil bastard Dyson is !