Quote:
Originally Posted by Wamy Einehouse
I'm curious what context you mean. The argument you make in the post before seems inherently wrong as the Germans could easily have attacked military targets by day and civilian by night in the early stages of the Battle of Britain had they no qualms.
I guess you glossed over the "argument" since you didn't understand it too well. The German plan for Operation Sea Lion was to 1) establish air supremacy; so that 2) they could keep the British Navy at bay. Their plan did not include the bombing of any civilian targets as that was not conducent to their immediate goals; it had nothing to do with their moral beliefs regarding taking out civilian targets or fear of reprisal from such.
The Germans were still there to fight a war and win that war. However, as evidenced by the bombing of Rotterdam, they had no qualms with hitting civilian targets if such was part of their war strategy. For the Battle of Britain, it was not. So, it would make entirely no sense to continually bomb civilian targets "by night" if that was not part of the strategy to begin with.
My comment about "proper context" concerns your outrageous comparison between the wonton tactics of the belligerant country against that of the defending country attempting to end the war. Even beyond that, the Bombing of Dresden at best (to your position) was still an act against military targets, especially since the Germans started spreading their assets in and among civilian areas. Finally, in the context of the times when it took squadrons of bombers to effectively eliminate just one target (its not like today with modern weapons) and the fact their operation was not in violation of the Geneva Convention, your "comparison" is just a hackeneyed attempt to recharacterize something to suit your modern views which are completely impractical and unfair given the big picture.
* I see you were going on about this earlier in the thread. You were not so convincing there, either.
Last edited by Nut Low; 11-22-2011 at 02:01 PM.