# "Why political correctness has denied wartime bomber crews......."



## mariomike (20 Nov 2009)

"One of posterity's worst vices, 63 years after the end of World War II, is to dub everyone who served in it a hero.":
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-557343/Why-political-correctness-denied-wartime-bomber-crews-honour-deserve.html


----------



## OpieRWestmrR (22 Nov 2009)

Interesting piece. No denying Hastings' point: "A medal would not represent a 21st-century endorsement of area bombing. It would merely be a long-overdue act of justice to those who flew."

Awarding a medal might also help resist the notion Allied bombing can be equated with the Holocaust.

Did Austin Mitchell's initiative succeed? Are Canadian aircrew in the same position with regards to recognition and would a British medal apply to them?


----------



## AJFitzpatrick (22 Nov 2009)

What seem to be conveniently forgotten in all of this is the bombing of British Cities by the Luftwaffe. What are we supposed to think of the German bomber crews?


-may be a little to close to this-


----------



## mariomike (22 Nov 2009)

OpieRWestmrR said:
			
		

> Are Canadian aircrew in the same position with regards to recognition and would a British medal apply to them?



Yes.
17.8% of Bomber Command's KIA's were members of the RCAF. Every one of them a Flight Sergeant, Warrant Officer, or Officer.

The battle for a campaign medal continues since 1945. 
Because Bomber Command's losses were so terrible, those who survived, and the families of those who did not, have always been specially sensitive to criticism of the campaign.

OTTAWA: "Senate urges recognition for Bomber Command: 
Its personnel suffered a fatality rate that was the highest of any Allied combat unit":
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=6629

OTTAWA: "Senator criticizes government for delay on Bomber Command Medal: Could the government list other major operational theatres of World War II, Korea or UN and NATO operations since, where the decision has been made to deny surviving Canadian participants appropriate recognition?"
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2009/09/16/senator-criticizes-government-for-delay-on-bomber-command-medal.aspx


----------



## Bass ackwards (23 Nov 2009)

They say that history is always written by the victorious. 
That's probably true, but I always hear it from smirking leftists who are trying to make the point that we sugar-coat everything when, in fact, we are all evil and should feel bad about ourselves. 
Funny thing is, we won the damn war, we're writing the history -and we're making ourselves out to be evil people who should feel bad about ourselves. 

Strange...


----------



## mariomike (23 Nov 2009)

AJFitzpatrick said:
			
		

> What seem to be conveniently forgotten in all of this is the bombing of British Cities by the Luftwaffe. What are we supposed to think of the German bomber crews?
> -may be a little to close to this-



With Goring as Air Marshall, the Luftwaffe got plenty of medals.


----------



## OpieRWestmrR (24 Nov 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> The battle for a campaign medal continues since 1945.
> Because Bomber Command's losses were so terrible, those who survived, and the families of those who did not, have always been specially sensitive to criticism of the campaign.
> 
> OTTAWA: "Senate urges recognition for Bomber Command:
> Its personnel suffered a fatality rate that was the highest of any Allied combat unit":



Thanks for the references. I guess those motions and the British one in the Hastings link you posted have been awaiting action since 2008?

My RCAF relative was in the 17.8% and I have always been sensitive to criticism, too, for many technical, industrial and political reasons. I'm sure you can think of more than me. 

One point I think could be made more often in defence of Allied bombing: it would have ended - instantly - if the Nazi regime had surrendered. Of course there was no question of that happening while Hitler was alive but the simple fact is there.


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Nov 2009)

OpieRWestmrR said:
			
		

> One point I think could be made more often in defence of Allied bombing: it would have ended - instantly - if the Nazi regime had surrendered. Of course there was no question of that happening while Hitler was alive but the simple fact is there.


Another point that could be made in defence of Luftwaffe bombing: it would have ended - instantly - if the British regime had surrendered.  Of coruse, there was no question of that happening while Churchill was alive but the simple fact is there.

Göring issued this order on 30 June, 1940:


> The war against England is to be restricted to destructive attacks against industry and air force targets which have weak defensive forces.... The most thorough study of the target concerned, that is vital points of the target, is a pre-requisite for success. It is also stressed that e*very effort should be made to avoid unnecessary loss of life amongst the civilian population*.


 (emphasis added).

Later in September, due to RAF bombings of Berlin, which were perceived to be deliberately attacking civilians, Hitler threatened to bomb British cities if the RAF bombings didn't stop.  7 September, 1940, the Luftwaffe attacked London, which had hitherto been avoided.  (It had been bombed previously, but in error).  The result was that from 7 September onwards, the RAF fighters were given a breather, allowing them to maintain their strength and to keep the Germans from achieving their goal of air supremacy.


----------



## Michael OLeary (24 Nov 2009)

For some additional background reading, a UK Parliament document on Retrospective Medal campaigns.

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/snia-02880.pdf



> Medal Recognition
> 
> Service in Bomber Command during World War Two was recognised in the eligibility criteria for several other campaign medals which were instituted at the time. As outlined above, successive governments have supported the view that medals should not be instituted for theatres of operation which have already been recognised or occurred more than five years previously. This was addressed by the MOD in answer to a Parliamentary Question on 4 July
> 2007:
> ...


----------



## Rifleman62 (24 Nov 2009)

Actual exchanges between pilots and  control towers: 

A Pan Am 727 flight, waiting for start clearance  in  Munich , overheard the following:
Lufthansa (in  German): "Ground, what  is our start clearance time?"
Ground (in  English): "If you want  an answer you must speak in English."
Lufthansa (in  English): "I am a  German, flying a German airplane, in Germany . Why must I speak  English?"
Unknown voice from another plane  (in a beautiful British accent): "Because you lost the bloody war!"


----------



## observor 69 (24 Nov 2009)

Some historical perspective:

Sir Arthur Harris, 1st Baronet
13 April 1892 – 5 April 1984 (aged 91) 
Nickname Bomber Harris, Butcher Harris 

British strategic bombing in Europe 

Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Arthur Travers Harris, 1st Baronet GCB OBE AFC RAF (13 April 1892 – 5 April 1984), commonly known as "Bomber" Harris by the press, and often within the RAF as "Butcher" Harris,[2] was Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief (AOC-in-C) of RAF Bomber Command (from early 1943 holding the rank of Air Chief Marshal)[3] during the latter half of World War II. In 1942 the Cabinet agreed to the area bombing of German cities. Harris was tasked with implementing Churchill's policy and supported the development of tactics and technology to perform the task more effectively. Harris assisted British Chief of the Air Staff Marshal of the Royal Air Force Charles Portal in carrying out the United Kingdom's most devastating attacks against the German infrastructure at a time when Britain was limited in its resources and manpower.

Harris's preference for area bombing over precision targeting in the last year of the war remains controversial, partly because by this time many senior Allied air commanders thought it less effective[4] and partly for the large number of civilian casualties and destruction this strategy caused in Continental Europe. While the Butt Report correctly notes, "of those aircraft recorded as attacking their target, only one in three got within five miles (eight kilometres)"[5] in 1940 and 1941, by 1944, many technical and training improvements had been implemented, not least H2S radar and the Pathfinder force. The argument Harris continued to adhere to an area bombing strategy due to the inaccuracy of his bomber force, despite the absence of evidence (or even attempts to gather any) of its effectiveness, is based on a misapprehension of the circumstances. He was not dissuaded from it by his seniors, Portal and Churchill, both of whom had access to better intelligence than Harris, nor were there serious misgivings about the campaign expressed by his seniors (or anyone in the Government) at the time.

LINK


----------



## mariomike (24 Nov 2009)

R(C)AF Strategic Bombing Doctrine was set long before 1939.:
http://www.greenwood.com/images/coverImage.aspx?sku=C4997
Objectives:
1) Keep Russia in the war by fighting a Second Front from the air.  No one had forgotten the near-catastrophe that followed the Bolsheviks' negotiated peace with Germany in 1917. Stalin wanted D-Day in 1943. 1942, actually. Churchill understood that delaying Overlord until 1944  would allow the Germans and Russians time to slaughter  fatally weaken each other in the East. Stalin was sent updated copies of Harris's "Blue Books". These were his personal photograph albums of the wrecked cities of Germany. The Russians never cared about the economic importance of a target, they just wanted to know how many Germans per acre. After the war, Harris was awarded the Order of Suvorov, First Class, by a grateful Soviet Union. 
Bomber Command allowed the Allies to justify delaying Overlord until 1944, while Russia broke the Wehrmacht's back in the East. 
2) After WW1, the Nazis had convinced many German people that they had not really been defeated because their homeland cities and towns were not bombed. By 1945, that had changed. It also sent a message to the Russians, when they arrived in Germany, in the disadvantage of war.
You don't hear much about it now, but the plan back then was to turn Germany into a big farm.:
"All heavy industry was to be dismantled or otherwise destroyed."
"is looking forward to converting Germany into a country primarily agricultural and pastoral in its character."
President Roosevelt had this to say: "We have got to be tough with Germany and I mean the German people not just the Nazis. We either have to castrate the German people or you have got to treat them in such a manner so they can't just go on reproducing people who want to continue the way they have in the past."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan
FDR also ordered the Manhattan Project. Hitler had his V-Rockets, and wanted a bomber capable of hitting New York City. Churchill considered bombing Germany with poison gas. Those were the times.
3) 58% of the Canadians who flew in Bomber Command were KIA. That figure does not include those who were wounded and/or Prisoners of War. Some were hanged by civilians, some were sent to Buchenwald, some were tortured and shot by the Gestapo.    Give them their damn medal.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Nov 2009)

My dad, after seeing a concentration camp for the first time, was a committed fan of bomber command, where several of his boy hood friends served during WW2 on  multiple tours between 1942-45. He met a guy from Germany once, then living in Canada, and asked him where he was from. "Emmerich" was the reply. 'Emmerich?" he said, with relish, "we flattened it and drove over the rubble". As far as he was concerned, more bombs dropped on Germany meant fewer dead Canadian infantry. No love lost there...

Do the aircrew deserve a special campaign medal? Abso-friggin-lootley


----------



## observor 69 (30 Nov 2009)

Noticed this book in Chapters.

Fire and Fury: The Allied Bombing of Germany 1942--1945 

Focusing on the crucial period from 1942 to 1945, and using a compelling narrative approach, Fire and Fury tells the story of the American and British bombing campaign through the eyes of those involved: military and civilian command in America, Britain, and Germany, aircrew in the sky, and civilians on the ground.

Acclaimed historian Randall Hansen shows that the Commander-in-Chief of Bomber Command, Arthur Harris, was wedded to an outdated strategy whose success had never been proven; how area bombing not only failed to win the war, it probably prolonged it; and that the US campaign, which was driven by a particularly American fusion of optimism and morality, played an important and largely unrecognized role in delivering Allied victory. 

LINK

LINK


----------



## time expired (30 Nov 2009)

Randall Hansen,acclaimed historian!,just another ivory tower academic revisionist.
British,Canadian, bombing evil and immoral ,American bombing accurate, moral and
war winning.I don't think so.
                                       Regards


----------



## observor 69 (30 Nov 2009)

quote "Randall Hansen,acclaimed historian!," unquote

Ah so you have read his book?


Randall Hansen is an Associate Professor of Political Science and holds a Research Chair at the University of Toronto. He has a master’s degree and a doctorate from the University of Oxford, where he was a Commonwealth scholar. He was elected to a Research Fellowship at Christ Church Oxford at the age of 26, a tutorial fellowship at Merton College, Oxford, at the age of 29, and an established Chair in Politics at the University of Newcastle at the age of 33.

Hansen has held sabbatical fellowships at the Institut des etudes politiques, Paris, the Humboldt University and Wissenschaftszentrum, Berlin, Trinity College, Dublin, and the University of California, Los Angeles. He is the author of Citizenship and Immigration in Postwar Britain (Oxford University Press, 2000), and has published numerous articles and book chapters on immigration, citizenship, and the history of eugenics and forced sterilization. His work has been translated into French, German, and Italian. He has given public lectures throughout Europe and North America.

http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~rhansen/Home.html


----------



## mariomike (30 Nov 2009)

After Dresden, far sighted airmen and politicians began to perceive that history might judge the achievements of strategic air power with less enthusiasm. The Americans, Winston Churchill and RAF High Command began to distance themselves from area bombing, and the part they played in it. Harris never apologized for the work his forces had done.


----------

