[Publius6961]

"I think it's shameful. It's a terrible surrender by a public institution to public pressure," said University of Toronto history professor emeritus Michael Bliss.
He said it was important to include a question about the effectiveness of the campaign because of a tenacious belief, especially in the United States, that bombing works.

History revisionists among us, who view events through the enemies' eyes are no better than traitors. That's why the vanquished enemies can create their own version of reality if they so wish.

This doofus Bliss seems unaware that the director of the Smithsonian had to resign and go back to flipping burgers for attempting a similar outrage with the nuclear bombing of Japan.

The war with Germany ended. Indiscriminate bombing of England and France had been ongoing for years. Germany could simply not continue with a civilian populace totally demoralized by --- continuous bombing.

What might have happened is completely speculative, subjective and totally at the mercy of the logic and ignorance of the person promoting the speculation.

I would rather discuss what actually happened.

Just saying.

[yarddog]

I read a very interesting book by Adolph Galland, the commander of the fighter wing of the Luftwaffe and also an ace with something like 200 victories.

The book is really interesting, giving the inside view of the war from their perspective. He in no was tries to minimize German atrocities, but he did mention a couple of times that the allies were bombing civilian centers quite puposely. He said all higher officers in all air forces knew the difference between industrial and civilan areas.

I agree the Germans (nor the Japanese) have an moral ground to complain but I still think the deliberate bombing of civlians was not only wrong but a war crime. Also it didn’t break German morale, it just made them more determined.