Skip to comments.Bush: US should have bombed Auschwitz
Posted on 01/11/2008 10:05:46 AM PST by starlifter
JERUSALEM - President Bush had tears in his eyes during an hour-long tour of Israel's Holocaust memorial Friday and told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the U.S. should have bombed Auschwitz to halt the killing, the memorial's chairman said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I think people around W should keep their mouths shut .
It’s an difficult moral choice. You kill the people there with the bombs but shut down the gas chamber.
I totally agree with you.
“I think people around W should keep their mouths shut .”
I think Bush should stop arming the Palestinians who want to start their own little Auschwitz on the Mediterranean.
“Its an difficult moral choice. You kill the people there with the bombs but shut down the gas chamber.”
They could have just bombed the rail lines, even.
They didn’t because the trains bringing Jews to their deaths weren’t carrying ammo to the front.
‘You kill the people there with the bombs but shut down the gas chamber.”
Not if you bomb the gas chamber alone. Not to mention the german controlled areas. Of course we didnt have that level of precision at that time but the only purpose of this story is to make Bush look bad.
Ask these folks....http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951975/posts
Clinton would have apologized for not arguing more forcefully that it should have been bombed, expressing regret that his advice was not taken.
Will he cry and say the US should have bombed the terrorist states that surround Israel?
A typical WW II bomber might be able to hit the camp, maybe. I doubt that would do much more than delay the Germans by a couple of days and keep a bomber from hitting targets that would end the war faster.
If I were an Army Air Corps general at the time, I would have had a very tough time not bombing the camp, but the only way to stop the killing was to conquer Germany, thus every mission had to be to that end.
Forget about Auschwitz..it’s yesterdays history.
Care about stopping future killing of Jews.... bomb Iran instead.
There is nothing wrong with the comments he made. It was heartfelt and right. I just wish he’d not only talk the talk but walk the walk, and stop the Islamic Nazis of today.
Actually, it would have probably been more humane in the long run if some of the prisoners were killed by bombs along with the destruction of the camps. At least they would not have had to suffer the long, agonizing torture of starvation, humiliation and cruelty. Auschwitz brings up the reminder of the story about he rabbis who put "God on trial." It supposedly occurred just before the liberation of the camp in which they debated for days about His existence and tried to convinced themselves that He couldn't exist with so much experience of hell around them. However, each day ended in the call for evening prayer and (I think I'm getting this right) on the seventh day they finally heard news about the allies (Russians) breaking through the German lines. They were all rescued a couple of weeks later.
Uh...I would say he's killed thousands more Islamofascists than anyone in history.
Read this thread http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951975/posts
The Allies were aware of Auschwitz since 1940 earliest, and since 1942 largely aware of the Holocaust. Polish refugees and allied intelligence gave enough information.
The US made aerial photos of whole Auschwitz in 1944, and even bombed Auschwitz III (Monowitz), the Industrial slave labor complex of the camp.
Since 1944 it was possible to reach the camp and bomb the gas chambers and railways... plus the SS Barracks.
There were RUMORS of such camps, But not until June 44 did evidence begin to mount of thier actual existence.
But there were SO MANY rumors of atrocities coming out, that it got lumped in with all the rest.
And the previous poster was right. The PRIORITY was destroying Germanies ability to make war, not wasting American lives and Machines on a fool’s errand in a HEAVILY defended area.
(Think the Peolesti Raids, and thier cost)
The idea is consistent with Bush’s WOT strategy: destroying the camps, whether it is a torture and killing camp or a camp where terrorists train to torture and kill.
Actually, we had ample intelligence and evidence, including photographs smuggled out by escapees, in early 1944.
We knew what was going on in the camps.
They knew they were concentration camps and there was plenty of intel that the camps were death camps. Many people thought the rumors were grossly exaggerated.
It didn’t become real until our soldiers got to the camps and saw what had happened.
I think Bush should stop arming the Palestinians who want to start their own little Auschwitz on the Mediterranean.”
Post of Day
Yes, but why assisting in the dismemberment of Israel, in order to create a terrorist state next door? His Palestine policy is an odd departure from the way he deals with Iraq/Afghanistan Al-Qaeda. Fatah is no friend.
My understanding is that most proponents of bombing the camps argue for destroying the rail lines to the camps. Now that still leaves the issues of precision, and it wouldn’t take long to lay new track. Furthermore, those already in route might well have died or been killed if they couldn’t get through.
Bottom line, the hindsight should be left alone in this case.
And stop referring to Jerusalem and the West Bank as occuppied territories, stop pushing for a Palestinian state which will be nothing more than a staging ground for raiding Israel, and stop pushing for a Palestinian right-of-return.
I hope the Presdient took this all in and realized that no Israeli leader is going to allow a Second Holocaust to occur.
There’s been debate about this topic for decades and it’s always easy to make lofty moral judgements after the fact. The Nazis were so insanely determined to exterminate the Jews that I don’t think one life would have been saved had Auschwitz been flattened. The Jews would have died in sealed boxcars or else been murdered elsewhere.
The cat should of married its kindergarten sweetheart!
Bush is terrible with words. He should have said that WWII is the perfect example of how pre-emption and eliminating Hitler could have saved millions and millions of lives.
Same is true today with Iran.
Oh man, the Opposition is going to have a field day with this one....
Bombing then was good for +/- five miles. Worse at night.
Nazi’s could kill anywhere.
‘I understood before that we were not aware of what was going on until our forces stumbled upon them. How could we have bombed what we did not know existed?”
The soldiers didn’t know but our leadership did. There were reports of what was happening by people who escaped and the underground. The decision was made to focus elsewhere as the best way to end the war.
We destroyed tens of thousands of miles of rails. Germans just fixed them. They’d tell everyone out and start walking.
After Bush performs his “moral calculus” regarding Israel and palestine, he throws a backhanded compliment to Israel “he would have bombed Auschwitz” Like that is going to make things better. As Bush sells out Israel.
What happened to George Bush?
And 70 years from now the grandaughter of Chelsea Clinton the first woman president is saying the same thing about the nuclear processing plants in Iran that allowed over 1000 simultaneous small nuclear devices to be detonated in the US and knocked us lower than a third world nation for over 10 years.
Ah, to live, disarmed in a total, socialist state, democratic or otherwise. People are integers, resources, property as everything else, of the state.
This is why, every and any citizen that wants a military weapon, or weapons should have them. I don’t care how many high school kids get killed every year.
Nothing kills, steals, murders like humans in service of the state.
The only places in WWII where bombing was really effective against railroads was in Italy and France where the damage was done by fighter bombers, Typhoons and P47s mostly. The reason it worked then is because the attacks could be repeated day after day so about the time the line was fixed here came the fighter bombers again.
Another problem with hitting rail lines with level bombers in WWII was the the targeters tended to go after bridges and marshaling yards where repair supplies where stored nearby, instead of out in the middle of nowhere where the Germans would have to spend a day or two transporting repair crews and supplies before they could even go to work on the damage. When you have as little chance as we did then of hitting a rail line I guess they had to hope to make up for the inaccuracy with collateral damage.
The best examples of war against railroads is the US civil war. The Union never caught N. B. Forrest and the Confederacy never stopped W. T. Sherman’s Bummers but both sides got so good at repairing the damage that by the end of the civil war the strategic benefits railroad wrecking were much reduced.
I suspect the ever efficient Germans in WWII would have developed the skill pretty quickly - we might have seen prisoners from the camps hauled out to make repairs, then sent back to be executed or killed on the spot, the deaths blamed on the allies.
History does not reveal her alternatives
Allied pilots fired on the bunkers with the notion that they were enemy bunkers. On closer inspections the firing stopped anf they figured out they were labor camps.
I don’t see what the problem is.
The way it worked out seem to work.
They were liberated, the atrocity was prosecuted and many survived to share their stories with future generations.
Our brave men and the brave men of tha allied forces are to thank.
I never think of how it should have been accomplished. It already happened.
I always think of how great it was that they were liberated.
I couldn’t agree more.
Excuses for not moving on this data included trying to protect MAGIC intercepts, the Brits trying to protect postwar claims to Palestine, the Ivy Leaguers in the OSS turning a blind eye to the Jewish Problem, the general opinion that Zionists were one notch left of the Communists, and couldn't be trusted. Most of the death camps were beyond the effective range of the US and Brit bombers, since the Soviets would not allow Allied bombers to fly missions that would require refueling in Russian territory. As far as Stalin was concerned, the Germans were doing the Russians a favor by disposing of the Jews.
Why didn't the Allies smash the rail systems that fed the camps? They were too busy trying to cut off oil and industrial production. It wasn't until near the end of the war that tactical airpower was turned loose on transportation targets, like bridges, roads, rail yards and rolling stock.
It never ceases to amaze me how Jews will still vote Democrat, regardless of what FDR did to them.
I agree. It angers me when people give opinions about subjects of which they are totally ignorant. If Bush really said that, then he is an idiot if he meant it.
First, Poland was in the Russian sector of the War. The Russians could have bombed Auschwitz with their bombers.
Ilyushin 4 (10000) - Russia’s main long range bomber. It bombed Berlin, East Germany, and the vast German-occupied territory in Eastern Europe and Russia, but it carried only 1-1.5 tons of bombs, or three torpedoes, and it suffered heavy losses by enemy fighters because of its very poor defensive weapons.
We all know why the liberal press and Dems are not castigating the Russians for not bombing Auschwitz.
Second, American bombers and crew took horrendous losses in their attacks until after February 1944. Imagine being told that you are going to fly to Poland to bomb a death camp to save people who are making no effort to save themselves and by the way, you probably wont be coming back. I am sure morale would be high/sarc. Shortly after February 1944 SHAEF took over the air fores for Operation Overlord. The only time Auschwitz could have been bombed with out too great a loss of men and material was after February 1944.
Third, we did invade a country to stop the extermination of civilians. It is called Iraq. I do not hear the liberal press and Dems congratulating Bush on stopping this extermination.
Fourth, if we are going to stop exterminations, then we should have bombed Cambodia, Rwanda, and should be bombing Darfur, Congo, Kosovo.
‘I dont see what the problem is. The way it worked out seem to work.”
It worked for us but not the 6 million killed in these camps. The thought was that by bombing these camps the deaths could have been avoided. The intent wasn’t to bomb the bunkers but the railroads and other support structures.
Its hard to say, we could have bombed them and then lost because it took resources away from what was really needed. I don’t want to sit back and question the decision our leaders made back then. It was a tough position and a tough decision. It certainly wasnt because we didn’t care about the jews.
Yep. One way to say it is that every bomber that would have been diverted to try to *possibly* stop or slow down the killing in a death camp was one less bomber that would have been destroying the German's ability to resist and thus bring ALL the killing to an end. All these other killing would include the daily killings that were occurring away from dedicated death camps (concentration camps, slave labor, street executions, mobile killing units...).
Wrong. Watch Ken Burns’ “The War.” I think it was Life Magazine that had a photo essay in 1942 showing what was being done in the death camps. Also, the NY Times was writing about it and nothing was being done. A lot of Jews are down on FDR for ignoring the mass murder.
It concerns me very much what is going on in the Sudan.
One of the great mysteries of WWII was why FDR pursued the policy of unconditional surrender against the Germans and ignored the many secret overtures to the US and UK by the German resistence for help in overthrowing the Nazis...several overtures made by the head of German intelligence Wilhelm Canaris...who was ultimately executed by the Nazis.
There are many historians (Thomas Fleming among them) who believe that these were tragic errors by FDR that cost millions of lives (including the Holocaust victims) and laid the groundwork for the Communist domination of post-WWII eastern Europe