quote:

So, with Hindenburg as president, how does Hitler, never with a majority in the reichstag, get the position of chancellor when Hindenburg didn't want to appoint him?

Only Hindenburg, Von Papen and Kurt Von Schleicher can answer that, and they're all dead.

(I'm not sure what you're asking here. That Hitler obtained power through democracy is surely not in question.)

The February 14, 1942 Air Ministry directive to Bomber Command from Air Vice Marshal Sir Norman Bottomly contained the following Valentine's Day message: "You are accordingly authorized to employ your forces without restriction... [operations] should now be focused on the morale of the enemy civil population and in particular, of the industrial workers.

That was the directive whch launched the area offensive on German cities of course.

Few points are worth making - Britain was at its lowest ebb. U-boats running riot in the Atlantic, it was the German "happy time" here I think - following war with America, US totally unprepared for submarine warfare off its eastern seaboard. In Libya the British 1st Armoured division, a force supposedly trained and equipped to the highest possible standards, ignominiously routed by Rommel. Malta hanging on by a thread. Singapore fallen - the greatest disaster in British military history, Prince of Wales and Repulse sunk. The 2 German battlecruisers had sailed through the Channel in another wretched fiasco. Britain was cold, hungry - short of suplies.It had ben heavily bombed. It was one disaster after another.

The Russians had suffered terrible losses, admittedly Hitler was checked at Moscow - but there was no reason to think that during the spring the German superiority in blitzkrieg warfare would not reassert itself with probably didasterous consequences.

The US in the Pacific had been hammered - Japanese running wild, only a matter of time for MacArthur in the Phillipines. So overall it could hardly have been worse. Although the war potential of the allied powers was far greater than that of the axis, this was less thn apparent on the ground.

It was natural to want to hit back at the Germans with whatever instruments were at hand, however feeble in reality they were - hence the area offensive was born.

It was also hoped that the 4 engined "heavies" starting to come into service, with a range of navigational aids, and bigger payloads would have a dire effect on German morale and production - wishful thinking perhaps, but easy to say with hindsight.

quote:

You seem to have no concept of how totalitarian states opperate. Even in China today it is impossible to "protest" unless the government approves.

In most testimony I've read and seen in historical documentaries there is ample evidence that the people of Germany, even those who didn't vote for the Nazis, were content to see their civil liberties (and those of the Jews - manifold) eroded. They were quite happy, when the economy improved and their lives became regimented, to turn a blind eye to attacks on Jews. Many were more than keen to take part on Krystallnacht. Word always got round about what the Nazis were doing. There were some who retaliated, some brave people who resisted, but the overwhelming number of German people were content. They did not want to revolt.

quote:

See my response above. Did the people in 1933 know what the Nazi laws passed in 1935 would be?

If you're suggesting that Hitler's anti-semitic diatribe didn't offer an insight into future domestic policy then...I can't accept that. That's just nonsense and I think you know, deep down, that German people didn't cup their ears to his words:words that explicitly denounced Jews as being sub-human and to blame for all ills.

quote:

Collective responsibility is only applicable when there is unanimous approval. The logical extension to your argument is that since we did nothing to stop the holocaust were are all responsible. Is that what you are trying to prove?

Sadly it isn't true that you need unanimous approval. Implicit in any acceptance of democracy (if you take part in the process of voting) is that the government represents you in foreign affairs. If you want to get rid of them then vote them out. If you don't like what they are doing at home then vote them out. If you can't then either revolt or emigrate. Now, you can say that some people can't escape certain regimes, but what you can't say is that German people, overall, felt ashamed of what was going on. They were, on most accounts, content. They did not make themselves heard when the war began, nor when the concentration camps opened their doors to various unfortunate members of society.

And no, the logic doesn't extend to knowing about the holocaust because we were trying to bring it to an end by wanting to bring the war to an end as quickly as possible. The Nazis were cuplable for those atrocities. Not us.

quote:

Originally posted by Harry Amphlett:
So, with Hindenburg as president, how does Hitler, never with a majority in the reichstag, get the position of chancellor when Hindenburg didn't want to appoint him?

In a palace coup orchestrated by Goering & Oskar von Hindenburg, Hindenburg's son, among others. Hitler took office in a coalition government along with Nationalists, Centrists and non-party nominees (the Foreign & Defence Ministers were non-party appointments). It was six weeks after he was appointed Reich Chancellor that Hitler used the excuse of the Reichstag Fire to pass an Enabling Bill giving him (and the Nazi Party) dictatorial power.

Read "Hitler's Thirty Days to Power: January 1933" by Henry Ashby Turner Jr. (pub.1996).

There's a useful summary about the effectiveness - or otherwise of the area offensive on wikipedia "the balance sheet"

"From the British perspective it should be noted that the RAF offensive made a great contribution in sustaining morale during the dark days of the war, and in particular the bleak 1941/2 winter period. It was the only means that Britain possessed of taking the war directly to the enemy at that time. Perhaps more importantly it helped prevent Britain being drawn into a premature and quite possibly disasterously early Second Front, under pressure as the Government was, not only by the Americans, the Russians - but also by home public opinion"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Bomber_Command

quote:

I think you're oversimplifying what Bomber command were asking: which is to target industrial areas and take out the associated working populations as well as the machinery that generated the products for war.

decrypted,

The quote referred to is from the Area Bombing Directive issued by the Air Ministry to RAF Bomber Command in Feb 1942. How do you know it refers to machinery and other industrial facilities? Remember Baldwin's argument that killing women and children by mass bombing was essential to national survival. How do you know that wasn't the sole objective after the directive for area bombing was issued in 1942? Do you have any evidence to support a hypothesis that it included plant and machinery?

quote:

Hamburg would be classified under purely civilian.

OK here you appear to accept the purely civilian nature of the target and when you say:

quote:

To terrorise is to make a group cower with fear. If that's not attempting to break the people then I don't know what is.

this obviously includes people but may or may not include other targets of value.

When you refer to Dresden, you state that there were two major strategic points. Don't you think it possible that these may be included in Churchill's 'other pretexts'?

Well exactly cottar - my gran once told me how the sight of a Lancaster bomber, heading towards Germany, used to make people cheer. Morale boosting the Brits was also part of that campaign.

by decrypted:

quote:

That Hitler obtained power through democracy is surely not in question.

by allan d

quote:

In a palace coup orchestrated by Goering & Oskar von Hindenburg, Hindenburg's son, among others. Hitler took office in a coalition government along with Nationalists, Centrists and non-party nominees (the Foreign & Defence Ministers were non-party appointments). It was six weeks after he was appointed Reich Chancellor that Hitler used the excuse of the Reichstag Fire to pass an Enabling Bill giving him (and the Nazi Party) dictatorial power.

Claiming Hitler came to power democratically does seem highly questionable to me. I've long held the view that he had to wait until Hindenburg died and then seize power when there was no president.

quote:

The quote referred to is from the Area Bombing Directive issued by the Air Ministry to RAF Bomber Command in Feb 1942. How do you know it refers to machinery and other industrial facilities?

The fact that it prioritises those working in those industrial areas? If simply killing civilians was the aim they'd not target industrial areas (which would be the most heavily defended)they'd opt for towns, villages and historical monuments.

quote:

this obviously includes people but may or may not include other targets of value.

That some targets were of dubious strategic importance isn't doubted by me. The most important point is that civilians working for industry were part of the Nazi war machine. to hit back at them when they were hitting us was vital. In a war where you are fighting an unaccountable (dictatorship) aggressor with fanatical followers you can't tie one hand behind your back as they try to cut your supplies.

quote:

When you refer to Dresden, you state that there were two major strategic points. Don't you think it possible that these may be included in Churchill's 'other pretexts'?

The case for bombing Dresden is covered here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II
Also covered is the payload compared to other raids.

quote:

That some targets were of dubious strategic importance isn't doubted by me.

decrypted,

But are you prepared to accept that from Feb 1942 there was a deliberate policy to kill only civilian workers, in their homes and not at their place of work?

quote:

But are you prepared to accept that from Feb 1942 there was a deliberate policy to kill only civilian workers, in their homes and not at their place of work?

Yes - and rightly so.

As the Luftwaffe targetted areas around strategic targets then the RAF was entitled to bomb those residents who worked in those industrial areas.

quote:

The case for bombing Dresden is covered here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II
Also covered is the payload compared to other raids.

decrypted,

I asked you what you thought. The above is hardly an answer to that. OK if you don't want to but I'd be interested to hear your answer if you'd like to.

Harry

quote:

How do you know that wasn't the sole objective after the directive for area bombing was issued in 1942?

The idea was to destroy the morale of the German industrial classes by setting fire to their houses - it was thought that this was then impact on industrial production.

Having said that there was provision in the plan for precision attacks because the Air Staff had high hopes of the new generation of navigational aids then being introduced - they were mostly disappointed here, though Oboe Mosquitos were able to successfully mark the Krupps works in May 1943 and a havy and effective attack resulted.

Overall the plan's aim of destroying morale was simply a rationalisation of the plain fact that given the limitations of the technology available only a target the size of an entire city could be found with any hope of reliability.

quote:

I asked you what you thought.

Churchill seemed to believe it was more of an attack on civilians. Later on the USAF seemed to conclude it was justified.

What this tells us is that Churchill's gut feeling was that it was time for a rethink.

quote:

But are you prepared to accept that from Feb 1942 there was a deliberate policy to kill only civilian workers, in their homes and not at their place of work?

They didn't choose to put it quite like that, it was put over as the destruction of the homes of the workers.

But in any case the industrial areas were on the outskirts - they could not be found much of the time, let alone destroyed with the means available. The aiming points were the city centres which lent themselves to incendiary attacks.

Obviously it wasn't possible to fly by day and attack factories - that would have been suicide, it was tried sometimes like in the 1942 raid on Augusburg attemting to destroy a U-boat engine plant, but the losses were wholly prohibative. In any case even if the factory was hit, it was unlikely that the machine tools would be destroyed.

Didn't Speer say that a couple of raids on the scale of Hamburg within a week or so of each other and it would have been game over.

On 1st August 1943 speer warned Hitler that raids like that on Hamburg on six more major German towns would bring armaments production to a total halt. He also warned that continued attacks on the ball bearing production facilities around Schweinfurt would produce the same result. In both cases the Allies changed tactics before the job was complete.

quote:

On 1st August 1943 speer warned Hitler that raids like that on Hamburg on six more major German towns would bring armaments production to a total halt. He also warned that continued attacks on the ball bearing production facilities around Schweinfurt would produce the same result. In both cases the Allies changed tactics before the job was complete.

It wasn't technically feasible to destroy 6 more towns in that way - Hamburg was relatively close to Britain and I think provided a clear H2S image, because it is on the coast/river estuary. German defences had been thrown into choas by "Window" but they recovered quickly.

US bomber losses - which were very heavy not only in terms of aircraft shot down but also those damaged - meant that it was not at all possible to fly deep into Germany without fighter escort

quote:

In most testimony I've read and seen in historical documentaries there is ample evidence that the people of Germany, even those who didn't vote for the Nazis, were content to see their civil liberties (and those of the Jews - manifold) eroded. They were quite happy, when the economy improved and their lives became regimented, to turn a blind eye to attacks on Jews. Many were more than keen to take part on Krystallnacht.

Following the assassination of the German ambassador in Paris on November 7, 1938, Heydrich sent an urgent secret telegram to "All Headquarters and Stations of the State Police, All Districts and Sub-districts of the SA" containing instructions regarding the “riots”. The timing of the riots varied from unit to unit. The Gauleiters started at about 10:30pm,. They were followed by the SA at 11pm, and the SS at around 1:20am. Most were wearing civilian clothes and were armed with sledgehammers and axes, and soon went to work on destruction of Jewish property. This was standard practice for the Nazis trying to give the impression that the local population was rising up against the Jews. The same practice was adopted in the Ostland in 1941 to try to show that the local inhabitants were responsible for killing the Jews. Krystallnacht was not a spontaneous action by Germans but a planned Nazi operation.

quote:

If you're suggesting that Hitler's anti-semitic diatribe didn't offer an insight into future domestic policy then...I can't accept that. That's just nonsense and I think you know, deep down, that German people didn't cup their ears to his words:words that explicitly denounced Jews as being sub-human and to blame for all ills.

Again you seem to think that only the German people were psychic and knew what the Nazis’ anti Semitism would lead to. No one predicted the holocaust and as I said even in 1944 the Jews of Hungary, who you would think had the greatest interest in knowing the truth, initially refused to believe that such a thing could be perpetrated by such a cultured nation.

quote:

Sadly it isn't true that you need unanimous approval. Implicit in any acceptance of democracy (if you take part in the process of voting) is that the government represents you in foreign affairs. If you want to get rid of them then vote them out. If you don't like what they are doing at home then vote them out. If you can't then either revolt or emigrate.

How many of the more than one million people in the UK who marched to protest against the Iraq war have emigrated? Can you name one country where there has been a mass voluntary emigration in protest of a government’s policies? And in the late 1930s where would these protesters go? Which country would take in even 10,000 emigrants?

The St. Louis was a German ship carrying 930 Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany to Cuba. When the ship set sail from Hamburg on 13 May 1939, all of its refugee passengers had legitimate landing certificates for Cuba. However, during the two week voyage to Havana, the landing certificates granted were invalidated by the Cuban government. When the St. Louis arrived in Havana on 27 May only 22 Jewish refugees were allowed entry. The Cuban President then insisted the ship and its remaining 900 Jews leave Havana. The refugees were also refused entry into the United States. On 6 June 1939 the ship was forced to return to Europe. While en route to Antwerp, several European countries were cajoled into taking in the refugees, 287 to Great Britain; 214 to Belgium; 224 to France; 181 to the Netherlands. This is the reality of mass emigration.

quote:

Now, you can say that some people can't escape certain regimes, but what you can't say is that German people, overall, felt ashamed of what was going on. They were, on most accounts, content. They did not make themselves heard when the war began, nor when the concentration camps opened their doors to various unfortunate members of society.

The concentration camp system was originally regarded as positive law and order measure. The residents of Dachau welcomed the first concentration camp when it was set up as they believed it would provide local traders with opportunities to do business with the camp. This turned out not to be that case as the SS made its own arrangements to ensure that as little as possible was known about what went on in the camps. Virtually all the initial people arrested, including large numbers of Jews, were released. Until the war started the number of deaths in the concentration camps was quite small, so the concentration camp argument does not really apply.

quote:

And no, the logic doesn't extend to knowing about the holocaust because we were trying to bring it to an end by wanting to bring the war to an end as quickly as possible. The Nazis were cuplable for those atrocities. Not us.

The Western Allies did nothing to stop the holocaust. The inmates of Auschwitz were praying for the Allies to bomb the concentration camp and the death camp even if it resulted in the deaths of inmates. However, the Allies were aware that if they did anything specifically to halt the holocaust that Hitler would accuse the Allies of waging war to help the Jews and the Allies wanted to avoid this at all costs. So to claim that the Allies were doing everything to end the war as quickly as possible to stop the holocaust is just plain wrong.

quote:

If simply killing civilians was the aim they'd not target industrial areas (which would be the most heavily defended)they'd opt for towns, villages and historical monuments.

decrypted,

But all those types of targets were bombed as well. It was by no means just the civilian populations of large industrial cities.

Towns include those such as Freiburg where 3000 civilians were killed in Nov 1944 and Pforzheim where 17,600 civilians of population of approx 60,000 were killed in February 1945. Darmstadt, 12,300, Sept 1944, Kassel, 10,000, Oct. 1943 and the list continues all the way to small villages such as Wildberg in Jan 1945 and Haiterbach April 1945.