Without proximity fuses the anti-air raid 88 guns were still somewhat effective. If the Germans were able to successfully design proximity fuses to be used with the 88, they didn’t, the effect on the bomber fleets would have effectively ended the allied air campaign.
Not to mention they would have gotten to the D-Day shores way faster and probably threw back the invasion, there would have been 2x-4x the number of planes and panzers, and they would have had plenty of fuel. It was not only effective but necessary. If they didn’t like it, they shouldn’t have started the war or started the carpet bombing (they hit london first) or they could have surrendered.
Worth conjecture: if the war in europe had dragged on, the A bomb would have been used there, with Britain full of Americans it could not be beaten, & if the conventional bombers had failed it would be a further stimulus to multiply the offspring of the Manhatten project & deploy one straight onto Berlin central, & put an end to the pointless German resistance.
According to Albert Speer, someone who was there, had all the figures and lived through it said "Without the bombing campaign, we would have had 10's of thousands of guns (88's), hundred of thousands of men and millions of rounds of ammunition in Russia killing tanks, where we needed them", see 'World at War" Whirlwind episode. Without the bombing, millions of tons of concrete would have been available to the occupation forces in Russia and France to make winning the war impossible, so yes it 'helped' beyond what the anti bombing 'experts' claim.
The biggest disruption over all was rail, road and water transportation. Water would be salt water and fresh water. Mining waterways and bombing via ducts.
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer Yes but it was a very hypocritical apology as he was responsible for many demands for more slave workers from the death camps, and their return when unable to continue production.
Quite right & those 'experts' were more than just odd disenting opinions, they were the tip of a pacifist- liberal movement that eventually became fully embedded in the ruling structures & are still in position.
George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganiki. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front....
Dad always told me that, even with the best sights available at the time, when you dropped something at 20,000 ft, you had almost no idea where it would hit. The cross winds in northern Europe made "precision high level bombing", a myth.
This was also true at Midway in the Pacific. None of the high-level bombers even came close, the four Japanese aircraft carriers were all sunk by dive bombers.
18.09 "the study of raids on Essen on March and April showed that only 10 percent of the bombers got within five miles of their target" 23.46 "at the end of 1943 chief of air staff Sir Charles Portal reflected that if it had been tactically possible to concentrate a quarter of our total bombs dropped on Germany on a distinct group of targets associated with oil, ball bearings or aero engines the war would by now have been won"
They gave up daylight precision bombing in early 1944 because only 15% of bombs fell within a mile of the targets. 80% of the US 8th AAF bomber losses were to radar-guided flak. The formations were so huge, they could not fly a dog leg course like the RAF did at night. Because of this, the Luftwaffe AA batteries put up a wall of flak that they had to fly through and losses were horrendous. The RAF pleaded with US bomber command to break up their raids into smaller formations and approach the targets from different directions and at different heights. It fell on deaf ears. In Normandy in D Day, some US bombers dropped their loads 7 miles from the beach and more casualties with the 101st and 82nd Airborne came from this than from the Germans. Eisenhower was appalled. He was quoted as asking, "Don't they look out the window?" Montgomery in fact cancelled all bombing on Sword and Juno and their losses were much less despite more Germans in the area.
The Americans think that they can go full 'gun ho' and just win through. Even though the British were at it longer and know what worked better, the Americans think they know best. Mugs
The only type plane able to do precision bombing was the Ju87 (Stuka). The U.S. lost 4 800 bombers of all kinds over Germany. Each plane had a crew, most of them did not make it.
The highest ranked US military combat fatality suffered during WW2? Lt Gen Leslie J. McNair, killed on 25th July 1944 as a result of US 8th air force bombing hitting his command post at Saint-Lô in Normandy.
@timsmith2525 They were forced to fly those same routes. It was pure madness. Because of McNamara and it not being an officially declared war,restrictions were put on everything. It was insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Those poor boys and the women who went over as nurses. We lived in Oakland at the time. The Alameda base was busy, and the Oakland army base was always filled with APC's and trucks ready to be loaded. They were lined up near a fence we could see as we came off the bay bridge as kids. Mom,Dad,sister,brother me. Their all dead now. I can still see those trucks, though.. If you can find it, get the book "Nam." It's an incredible book. Fire on the Lake is another.
It may be that the main benefit of daylight bombing was the Luftwaffe was slowly fed into the meat grinder and eventually destroyed. No Luftwaffe meant no air defense, and this gave the Allies air superiority over the German army, and Allied armies were free from air attack.
@bernardscheidle5679 Making D-Day possible. That alone justified the air campaign, but it did much more. For example, the German Panzers ran out of fuel during the Battle of the Bulge. Have you ever asked yourself why?
@@MarkHarrison733No, it wasn't. It was to liberate France from German occupation, and to put American troops and equipment on the ground in Europe, in order to fight a ground war and defeat Germany and end the war.
23.46 "at the end of 1943 chief of air staff Sir Charles Portal reflected that if it had been tactically possible to concentrate a quarter of our total bombs dropped on Germany on a distinct group of targets associated with oil, ball bearings or aero engines the war would by now have been won"
@@OndrejSc...WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT?! AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED- ALL THAT THE GERMANS GOT WAS A GODDAM GOOD TASTE OF THEIR OWN MEDICINE- AND THE GERMANS SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE CONSEQUENCES BEFORE THEY STARTED THAT GODDAM WAR IN EUROPE!!! GO DO SOMETHING WEIRD TO YOURSELF-!!!
I get the point one had to defeat Germany. But I can't see dropping incurate carpets on civilians being an honorable duty. Especially when Germany was clearly defeated in 1945 the allied bombed every small town and on top of that old medieval cities like Nuremberg and dresden got anihilated. Not just the thousands of woman and children. The old history of the cities - centuries old - got anihilated. War is war. But I can't understand the constant try to make some sort of heroism out of killing so many people from the air. And it is possible to call the holocaust a horrible crime as well as the bomber offensive.
Good video, but too many numbers being thrown around. Perhaps displaying the numbers, maybe in a graph, would work. I could not tell if things were getting better or worse or by how much because I couldn't keep track of all the numbers in my head.
Not very well understood is the fact that German manpower went East, but the industrial output needed by the Ostheer went to fight the War in the West. This was the central factor that the Germans lost the War.
Without doubt, we Brits are the most stubborn buggers on this planet we NEVER surrender, no matter what the odds, thats why, since 1066, we have never been beaten
Britain has lost 4 wars since 1066. American Revolutionary War (1775-1783), First Anglo-Afghan War (1839-1842), First Boer War (1880-1881), The Irish War of Independence (1919-1921).
Unfortunately, with the bombing of cities by the Germans and strafing of refugees in France in 1940, the war suddenly took on the status of Total War, which meant civilian targets housing workers and transport hubs and factories were then given the status of economic and strategic targets. The allies did not stuff up their development of long-range four engine bombers, i.e., HE 177, and Goering was happy with his short-range tactical bombers as he had more of them produced to support ground forces. The bombing caused German forces to be held back from the battle fronts for defence of the Reich from the aerial assault.
Crippled is subjective the maus is the only production line the bombing campaign killed. Every tank was in production until overran by the allied or Russian forces. The only real problem that was create was oil production from the eastern regions.
Incorrect. The bombing not only destroyed Ploesti, but the Synfuel plants in the Reich. The bombing did affect tank production. It affected the raw materials that went into the tank plants. It also affected the ammunition production. Germany maintained arms production until late 1944, but this was only because the strategic bombing was stopped and the bombers used to support the D-Day invasion until September. But more importantly, way before 1944 the bombing forced Germany to use most of its industrial output to support the War in the West, rather than the Ostheer.
German aircraft production peaked in 1944 so the allies did not cripple production. It was the lack of fuel that was a problem since 1939 and was the reason for the Russian invasion that crippled German production.
How can that be? The Luftwaffe was invisible on D-Day. Certainly if they had enough aircraft…more important trained pilots…they would have enough fuel to defend the coast. They couldn’t ALL have been dedicated to the Eastern front in June 1944.
@Ira Rather How does the production of aircraft relate to Germany's ability to produce oil? They are two separate issues. The Nazis relied on captured oil fields and refining facilities such as Ploesti in Romania. Your argument is not logical at all.
@local bod Firstly the lack of logic is in your statements. Romania was not captured, it was an allied. What is it like to go through life making ignorant and obtuse statements that demonstrate you have no idea what you are talking about? There were Hungarian oil fields who were also allied, are you going to say those were captured too? The simple fact is Germany lost the war because they did not have the fuel to fight the war. All allied bombing did was kill civilians and force the production underground and to decentralized locations. In fact, if German had won the war, they would have grounds to charge British and American air command with war crimes. In future, do a little research before replying and making yourself look so silly 😜.
@@localbod My point is that they didn’t need large quantities of fuel to park aircraft in France in anticipation of an invasion, which they KNEW was coming: The distances needed to fly for defense would be remarkably shorter compared to the fuel needed for eastern front aircraft, both combat and supply. It just seems like an illogical allocation of the country’s fuel supply, and a shortage of air craft had to have been the reason you didn’t see Luftwaffe on June 6th.
Simply a cull! That’s what all wars are about! Ask the Redskins and all Aborigines we were and are all ordered to be savages! Still are! Elites (profiteers) are laughing though. Please have a listen to “Masters of war” Bob Dylan. It answers all who question war better than I can.
The answer to why the Nazi's/Facists never made a serious comeback since World War Two is endless the bombed out ruins of Germany by the surrender. Moral issues aside, the sheer weight of firepower unleashed from bombers over Germany was far more devastating than two the atomic bombs used against the Japanese.
Regarding the effectiveness of Allied bombing, it might depend on the measure being used. If one takes the growth in German military production until late in the war, Allied bombing superficially looks pretty ineffective. On the other hand, if one compares German actual military production with German planned military production, Allied bombing looks very effective, because their military production fell so far short of what the Germans themselves thought was possible and planned for. A fair share of what they did manage to produce very late in the war had bits and parts missing or never reached the troops due the paralysis of Reich logistics
Many improvisions occured like bearing plates after Schweinfurt, underground factories and most machines needed direct hits to break, usually a factory didn't need as much repair as pictured, Old machines were always very thick and heavy, they survive the buildings destruction and were back up and running in no time. The more Germany was bombed their production went up. Finally the allies bombed the Germans fuel production and that created immediate results. I hadn't considered how many 88's would have been again the communist.
At 48.28 Lt Bob Knight, " When you are fighting a war, you gotta win." Whatever hormone in the human body is causing this need for power is the root of innocent, defenseless individuals suffering for generations, sadly , even to this day. Shame on these people on both sides of the war for not being able to solve what ever issues more proactively and peacefully.
RAF "These theories and the exertions of the Combined Operational Planning Committee did not meet with the approval of Harris. The Air Chief Marshal felt that here was yet another attempt to compel him to abandon area for precision bombing, a feat of which his Command in general--the Pathfinders always excepted--was incapable in 1943." page 4 Hyperwar Royal Air Force 1939-1945 POINTBLANK and Area Attacks
Pretty much the same for ALL air forces in the 1940s. Even the US's "revolutionary" Norden sight was a MASSIVE waste of resources after it showed itself in practice to be incapable of its claimed accuracy. It fared no better than the RAF's own late war bomb sights such as the SABS (Stabilised Automatic Bomb Sight).
Stupid conclusions. At the end of the war,1945, Germany was producing more weapons than they were in 1939. Their problem was that they didn't have the manpower to operate those weapon systems.
Nonsense. German arms production plummeted in 1944. But even before this occurred, Allied arms production overwhelmed German production. Please read about the Arsenal of Democracy.
As for the "Arsenal of Democracy" it was propaganda, but correct propaganda. The allies were producing more machines and material than the Germans since the start in "39". Problem was the Germans were destroying that equipment and material sometimes at a 10 to 1 ratio, especially on the east front. Germans made close to 50,000 tanks and SP anti-tank guns the Russians alone lost around 80,000 and the western alliance around another 20,000 or more. The air force ratios were much higher.
This is not at all accurate. Take Schweinfurt for example, we (the RAF and USAAF) unloaded huge amounts of ordnance and the factories were up and running in a matter of days. As it turns out we couldn't "drop a bomb into a pickle barrel" from 20,000 feet.
At the height of the US bombing effort, German war industry output actually rose, and the American loss rate went up as well. It was not until mid to late 1944, when the Luftwaffe had for all intents ceased to exist, that the wholesale destruction of German industry began.
When industrialized countries considered concentrated, decisively air (strategic)bombarding as mainly attacking method for capitulate & defeat (supposed) enemy ...they decided (total war )doctrine practically for future wars...while Ghobless proclaimed it in his propaganda speeches ...while Germany in started of crippling its whole strength 💪..
To Boeing it was the model 299, then the YB17 and finally B17. Don't be disingenuous. Why not just tell people with less knowledge than yourself from which transport aircraft it was originally and partially derived from?
I never understood why the Brits put so few machine guns on their bombers & as on ALL of their planes, those useless damn .30 caliber machine guns. Great if you're deer hunting but not worth spit in air combat !
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 .303 ammunition was hardly responsible for all Luftwaffe losses. There was British AA, running out of fuel, crashes on take off or landing, pilot fatigue, collisions, mechanical failure, etc. Eight .303's is a pretty nasty combination, but you can't give the fighters all the credit.
Not really. Carpet bombing (which is just a slang term for saturation bombing) is a bit different. It tends to ignore any specific targets within an area and, whilst it can be effective, it uses huge amounts of munitions which allies in WW2 couldn't afford to do. Hence they targeted railways, harbours, cities, workers' and civilian housing, and industrial districts specifically. That was the whole reason Pathfinders were used to drop flares to guide the main bomber force and the waves were carefully calculated in respect of wind, creepback etc. Had they the amount of aircraft and munitions to saturation bomb, they wouldn't have bothered with pathfinding. It takes a great deal of expertise and skill to get it right. You don't get the amazing successes of Dresden and Hamburg by chance, which is what saturation bombing is - largely just chance.
First the Poles started to kill the German minority in Poland , the reason for the German invasion. The media put the people against each other , just like today.
The idea behind the B17 was flawed . How they thought weighing down a Bomber already heavy with bomb load , with Ten MG's and think it will get through the Luftwaffe . The 8TH Air Force lost 33,000 airmen. That's Half of the Patton's 3RD Army . But typical US style use a sledgehammer to bash in a Nail. Just keep sending more planes into the Grinder . It was bad enough for Australian Crews who lost the largest percentage of 38% ( but was only contributing a few thousand men )
Early on, B24s etc. were used to bomb, instead of patrolling and countering u-boats. It was a bad use of valuable resources, costing us high casualties, men and ships both.
@@dennisweidner288 You are correct, even if you completely misunderstand what I said. Destroying u-boats was an intrinsic part of that winning strategy.
@@EllieMaes-Grandad The major part of the Bomber Offensive happened after the U-boats were defeated. Yes the RAF should have used all of the B-24's they had to go after the U-boats, but for some reason they used them as long range transports (Churchill was flying around the Med in one for most of 1942/43). Harris raised 18 new Squadrons in 1942, he got to keep 6 of them. The rest were given to Coastal Command and the Middle east. The main issues were a shortage of centimetric radars and suitable fuzes for the Depth Charges until early 1943. The issue about the radar was Coastal Command had a set in development built for finding U-boats and its development failed. The limited number of B-24's the RAF had were also not employed correctly due to the AOC in C of Coastal Command putting a limit on sortie length which was 4 hours shorter than the maximum duration of the VLR liberator. This was removed by a new AOC in C just before the U-boats were defeated. Most of the Aircraft kills against U-boats were after May 1943.
Britain's bombers never had enough defensive guns! I never understood why. Probably to save money. A shame, as many airmen died because of that. One the reasons I suspect they changed to nighttime bombing.
Lancasters carried three times the bomb load of B17s. Better pilots and navigators, too. Bombs and skilled aviators do more damage than blokes wi’ machine guns.
@manricobianchini5276 British realised that the self defending bomber concept was flawed before they dropped a single bomb on mainland Germany. Having just .303 guns was forced on the RAF due to the fact that the British had buttloads of Ammo of that type. The range of the weapon was somewhat irreverent at night as the German night fighters were not seen by the gunners until they were well within range of the .303 guns. At that point the Germans were putting 22mm cannon rounds into the RAF aircraft. Night Bombing massively reduced the amount of aircraft destroyed or damaged by Flak.
@@user-io6pj8bz8h You conveniently ignore the post-WW1 circumstances and mindset. In fact, the UK and others did fight the Bolsheviks in 1918/19. In 1945, the western allies had a citizen army, whereas the USSR had uneducated cannon-fodder and a huge land mass; pragmatism prevailed.
The British fought in Northern Russia to protect their timber Interests near Archangel after WW1. Unfortunately, it was too precarious to keep ground forces there, and they were withdrawn.
I'm either seeing something incredibly stupid, or maybe I'm being stupid. But... Wasn't it the German Stukas - low level dive bombers - not British strategic bombers, that had the sirens? The sirens used to instil terror in those who heard them? At 12:26 a bomber is seen tumbling to earth. With a siren going off. Why would a strategic bomber, flying at tens of thousands of feet, employ a siren? Nobody would hear it. And I kind of don't really think they'd want to be heard. Am I missing something or are producers so desperately hungry for dramatic effect that they resort to cheap tactics like this that insult the viewer's intelligence? If this channel is claiming to be educational - in the slightest amount - then misleading people pretty much undermines its credibility and purpose.
Strategic bombing ? They were lucky to land 10 out of 100 bombs on target. Even with the Norden bombsight which had to have perfect conditions ( no cloud ) the ratio wasn’t much better. I’ve heard that towards the end of the war the “ target “ was just the cicumference of the city that was to be hit.
@dwight4626 You are correct that strategic bombing was not very accurate. But it was accurate enough to disrupt the German war economy. Have you never asked yourself while the Luftwaffe was a no-show on D-Day? You might want to read about the Battle of Britain. It was all about gaining air superiority over the Channel beaches. The Luftwaffe failed. But the Allies managed to destroy the Luftwaffe through the strategic bombing campaign. The D-Day landings were virtually unopposed by the Luftwaffe.
The Americans said that they could drop a bomb into a pickle barrel with Norden bombsight. One English wag said why don’t you put the bomb in the barrel before you drop it.
Arthur Harris did what was essential and hated losing over 50% of our own crews. My Rear gunner Father survived despite inadequate guns and limited view of any attack from beneath the Lancaster. Completing his "Tour", he was promoted and sent to a gunnery school. Without Arthur Harris, we would have lost the War!
Numbers show that the bombing campaign did little to slow down German war production, which increased through 1944. German war production wasn't stifled until Allied ground troops conquered Germany's industrial heartland. What the bombing campaign DID do was destroy the Luftwaffe. First, German air power was forced to protect the skies over the Fatherland instead of focusing on attacking Allied ground forces and supply lines. And second, what finally destroyed the Luftwaffe wasn't a lack of planes but a lack of experienced pilots. By 1945 Germany was sending untrained kids up against American, British, and Soviet aces.
Most informative historical coverage about aviation strike between Luftwafa & allies airforces during WW2....allot thanks ...german Luftwafa fought furiously in skies while USA 🇺🇸 airforces fought more successfully than its British partners during WW2 against Luftwafa
If I’m understanding your comment properly…. You have many gaps in your understanding of events. Have you heard about the Battle of Britain? Why don’t you look into the American daytime raids and what happened to them. The introduction of long range fighter escorts was the deciding factor but by then the Luftwaffe couldn’t fuel and pilot their planes and were being driven back on every front. Do some research! Have a nice day. 🌞
@@eyebelieve3 I'm 85 and can remember my mother pointing out the contrails of the RAF battling it out in the sky. As for the Yanks they got slaughtered because they wouldn't take advice of those who had been there and done it.
Before the bombing ever took effect on the economy of Germany, they camps weren't provided enough food to keep the persecuted alive. The idea was to starve them or just execute them.
Mrs Richards: " I paid for a room with a view!" Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) " That is Torquay, Madam." Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!" Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically past?..." Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!" Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky." Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction." Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment ?"
I am quite prepared to entertain a reasoned argument as to whether Bomber Harris were justified tactically and morally in his obsession with bombing German city centers, but how on earth is bombing a city integrated into the enemy war effort in any way remotely analogous to the Nazis undertaking a genocide on defenceless people in your custody for no other reason than their ethnicity? It's morally and logically corrupted statement, The Nazis had custody of the Jews and from late 1941 brought them together for the specific purpose of killing them.The British never had custody of German city dwellers during the war Germany did. Germany could, at least in theory, have prevented their bombing by declaring their cities "Open". However, this required stopping all military activity in those cities and this the Nazis were not prepared to do. They wouldn't even allow their Italian and Hungarian allies to do so. As it was, German "civilians" got up in the mornings, walked past troop trains and military depots to get to their factories where they were increasingly was making implements of war. One can not claim immunity to the horrors of war simply by not wearing a military uniform and not carrying a weapon. Let alone in a total war where you are part of the war, are not protected by the legal framework and where area bombing was the only game in town when it came to strategic bombing
when i read these comments i realized theres more armchair soldiers than there are armchair quarterbacks.. everybody is a expert after the fact. but gee whiz, hindsight is always 20/20. how many of you guys still live in the basement at your mums?
That's not entirely true. The air war against German oil crippled the Germans. Also, the Germans did engage in terror bombing first which made a lot of people vengeful. As the war wore on, the Allies did tire of bombing the German cities. As far as Dresden is concerned that was Churchill's doing to try and make nice to Stalin.
Without the bombing campaign, there would have been up to 4x the number of 88mm guns on the eastern front!
Without proximity fuses the anti-air raid 88 guns were still somewhat effective. If the Germans were able to successfully design proximity fuses to be used with the 88, they didn’t, the effect on the bomber fleets would have effectively ended the allied air campaign.
@@jrsands Yes,and were a real game changer for the Allied Navy's 👍
There might have been a lot more than that.
Not to mention they would have gotten to the D-Day shores way faster and probably threw back the invasion, there would have been 2x-4x the number of planes and panzers, and they would have had plenty of fuel. It was not only effective but necessary. If they didn’t like it, they shouldn’t have started the war or started the carpet bombing (they hit london first) or they could have surrendered.
Worth conjecture: if the war in europe had dragged on, the A bomb would have been used there, with Britain full of Americans it could not be beaten, & if the conventional bombers had failed it would be a further stimulus to multiply the offspring of the Manhatten project & deploy one straight onto Berlin central, & put an end to the pointless German resistance.
According to Albert Speer, someone who was there, had all the figures and lived through it said "Without the bombing campaign, we would have had 10's of thousands of guns (88's), hundred of thousands of men and millions of rounds of ammunition in Russia killing tanks, where we needed them", see 'World at War" Whirlwind episode. Without the bombing, millions of tons of concrete would have been available to the occupation forces in Russia and France to make winning the war impossible, so yes it 'helped' beyond what the anti bombing 'experts' claim.
USA still lost the war and paid reparations
and the UK is now a brownie colony
UK will never do that again..
good riddance
long live Germany and Japan
The biggest disruption over all was rail, road and water transportation. Water would be salt water and fresh water. Mining waterways and bombing via ducts.
I have read his memoirs. He is one of the few to apologize for the Holocaust.
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer Yes but it was a very hypocritical apology as he was responsible for many demands for more slave workers from the death camps, and their return when unable to continue production.
Quite right & those 'experts' were more than just odd disenting opinions, they were the tip of a pacifist- liberal movement that eventually became fully embedded in the ruling structures & are still in position.
The last words of the doc spoken by the old RAF lad,"when your fighting a war for your existence,youve gotta win"
George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganiki. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front....
Ajd now we're fighting the war for our existence against the marxists, the war Britian gave us by fighting for globalism.
@@martytrueblood5902 ohhhh, boohoo, leftie. England went globalist instead of remaining Imperialist. That was the problem.
@@user-io6pj8bz8h UK lost the race war to the Axis too..
now it is a brownie colony
boo hoo
😂😂❤
Dad always told me that, even with the best sights available at the time, when you dropped something at 20,000 ft, you had almost no idea where it would hit. The cross winds in northern Europe made "precision high level bombing", a myth.
This was also true at Midway in the Pacific. None of the high-level bombers even came close, the four Japanese aircraft carriers were all sunk by dive bombers.
Poor old Switzerland was on the receiving end a few times, and even Dublin during the Blitz.
18.09 "the study of raids on Essen on March and April showed that only 10 percent of the bombers got within five miles of their target"
23.46 "at the end of 1943 chief of air staff Sir Charles Portal reflected that if it had been tactically possible to concentrate a quarter of our total bombs dropped on Germany on a distinct group of targets associated with oil, ball bearings or aero engines the war would by now have been won"
I thought that was what the US was doing? Did we have to do it ALL ?????
The Bombardment - Opening Scene
ua-cam.com/video/Bg0Gowqf6FM/v-deo.html
They gave up daylight precision bombing in early 1944 because only 15% of bombs fell within a mile of the targets. 80% of the US 8th AAF bomber losses were to radar-guided flak. The formations were so huge, they could not fly a dog leg course like the RAF did at night. Because of this, the Luftwaffe AA batteries put up a wall of flak that they had to fly through and losses were horrendous. The RAF pleaded with US bomber command to break up their raids into smaller formations and approach the targets from different directions and at different heights. It fell on deaf ears. In Normandy in D Day, some US bombers dropped their loads 7 miles from the beach and more casualties with the 101st and 82nd Airborne came from this than from the Germans. Eisenhower was appalled. He was quoted as asking, "Don't they look out the window?" Montgomery in fact cancelled all bombing on Sword and Juno and their losses were much less despite more Germans in the area.
The Americans think that they can go full 'gun ho' and just win through. Even though the British were at it longer and know what worked better, the Americans think they know best. Mugs
Something the US still didn't learn by Vietnam-flying the same paths so defense knew they were coming.
The only type plane able to do precision bombing was the Ju87 (Stuka). The U.S. lost 4 800 bombers of all kinds over Germany. Each plane had a crew, most of them did not make it.
The highest ranked US military combat fatality suffered during WW2?
Lt Gen Leslie J. McNair, killed on 25th July 1944 as a result of US 8th air force bombing hitting his command post at Saint-Lô in Normandy.
@timsmith2525 They were forced to fly those same routes. It was pure madness. Because of McNamara and it not being an officially declared war,restrictions were put on everything. It was insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Those poor boys and the women who went over as nurses. We lived in Oakland at the time. The Alameda base was busy, and the Oakland army base was always filled with APC's and trucks ready to be loaded. They were lined up near a fence we could see as we came off the bay bridge as kids. Mom,Dad,sister,brother me. Their all dead now. I can still see those trucks, though..
If you can find it, get the book "Nam." It's an incredible book. Fire on the Lake is another.
Really good not gonna lie it was a lot better then what I thought it was gonna be keep it up
It may be that the main benefit of daylight bombing was the Luftwaffe was slowly fed into the meat grinder and eventually destroyed. No Luftwaffe meant no air defense, and this gave the Allies air superiority over the German army, and Allied armies were free from air attack.
@bernardscheidle5679 Making D-Day possible. That alone justified the air campaign, but it did much more. For example, the German Panzers ran out of fuel during the Battle of the Bulge. Have you ever asked yourself why?
Big week
@@4playpowerful Absolutely, Big week began the destruction of the Luftwaffe.
@@dennisweidner288 D-Day was to save western Europe from Stalin.
@@MarkHarrison733No, it wasn't. It was to liberate France from German occupation, and to put American troops and equipment on the ground in Europe, in order to fight a ground war and defeat Germany and end the war.
18.09 "the study of raids on Essen on March and April showed that only 10 percent of the bombers got within five miles of their target"
23.46 "at the end of 1943 chief of air staff Sir Charles Portal reflected that if it had been tactically possible to concentrate a quarter of our total bombs dropped on Germany on a distinct group of targets associated with oil, ball bearings or aero engines the war would by now have been won"
Thank you for your sacrifice bomber crews. Despite the very high risk, they did their duty.
War criminals.
@@OndrejScHeroes.
@@OndrejSc...WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT?! AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED- ALL THAT THE GERMANS GOT WAS A GODDAM GOOD TASTE OF THEIR OWN MEDICINE- AND THE GERMANS SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE CONSEQUENCES BEFORE THEY STARTED THAT GODDAM WAR IN EUROPE!!!
GO DO SOMETHING WEIRD TO YOURSELF-!!!
I get the point one had to defeat Germany. But I can't see dropping incurate carpets on civilians being an honorable duty. Especially when Germany was clearly defeated in 1945 the allied bombed every small town and on top of that old medieval cities like Nuremberg and dresden got anihilated. Not just the thousands of woman and children. The old history of the cities - centuries old - got anihilated.
War is war. But I can't understand the constant try to make some sort of heroism out of killing so many people from the air. And it is possible to call the holocaust a horrible crime as well as the bomber offensive.
@@OndrejSc
Don’t be a silly sausage, lovey🧐🧐🧐
Thank you for sharing
😎🏆🙏🇺🇲
Good video, but too many numbers being thrown around. Perhaps displaying the numbers, maybe in a graph, would work. I could not tell if things were getting better or worse or by how much because I couldn't keep track of all the numbers in my head.
We won
@timsmith2525 Have you not asked yourself where the Luftwaffe was on D-Day?
Not very well understood is the fact that German manpower went East, but the industrial output needed by the Ostheer went to fight the War in the West. This was the central factor that the Germans lost the War.
Indeed. Some 2/3 of Germanys wartime expenditure and material resources went on their air and sea forces, and these were largely lost in the west.
Really can't recommend Philip P. O'Brien's book, How the Allies Won, highly enough if you are interested in this topic.
Without doubt, we Brits are the most stubborn buggers on this planet we NEVER surrender, no matter what the odds, thats why, since 1066, we have never been beaten
Britain has lost 4 wars since 1066. American Revolutionary War (1775-1783), First Anglo-Afghan War (1839-1842), First Boer War (1880-1881), The Irish War of Independence (1919-1921).
I should have added on our little island.
@@goldreserveWhat ya talking about? In the revolutionary war you were all still British ✌️😉
@@goldreserve The Anglo-Irish War was a stalemate.
+ Brexit, poppet… But that was self-inflicted.
Unfortunately, with the bombing of cities by the Germans and strafing of refugees in France in 1940, the war suddenly took on the status of Total War, which meant civilian targets housing workers and transport hubs and factories were then given the status of economic and strategic targets. The allies did not stuff up their development of long-range four engine bombers, i.e., HE 177, and Goering was happy with his short-range tactical bombers as he had more of them produced to support ground forces. The bombing caused German forces to be held back from the battle fronts for defence of the Reich from the aerial assault.
Crippled is subjective the maus is the only production line the bombing campaign killed. Every tank was in production until overran by the allied or Russian forces. The only real problem that was create was oil production from the eastern regions.
Incorrect. The bombing not only destroyed Ploesti, but the Synfuel plants in the Reich. The bombing did affect tank production. It affected the raw materials that went into the tank plants. It also affected the ammunition production. Germany maintained arms production until late 1944, but this was only because the strategic bombing was stopped and the bombers used to support the D-Day invasion until September. But more importantly, way before 1944 the bombing forced Germany to use most of its industrial output to support the War in the West, rather than the Ostheer.
the gentle laborer shall no longer suffer
An insanely violent era, really hope we don't see similar again.
We will see when the Palestine war escalates if Iran decides to directly intervene combining Russia's support
German aircraft production peaked in 1944 so the allies did not cripple production. It was the lack of fuel that was a problem since 1939 and was the reason for the Russian invasion that crippled German production.
You are correct, sir.
How can that be? The Luftwaffe was invisible on D-Day.
Certainly if they had enough aircraft…more important trained pilots…they would have enough fuel to defend the coast. They couldn’t ALL have been dedicated to the Eastern front in June 1944.
@Ira Rather How does the production of aircraft relate to Germany's ability to produce oil? They are two separate issues. The Nazis relied on captured oil fields and refining facilities such as Ploesti in Romania.
Your argument is not logical at all.
@local bod Firstly the lack of logic is in your statements. Romania was not captured, it was an allied. What is it like to go through life making ignorant and obtuse statements that demonstrate you have no idea what you are talking about? There were Hungarian oil fields who were also allied, are you going to say those were captured too? The simple fact is Germany lost the war because they did not have the fuel to fight the war. All allied bombing did was kill civilians and force the production underground and to decentralized locations. In fact, if German had won the war, they would have grounds to charge British and American air command with war crimes. In future, do a little research before replying and making yourself look so silly 😜.
@@localbod My point is that they didn’t need large quantities of fuel to park aircraft in France in anticipation of an invasion, which they KNEW was coming:
The distances needed to fly for defense would be remarkably shorter compared to the fuel needed for eastern front aircraft, both combat and supply.
It just seems like an illogical allocation of the country’s fuel supply, and a shortage of air craft had to have been the reason you didn’t see Luftwaffe on June 6th.
what is strategic on bombing on such a big scale on civilian targets?
Simply a cull! That’s what all wars are about! Ask the Redskins and all Aborigines we were and are all ordered to be savages! Still are! Elites (profiteers) are laughing though. Please have a listen to “Masters of war” Bob Dylan. It answers all who question war better than I can.
Good question. RAF and USAF did their 'rightful' holocaust.
The answer to why the Nazi's/Facists never made a serious comeback since World War Two is endless the bombed out ruins of Germany by the surrender. Moral issues aside, the sheer weight of firepower unleashed from bombers over Germany was far more devastating than two the atomic bombs used against the Japanese.
Fascism is more popular than ever before.
@@MarkHarrison733
Only in the mind of the dangleberry, poppet. Be fair.
@@robertcottam8824 Churchill made Europe Communist and Islamic.
The wrong side won the war. Just look at what has become of this once great nation.
@j4a801 You are an evil person if you think the NAZIs were the right side.
German production rose steadily until mid-1944.
Regarding the effectiveness of Allied bombing, it might depend on the measure being used. If one takes the growth in German military production until late in the war, Allied bombing superficially looks pretty ineffective. On the other hand, if one compares German actual military production with German planned military production, Allied bombing looks very effective, because their military production fell so far short of what the Germans themselves thought was possible and planned for.
A fair share of what they did manage to produce very late in the war had bits and parts missing or never reached the troops due the paralysis of Reich logistics
3 commercial breaks in the first 12 minutes......I'm done
Many improvisions occured like bearing plates after Schweinfurt, underground factories and most machines needed direct hits to break, usually a factory didn't need as much repair as pictured, Old machines were always very thick and heavy, they survive the buildings destruction and were back up and running in no time. The more Germany was bombed their production went up. Finally the allies bombed the Germans fuel production and that created immediate results. I hadn't considered how many 88's would have been again the communist.
the thumbnail shows a view from a b24 cockpit...the other bombers in the formation are b17 ?... irritating.. very cool picture..
At 48.28 Lt Bob Knight, " When you are fighting a war, you gotta win." Whatever hormone in the human body is causing this need for power is the root of innocent, defenseless individuals suffering for generations, sadly , even to this day. Shame on these people on both sides of the war for not being able to solve what ever issues more proactively and peacefully.
RAF "These theories and the exertions of the Combined Operational Planning Committee did not meet with the approval of Harris. The Air Chief Marshal felt that here was yet another attempt to compel him to abandon area for precision bombing, a feat of which his Command in general--the Pathfinders always excepted--was incapable in 1943."
page 4
Hyperwar Royal Air Force 1939-1945 POINTBLANK and Area Attacks
Pretty much the same for ALL air forces in the 1940s. Even the US's "revolutionary" Norden sight was a MASSIVE waste of resources after it showed itself in practice to be incapable of its claimed accuracy.
It fared no better than the RAF's own late war bomb sights such as the SABS (Stabilised Automatic Bomb Sight).
Stopped watching….wayyyyy to many ads.
Stupid conclusions. At the end of the war,1945, Germany was producing more weapons than they were in 1939. Their problem was that they didn't have the manpower to operate those weapon systems.
Nonsense. German arms production plummeted in 1944. But even before this occurred, Allied arms production overwhelmed German production. Please read about the Arsenal of Democracy.
As for the "Arsenal of Democracy" it was propaganda, but correct propaganda. The allies were producing more machines and material than the Germans since the start in "39". Problem was the Germans were destroying that equipment and material sometimes at a 10 to 1 ratio, especially on the east front. Germans made close to 50,000 tanks and SP anti-tank guns the Russians alone lost around 80,000 and the western alliance around another 20,000 or more. The air force ratios were much higher.
This is not at all accurate. Take Schweinfurt for example, we (the RAF and USAAF) unloaded huge amounts of ordnance and the factories were up and running in a matter of days. As it turns out we couldn't "drop a bomb into a pickle barrel" from 20,000 feet.
Production shortfalls compensated by purchases from Sweden . . .
@eyebelieve3 There were failures, but please explain just why the Luftwaffe was a no-show on D-Day.
@@EllieMaes-Grandad Shipments from Sweden did not begin to compensate for the losses. That is nonsense.
@@dennisweidner288 Regular shipments were supplemented, or are you Swedish maybe . . . ?
RIP Greatest Generation! My Granps Bombed The Reich in a B 17 as an Engineer.
At the height of the US bombing effort, German war industry output actually rose, and the American loss rate went up as well. It was not until mid to late 1944, when the Luftwaffe had for all intents ceased to exist, that the wholesale destruction of German industry began.
That was when Speer took over and introduced a night shift into German industry . It was the effect of the bombing that forced it.
When industrialized countries considered concentrated, decisively air (strategic)bombarding as mainly attacking method for capitulate & defeat (supposed) enemy ...they decided (total war )doctrine practically for future wars...while Ghobless proclaimed it in his propaganda speeches ...while Germany in started of crippling its whole strength 💪..
Ghobless or Goebbels?
Can you translate that into English?
@@user-io6pj8bz8h I was about to comment the same thing 😂 This is 100% not english.
We killed a LOT of civilians. But then again... so did they?
Many civilians lost their lives at the hands of the Luftwaffe....
The Germans invented area bombing of civilians during the Spanish civil War.
@Stephen-wb3wf Hardly. Some 0.5 million German civilians died in the bombing. The NAZIs killed some 25-30 million people in the Siviet Union alone.
@@brianperry The history books only tell that.
Actually the B17 is a military designation. To Boeing it was the Model 299. Name the civil aircraft it was based on please
To Boeing it was the model 299, then the YB17 and finally B17. Don't be disingenuous.
Why not just tell people with less knowledge than yourself from which transport aircraft it was originally and partially derived from?
The civil Boeing 307 was developed in parallel with the Boeing 299.
"How the allies used strat bombing to cripple german war machine by killing german workforce"
I never understood why the Brits put so few machine guns on their bombers & as on ALL of their planes, those useless damn .30 caliber machine guns. Great if you're deer hunting but not worth spit in air combat !
"Not worth a spit in air to air combat" (ignoring the 1700 aircraft the Luftwaffe lost to .303s during the battle of Britain).
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 .303 ammunition was hardly responsible for all Luftwaffe losses. There was British AA, running out of fuel, crashes on take off or landing, pilot fatigue, collisions, mechanical failure, etc.
Eight .303's is a pretty nasty combination, but you can't give the fighters all the credit.
Pretty sure that's Carl Spaatz not Ira Eaker.
Stratigic bombing you mean carpet bombing 🙉
Not really. Carpet bombing (which is just a slang term for saturation bombing) is a bit different. It tends to ignore any specific targets within an area and, whilst it can be effective, it uses huge amounts of munitions which allies in WW2 couldn't afford to do.
Hence they targeted railways, harbours, cities, workers' and civilian housing, and industrial districts specifically. That was the whole reason Pathfinders were used to drop flares to guide the main bomber force and the waves were carefully calculated in respect of wind, creepback etc. Had they the amount of aircraft and munitions to saturation bomb, they wouldn't have bothered with pathfinding.
It takes a great deal of expertise and skill to get it right. You don't get the amazing successes of Dresden and Hamburg by chance, which is what saturation bombing is - largely just chance.
Fritz never ran out of fighter planes only pilots .
What about fuel?
@@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684
And sausages…
The French flag should be white
Very good...
Look what Germans dobę in Warsaw in 1944...
Greetings from Poland to England 😊
The UK betrayed Poland in 1939, 1944 and 1945.
Warsaw was destroyed by the failed terrorist uprising in 1944.
First the Poles started to kill the German minority in Poland , the reason for the German invasion. The media put the people against each other , just like today.
THANK GODTHAT WE HAD CHURCHILL AND ROSEVELT
TO SAVE US❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Forgotten something haven't you? Commonwealth crewmen. Aussies, Kiwi's, Springboks, Canadians and of course others as well. YANKS!
Churchill and Roosevelt saved Communism.
Churchill is a war criminal and did not want to talk about peace , because he was a bankers puppet.
Churchill starved many Indians and Africans
Can't you even provide a historically correct map of Germany?
The idea behind the B17 was flawed . How they thought weighing down a Bomber already heavy with bomb load , with Ten MG's and think it will get through the Luftwaffe . The 8TH Air Force lost 33,000 airmen. That's Half of the Patton's 3RD Army . But typical US style use a sledgehammer to bash in a Nail. Just keep sending more planes into the Grinder . It was bad enough for Australian Crews who lost the largest percentage of 38% ( but was only contributing a few thousand men )
Rusty, is that another Australian whinge about how many you lost. Give it a rest we were all in it together.
Quite. It was a bomber without bombs…
Babys are no targets for whatever reason and everywhere in the world at any time!
Early on, B24s etc. were used to bomb, instead of patrolling and countering u-boats. It was a bad use of valuable resources, costing us high casualties, men and ships both.
Nonsense. The ASllies did not win the War by destroying U-boats. They won the War by destroying Germany's ability to wage war.
@@dennisweidner288 You are correct, even if you completely misunderstand what I said. Destroying u-boats was an intrinsic part of that winning strategy.
@@EllieMaes-Grandad The major part of the Bomber Offensive happened after the U-boats were defeated. Yes the RAF should have used all of the B-24's they had to go after the U-boats, but for some reason they used them as long range transports (Churchill was flying around the Med in one for most of 1942/43). Harris raised 18 new Squadrons in 1942, he got to keep 6 of them. The rest were given to Coastal Command and the Middle east. The main issues were a shortage of centimetric radars and suitable fuzes for the Depth Charges until early 1943. The issue about the radar was Coastal Command had a set in development built for finding U-boats and its development failed. The limited number of B-24's the RAF had were also not employed correctly due to the AOC in C of Coastal Command putting a limit on sortie length which was 4 hours shorter than the maximum duration of the VLR liberator. This was removed by a new AOC in C just before the U-boats were defeated. Most of the Aircraft kills against U-boats were after May 1943.
In 1936 when war was inevitable? WTF?
👍
Britain's bombers never had enough defensive guns! I never understood why. Probably to save money. A shame, as many airmen died because of that. One the reasons I suspect they changed to nighttime bombing.
B-17s had loads of guns. It didnt matter.
Lancasters carried three times the bomb load of B17s. Better pilots and navigators, too.
Bombs and skilled aviators do more damage than blokes wi’ machine guns.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Absolutely correct, though they did kill quite a few Luftwaffe fighters, just nowhere near as many as they claimed.
@manricobianchini5276 British realised that the self defending bomber concept was flawed before they dropped a single bomb on mainland Germany. Having just .303 guns was forced on the RAF due to the fact that the British had buttloads of Ammo of that type. The range of the weapon was somewhat irreverent at night as the German night fighters were not seen by the gunners until they were well within range of the .303 guns. At that point the Germans were putting 22mm cannon rounds into the RAF aircraft. Night Bombing massively reduced the amount of aircraft destroyed or damaged by Flak.
Mass murder?
Yes indeed, the nazis were preeminent at that.
It was pathetic the way Sir Arthur Harris and bomber command was treated after the war. There is nothing quite as despicable as a politician.
He prolonged World War II.
We fought the wrong enemy
No, we were realistic; we fought them afterwards. Post 1990, we opted for consumerism - that was not clever.
@@EllieMaes-GrandadI disagree with your basic premise. If we were realistic we would have fought the real enemy from the beginning.
@@user-io6pj8bz8h You conveniently ignore the post-WW1 circumstances and mindset. In fact, the UK and others did fight the Bolsheviks in 1918/19.
In 1945, the western allies had a citizen army, whereas the USSR had uneducated cannon-fodder and a huge land mass; pragmatism prevailed.
Look where we are now! Worldwide happiness eh? I think not! We were the cullers and the culled! PROFIT for the ELITES!
The British fought in Northern Russia to protect their timber Interests near Archangel after WW1. Unfortunately, it was too precarious to keep ground forces there, and they were withdrawn.
I'm either seeing something incredibly stupid, or maybe I'm being stupid. But... Wasn't it the German Stukas - low level dive bombers - not British strategic bombers, that had the sirens? The sirens used to instil terror in those who heard them? At 12:26 a bomber is seen tumbling to earth. With a siren going off.
Why would a strategic bomber, flying at tens of thousands of feet, employ a siren? Nobody would hear it. And I kind of don't really think they'd want to be heard.
Am I missing something or are producers so desperately hungry for dramatic effect that they resort to cheap tactics like this that insult the viewer's intelligence?
If this channel is claiming to be educational - in the slightest amount - then misleading people pretty much undermines its credibility and purpose.
Dude. Trees. Forest.
@@ajalvarez3111 Was that a reply to what I said about Stukas being the only WW2 planes with sirens?
Strategic bombing ? They were lucky to land 10 out of 100 bombs on target. Even with the Norden bombsight which had to have perfect conditions ( no cloud ) the ratio wasn’t much better. I’ve heard that towards the end of the war the “ target “ was just the cicumference of the city that was to be hit.
@dwight4626 You are correct that strategic bombing was not very accurate. But it was accurate enough to disrupt the German war economy. Have you never asked yourself while the Luftwaffe was a no-show on D-Day? You might want to read about the Battle of Britain. It was all about gaining air superiority over the Channel beaches. The Luftwaffe failed. But the Allies managed to destroy the Luftwaffe through the strategic bombing campaign. The D-Day landings were virtually unopposed by the Luftwaffe.
The Americans said that they could drop a bomb into a pickle barrel with Norden bombsight. One English wag said why don’t you put the bomb in the barrel before you drop it.
@@anthonyeaton5153
Hahahaha! Problem is: Billy Big-Hat-‘n’-Banjo continues to believe his own dangleberries…
😩
BOMBER HARRIS FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He was a good man.
Arthur Harris did what was essential and hated losing over 50% of our own crews. My Rear gunner Father survived despite inadequate guns and limited view of any attack from beneath the Lancaster. Completing his "Tour", he was promoted and sent to a gunnery school. Without Arthur Harris, we would have lost the War!
Numbers show that the bombing campaign did little to slow down German war production, which increased through 1944. German war production wasn't stifled until Allied ground troops conquered Germany's industrial heartland.
What the bombing campaign DID do was destroy the Luftwaffe. First, German air power was forced to protect the skies over the Fatherland instead of focusing on attacking Allied ground forces and supply lines. And second, what finally destroyed the Luftwaffe wasn't a lack of planes but a lack of experienced pilots. By 1945 Germany was sending untrained kids up against American, British, and Soviet aces.
You can also tell the impact the bombing had by the great lengths the Germans took to stop them, as well as hide their industry from them.
@johnmichalski5981 Correct and the reason the Germans has only untrained pilots was largely the bombing campaign.
Most informative historical coverage about aviation strike between Luftwafa & allies airforces during WW2....allot thanks ...german Luftwafa fought furiously in skies while USA 🇺🇸 airforces fought more successfully than its British partners during WW2 against Luftwafa
You don't know what you're talking about.
Go learn some history.
If I’m understanding your comment properly…. You have many gaps in your understanding of events. Have you heard about the Battle of Britain? Why don’t you look into the American daytime raids and what happened to them. The introduction of long range fighter escorts was the deciding factor but by then the Luftwaffe couldn’t fuel and pilot their planes and were being driven back on every front. Do some research! Have a nice day. 🌞
@@eyebelieve3 I'm 85 and can remember my mother pointing out the contrails of the RAF battling it out in the sky. As for the Yanks they got slaughtered because they wouldn't take advice of those who had been there and done it.
@@mikemines2931 Do you reckon he actually watched the documentary.Probably spent most of the time typing gibberish into his phone.
I wonder if any camps went hungry?...
Death camps...
Before the bombing ever took effect on the economy of Germany, they camps weren't provided enough food to keep the persecuted alive. The idea was to starve them or just execute them.
Yet war production rose every year in German industry.
Are you sure about that?
It came at a high price too; volume isn't everything.
@@tightcamper yes. It’s a fact
@@EllieMaes-Grandad it’s what the USA used to win. That sounds pretty important
@@cwcsquared Indeed it did, but quality was maintained.
They gonna be hammered soon again🤔when the God's hammer fall, they shall cry
It must've been an awesome sight seeing hundreds of bombers flying overhead, air superiority was and is a key to win any war.🇺🇸
Except in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Afghanistan… Eye-raq, Somalia etc.
Mrs Richards: " I paid for a room with a view!"
Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) " That is Torquay, Madam."
Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!"
Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically past?..."
Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!"
Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky."
Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction."
Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment ?"
well presented, but a bit basic.
And wrong.
And no mention of airborne radar which showed the target in fine detail through cloud, flak or anything they on the ground cared to throw up.
long live Deutschland 😎
Another stolen content
The nazis targeted Jewish civilians. The British targeted German civilians. Same/same.
I am quite prepared to entertain a reasoned argument as to whether Bomber Harris were justified tactically and morally in his obsession with bombing German city centers, but how on earth is bombing a city integrated into the enemy war effort in any way remotely analogous to the Nazis undertaking a genocide on defenceless people in your custody for no other reason than their
ethnicity? It's morally and logically corrupted statement,
The Nazis had custody of the Jews and from late 1941 brought them together for the specific purpose of killing them.The British never had custody of German city dwellers during the war Germany did. Germany could, at least in theory, have prevented their bombing by declaring their cities "Open". However, this required stopping all military activity in those cities and this the Nazis were not prepared to do. They wouldn't even allow their Italian and Hungarian allies to do so.
As it was, German "civilians" got up in the mornings, walked past troop trains and military depots to get to their factories where they were increasingly was making implements of war. One can not claim immunity to the horrors of war simply by not wearing a military uniform and not carrying a weapon. Let alone in a total war where you are part of the war, are not protected by the legal framework and where area bombing was the only game in town when it came to strategic bombing
Right revenge is wrong.
Some people call it strategic bombing, others call it a war crime.
"That's like handing out tickets at the Indy 500"
-Captain Willard
i call it based
I agree .
We were at war, you do what is necessary. No crimes committed, a just cause and a just response
And some call it profitable arms dealing.
when i read these comments i realized theres more armchair soldiers than there are armchair quarterbacks..
everybody is a expert after the fact. but gee whiz, hindsight is always 20/20. how many of you guys still live in the basement at your mums?
Bomber Harris Hero 😘
Are you kidding? The man was borderline psychotic. He would call his men cowardly because a target was not destroyed with 1940's technology!
Strategic bombing was a weapon of terror. Industrial production was never seriously targeted. Dresden was only a refuge, was firebombed anyway.
That's not entirely true. The air war against German oil crippled the Germans. Also, the Germans did engage in terror bombing first which made a lot of people vengeful. As the war wore on, the Allies did tire of bombing the German cities. As far as Dresden is concerned that was Churchill's doing to try and make nice to Stalin.
Totally false. I have studied the war since 1970
"Industrial production was never seriously targeted" Who writes your material? Comedy gold !!! You really should be on stage.
Nazis killed my American grandparents with an Me-262.
Thanks for his service I suppose give it 30 years and there will be another world war to show to history
stop drinking
How was your grandmother involved ?