Saying Israel is committing genocide in its war with Hamas is like saying American and British forces committed it during their devastating campaign against the German city in 1945.
Strategic bombing is terror bombing. Killing civilians and terrorizing the survivors was the stated goal.
Of the Brits and of the Americans in Japan? Yes. Of the Americans in Europe? No. We endured high casualties for little gain because US bomber command in Europe recognized that attempting to break the enemy’s will to resist by killing civilians was a fool’s errand. We targeted strategic targets, such as factories and oil refineries. This is the whole reason for US daytime bombing vs. British night-time bombing. Unless you think the Americans just really liked taking heavy losses under daytime AA fire?
If Israel needs to learn anything from the Allied experience of strategic bombing, it’s probably that it doesn’t fucking work.
Yes, Israel needs to learn from the Allied experience of terror bombing - that terror bombing doesn’t work.
Strategic bombing is not much of an option for Israel because Hamas operates very few traditional material-production facilities that could be targeted.
It’s also pretty dishonest to frame the conflict from Oct7 as some isolated event. Like the charge of genocide rests only on the events of the past hundred days.
I don’t remember claiming that.
It should also be stated that Dresden is often used as a whataboutism by Holocaust deniers and Nazi apologists.
I’m well aware. That doesn’t change that the British policy was explicitly one of terror bombing in retribution for Nazi terror bombing campaigns. Dresden got its reputation because British and American bomber command both agreed Dresden had to go for different reasons, which meant they got it double compared to most other targets.
The USAAF didn’t do daylight bombing to spare civilians, they did it because of doctrine. They thought it was more effective to target industry. But those daylight bombs fell on cities just like they fell on factories and just like they fell on empty fields. They didn’t care about the aircrews, much less the people on the ground. What do you think it means to “demoralize” the population?
My comment about the framing was directed at the author of the article, not you.
The USAAF didn’t do daylight bombing to spare civilians, they did it because of doctrine. They thought it was more effective to target industry.
… okay? So you do admit, contrary to your initial claims, that the target of US bombing campaigns in Europe was NOT to terrorize and kill civilians but to target industry?
But those daylight bombs fell on cities just like they fell on factories and just like they fell on empty fields. They didn’t care about the aircrews, much less the people on the ground.
I’m pretty sure the US cared quite a bit about the loss of manpower and material? Do… do you think the US was operating under the presumption of infinite resources and soldiers?
What do you think it means to “demoralize” the population?
Something very different than what ‘targeting industry’ means.
Of the Brits and of the Americans in Japan? Yes. Of the Americans in Europe? No. We endured high casualties for little gain because US bomber command in Europe recognized that attempting to break the enemy’s will to resist by killing civilians was a fool’s errand. We targeted strategic targets, such as factories and oil refineries. This is the whole reason for US daytime bombing vs. British night-time bombing. Unless you think the Americans just really liked taking heavy losses under daytime AA fire?
Yes, Israel needs to learn from the Allied experience of terror bombing - that terror bombing doesn’t work.
Strategic bombing is not much of an option for Israel because Hamas operates very few traditional material-production facilities that could be targeted.
I don’t remember claiming that.
I’m well aware. That doesn’t change that the British policy was explicitly one of terror bombing in retribution for Nazi terror bombing campaigns. Dresden got its reputation because British and American bomber command both agreed Dresden had to go for different reasons, which meant they got it double compared to most other targets.
The USAAF didn’t do daylight bombing to spare civilians, they did it because of doctrine. They thought it was more effective to target industry. But those daylight bombs fell on cities just like they fell on factories and just like they fell on empty fields. They didn’t care about the aircrews, much less the people on the ground. What do you think it means to “demoralize” the population?
My comment about the framing was directed at the author of the article, not you.
… okay? So you do admit, contrary to your initial claims, that the target of US bombing campaigns in Europe was NOT to terrorize and kill civilians but to target industry?
I’m pretty sure the US cared quite a bit about the loss of manpower and material? Do… do you think the US was operating under the presumption of infinite resources and soldiers?
Something very different than what ‘targeting industry’ means.