Opinions wanted

Subject: Opinions wanted
From: "The Enlightenment"
Date: 1/8/04 4:06 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Opinions wanted
From: (The Enlightenment)
Date: 1/8/04 6:16 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Robert Briggs wrote in message
.. .
tadaa wrote:

So selling weapons/weapon parts to conflicts makes you and your
workforce
legal targets? Well actually the workforce, their families and
basically
everyone that happens to live in that city.
If Germany would have bombed cities in USA to rubble before
decleration
of
war you would have accepted it because, hey there were aiding
the allied
war effort? Obviously Germany didn't have capacity for that,
but that is
just an example.

Well, the Hun *did* bomb substantial parts of British cities to
rubble.

Rubbish. Both quantitatively and qualitatively. All had industrial
targets, radio navigation aids were used.


Tell that to the thousands of woman and children bombed out of their
homes in
residential areas by the Nazi *******s.
The image you project of ethical humane Nazis leaves much to be
questioned.


The Luftwaffe Pilots had the same ethics and concerns as you did. No
insult intended.


Not quite. The Luftwafe pilots were there to carry out the Nazi goal of
enslaving europe.We were there to liberate Europe. Hardly the same thing.

..
Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Subject: Opinions wanted
From: (Ryan M.)
Date: 1/8/04 3:19 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

P.S. Art, I know your probably going to attack me as some kind of Nazi
apologetic *******, but I understand why you feel the way you do and I
will respect you all the same

Nope. No attack. Have a nice day. (grin)


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 20:47:14 -0000, "Simon Robbins"
wrote:


First off, the neutrality of the country should be questioned diplomatically
and openly if it is knowingly supplying war equipment to a hostile
government on either side.

Neutral status does not preclude the trade with the belligerents.
Neutral country can freely choose with whom it is going to trade.


Drax
remove NOSPAM for reply

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:18:13 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


No but Holland was and that didnt prevent Rotterdam being bombed
by the Luftwaffe

By the time Rotterdam was bombed, Netherlands was no more a neutral
country. The German invasion (without declaration of war) was already
taking place.


Drax
remove NOSPAM for reply

"Drazen Kramaric" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:18:13 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


No but Holland was and that didnt prevent Rotterdam being bombed
by the Luftwaffe

By the time Rotterdam was bombed, Netherlands was no more a neutral
country. The German invasion (without declaration of war) was already
taking place.


Which was rather my point

Keith

Uzytkownik "Ryan M." napisal w wiadomosci
m...
The Germans made efforts to avoid bombing Warsaw and Rotterdam from
the historical documents I have read.

I don't know what kind of historical documents you cite, but they are not
true - at least in Warsaw case. WWII began 1. September 1939 at 4:45 am
Warsaw time. Polish cities (including Warsaw) were bombed from the first day
with He-111 and later (as the front moved) Ju-87. First German troops
achieved Warsaw neigbarhood on 8. September, so between 1. and 8. September
Warsaw WAS NOT defended, because WAS NOT directly attacked. Maybe I should
read your statement 'IF Poland would have been surrended on 1. September
till 5:00 am THEN Warsaw were not bombed'. Sorry, I could not share your
point.

Rotterdam for example, was being
used as a defensive position by the allies and there was actual house
to house combat taking place in the city.

In 1939 Warsaw was not defended house to house. The city suffered damages
and surrended on 28. September. Wounds were deep but Warsaw was still alive.
House to house combat took place in 1943 (19. April-8. May; Warsaw Ghetto
Uprising), in 1944 (1. August-2. October; Warsaw Uprising) and 1945 (17.
January; liberation of Warsaw). German aerial attacks were limited to dive
bombing (in other case they could hit their own troops). After that Warsaw
was 80% destroyed.

[snip...]

Warsaw and Rotterdam were both cities
that were bombed because of the fact that the defending troops had
bunkered themselves down in the city itself.

About Warsaw - see above.

[snip...]

Sincerely,
Ryan Muntener

I hate to tell you that you are not alone. Many 'historicians' claimed
recently that Poland (and Holland in this case) were guilty by themselves
that were attacked. Strange thinking, indeed... If Germans were worried
about destroying Warsaw (Rotterdam, London etc.) THEY COULD SIMPLY NOT TO
INVADE POLAND!!

NO regards, EOT
JasiekS [Jan Skowronski]
Warsaw, Poland

Hello Jan,

I'm sorry you were so offended by my statements. I only briefly
mentioned Warsaw as I did not have any good information at hand to
further clarify on it. And for this reason I should not have said that
there was house to house fighting in Warsaw, my mistake. I stuck
mostly with mentioning the conditions with the bombing of Rotterdam
instead. However, I understand that there are many sources that exist
which blatently contradict themselves on topics such as these. I would
still like to quote three sources I found with a quick search off the
internet.(no books as I am not at home to cite them)

1. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/tgmwc...08-77-06.shtml

From the Nuremberg Trials...see link for more citation info:

Q. "You never saw any such reactions on their part on these bombings
[Warsaw, Rotterdam, and Coventry], I take it?"

A. "I only know that Warsaw was a fortress which was held by the
Polish Army in very great strength, provided with excellent pieces of
artillery, that the forts were manned, and that two or three times
Adolf Hitler announced that the city should be evacuated by civilians.
That was refused. Only the foreign embassies were evacuated, while an
officer with a flag of truce entered. The Polish Army was in the city
defending it stubbornly in a very dense circle of forts. The outer
forts were very strongly manned and, from the inner town, heavy
artillery was firing towards the outskirts. The fortress of Warsaw was
therefore attacked, also by the Luftwaffe, but only after Hitler's
ultimatum had been rejected."

2. http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/Churchi...s_replies.html

Visit this link and scroll down to the area shaded in grey which
discusses the Luftwaffe attacks on Warsaw as well.

3. http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...mbing/AP27.htm

Citations used for the writing of this WEB page on also found at the
link above:

"World War II began on September 1, 1939, in Poland when the German
Luftwaffe began to bomb military targets. When Warsaw continued to
fight, German leader Adolf Hitler approved the dropping of five tons
of bombs on the city, hastening Poland�s surrender. As German
tanks rolled through the rest of continental Europe, Hitler used the
example of the bombing of Warsaw to encourage submission. But with
minor exceptions, there were no more bombings of civilian targets on
either side. Hitler even released War Directive #2 that forbade
bombing attacks on France or England except as reprisals."


You wrote:
I hate to tell you that you are not alone. Many 'historicians' claimed
recently that Poland (and Holland in this case) were guilty by themselves
that were attacked. Strange thinking, indeed... If Germans were worried
about destroying Warsaw (Rotterdam, London etc.) THEY COULD SIMPLY NOT TO
INVADE POLAND!!

I never said I believe the Polish were guilty themselves of being
attacked and could not agree with you more that if Hitler had not
invaded Poland the bombing of Warsaw would not have happened. However
I was not and am not trying to debate if Germany should have or should
not have invaded Poland.

The point of this respons is not to start an argument about this
topic, simply to let everyone know that I have read sources that
contradict what was stated by Keith in the prior post regarding
Rotterdam. We could all continue argueing by stating all the sources
which back up our opinion, but this is not my intention by any means.
History is the interpretation of the past and therefore will always be
dependant on how "we" as individuals interpret it.

Finally,

You wrote:
NO regards, EOT
JasiekS [Jan Skowronski]
Warsaw, Poland

I'm not sure why you would write "NO regards" but I will end my
response...

WITH regards,
Ryan Muntener
Vancouver, Canada


"JasiekS" wrote in message ...
Uzytkownik "Ryan M." napisal w wiadomosci
m...
The Germans made efforts to avoid bombing Warsaw and Rotterdam from
the historical documents I have read.

I don't know what kind of historical documents you cite, but they are not
true - at least in Warsaw case. WWII began 1. September 1939 at 4:45 am
Warsaw time. Polish cities (including Warsaw) were bombed from the first day
with He-111 and later (as the front moved) Ju-87. First German troops
achieved Warsaw neigbarhood on 8. September, so between 1. and 8. September
Warsaw WAS NOT defended, because WAS NOT directly attacked. Maybe I should
read your statement 'IF Poland would have been surrended on 1. September
till 5:00 am THEN Warsaw were not bombed'. Sorry, I could not share your
point.

Rotterdam for example, was being
used as a defensive position by the allies and there was actual house
to house combat taking place in the city.

In 1939 Warsaw was not defended house to house. The city suffered damages
and surrended on 28. September. Wounds were deep but Warsaw was still alive.
House to house combat took place in 1943 (19. April-8. May; Warsaw Ghetto
Uprising), in 1944 (1. August-2. October; Warsaw Uprising) and 1945 (17.
January; liberation of Warsaw). German aerial attacks were limited to dive
bombing (in other case they could hit their own troops). After that Warsaw
was 80% destroyed.

[snip...]

Warsaw and Rotterdam were both cities
that were bombed because of the fact that the defending troops had
bunkered themselves down in the city itself.

About Warsaw - see above.

[snip...]

Sincerely,
Ryan Muntener

I hate to tell you that you are not alone. Many 'historicians' claimed
recently that Poland (and Holland in this case) were guilty by themselves
that were attacked. Strange thinking, indeed... If Germans were worried
about destroying Warsaw (Rotterdam, London etc.) THEY COULD SIMPLY NOT TO
INVADE POLAND!!

NO regards, EOT
JasiekS [Jan Skowronski]
Warsaw, Poland

Ryan M. wrote in message ...

I'm sorry you were so offended by my statements. I only briefly
mentioned Warsaw as I did not have any good information at hand to
further clarify on it. And for this reason I should not have said that
there was house to house fighting in Warsaw, my mistake. I stuck
mostly with mentioning the conditions with the bombing of Rotterdam
instead. However, I understand that there are many sources that exist
which blatently contradict themselves on topics such as these. I would
still like to quote three sources I found with a quick search off the
internet.(no books as I am not at home to cite them)

1. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/tgmwc...08-77-06.shtml

From the Nuremberg Trials...see link for more citation info:

Q. "You never saw any such reactions on their part on these bombings
[Warsaw, Rotterdam, and Coventry], I take it?"

A. "I only know that Warsaw was a fortress which was held by the
Polish Army in very great strength, provided with excellent pieces of
artillery, that the forts were manned, and that two or three times
Adolf Hitler announced that the city should be evacuated by civilians.
That was refused. Only the foreign embassies were evacuated, while an
officer with a flag of truce entered. The Polish Army was in the city
defending it stubbornly in a very dense circle of forts. The outer
forts were very strongly manned and, from the inner town, heavy
artillery was firing towards the outskirts. The fortress of Warsaw was
therefore attacked, also by the Luftwaffe, but only after Hitler's
ultimatum had been rejected."

How about this, a German General at the war crimes hearings
says he thought the air operations against Warsaw were military
only.

13 September 1939, the Luftwaffe bombing of north Warsaw,
operation Wasserkante, 50 50 incendiary/high explosive mix,
targets may have included the ghetto. This raid had been
intended for 1 September as part of the initial strikes but delayed
to the second half of the day, then the second day. It was put
back on the agenda by the Luftwaffe as a reprisal for claimed
Polish crimes. On 11 September Hitler demanded Warsaw be
bombed on the 12th, a days delay was subsequently granted.
About 183 bomber sorties, there is evidence the middle ranking
officers changed some of the targets from those chosen by the
Generals to more military ones.

Then for the siege of Warsaw,

Low cloud restricted operations on 23 September as the air
attacks began.

25 September 1939, Luftwaffe attack on Warsaw although the
official targets were meant to be military, the attack method
included Ju52s with men literally shovelling incendiaries out
of the door. Some 40,000 Polish deaths in Warsaw with 10%
of buildings destroyed and 40% heavily damaged due to air
strikes. Note this second strike was so inaccurate some
incendiaries fell amongst the German troops whose
commander asked for the bombing to stop, Hitler ordered
them to carry on. The smoke from the fires was also hampering
the artillery. Some 1,150 bomber sorties dropping 560 tonnes
of high explosive and 72 tonnes of incendiaries on this day.

Warsaw surrendered on 27 September.

2. http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/Churchi...s_replies.html

Visit this link and scroll down to the area shaded in grey which
discusses the Luftwaffe attacks on Warsaw as well.

This is David Irving's web site, and a court has found him to be
a very unreliable historian, quoting him is a good way of giving
yourself zero credibility.

3. http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...mbing/AP27.htm

Citations used for the writing of this WEB page on also found at the
link above:

"World War II began on September 1, 1939, in Poland when the German
Luftwaffe began to bomb military targets. When Warsaw continued to
fight, German leader Adolf Hitler approved the dropping of five tons
of bombs on the city, hastening Poland�s surrender. As German
tanks rolled through the rest of continental Europe, Hitler used the
example of the bombing of Warsaw to encourage submission. But with
minor exceptions, there were no more bombings of civilian targets on
either side. Hitler even released War Directive #2 that forbade
bombing attacks on France or England except as reprisals."

Yes on the internet you can generally find a piece of text that is
wrong but suits the purpose.

For example the article goes on to describe the German radio
navigation aids as radar guidance systems. It also repeats the
lone German bomber over London on 24/25 August 1940 myth,

"After dark on the 24th the attacks were stepped up, and
some 170 German aircraft ranged over England from the
borderland to Kent. Largely due to bad navigation bombers
directed to Rochester and the Thameshaven oil-tanks
dropped their loads on the City of London. For the first time
since the Gothas of 1918, Central London was damaged in
an air raid. Fires burned at London Wall, and boroughs like
Islington, Tottenham, Finsbury, Millwall, Stepney, East Ham,
Leyton, Coulsdon and Bethnel Green all received their share."

The Narrow Margin, Wood and Dempster.

The Peoples War by Angus Calder, notes "considerable fires".

Lot of damage by one bomber.

Flying well over 1,000 sorties over several days of strikes to drop
5 tons of bombs makes the Luftwaffe the most inefficient military
air force around. Just think what the army would make of that level
of support as it tried to attack the city.

The point of this respons is not to start an argument about this
topic, simply to let everyone know that I have read sources that
contradict what was stated by Keith in the prior post regarding
Rotterdam. We could all continue argueing by stating all the sources
which back up our opinion, but this is not my intention by any means.
History is the interpretation of the past and therefore will always be
dependant on how "we" as individuals interpret it.

Changing 600 tonnes of bombs to 5 tons is not reinterpretation.
Using David Irving as a source indicates a preference for fiction.
See Lying about Hitler (or Telling lies for Hitler) by Richard Evans,
who was a historian for the defence when David Irving sued for libel
and lost very badly.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

I have to add only that Warsaw was not the only Polish city bombed.
First city bombed was Wielun, totally undefended small city, and first
target was hospital with huge painted red cross on it. Great
paactising target for Luftwaffe pilots. I happened in early morning of
1939.

Subject: Opinions wanted
From: "Geoffrey Sinclair"
Date: 1/16/04 11:03 PM Pacific

stop, Hitler ordered
them to carry on. The smoke from the fires was also hampering
the artillery. Some 1,150 bomber sorties dropping 560 tonnes
of high explosive and 72 tonnes of incendiaries on this day.

Warsaw surrendered on 27 September.

Proof bombing works. And if Germany had long range heavy bombers and fighters
they may have well bombed England into sueing for peace. We should all be
greatful for Germany's short sightedness,


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer