If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   The infamous World War II bombing of Dresden wasn't as dramatic as your grandfather made it out to be   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 220
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

17276 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2008 at 6:05 AM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



220 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-10-18 11:32:39 AM
EmperorTippy: GAT_00: It still was the intentional burning to the bedrock of a town with little to no military value.

Good. The worst thing to ever happen to war was the belief that there are any civilians. If a nation goes to war every square inch of that nation is a valid military target. War is hell and all of that. If you don't want your home fire bombed then change your government.


that's basically the stupidest, most heartless thing i've heard all morning. a) what if a nation goes to war on you? b) change your nazi facist government that has an SS? go for it! and c) innocent farking people, dude. come on.
 
2008-10-18 11:36:46 AM
ctobio:
You couldn't just drop a JDAM on a GPS coordinate and blow up an enemy's commander in his house, or blow up his factory. In order to destroy a factory in a city, you had to mass hundreds of bombers and destroy the city.


I thought the whole point about Dresden is that it wasn't a military target. ie no factories. JUST civilians. do i have it wrong?
 
2008-10-18 11:38:48 AM
cchurch 2008-10-18 09:16:01 AM
B.C.: EmperorTippy:No there aren't. The sole rule of war is don't fight one if you aren't willing to pay the price necessary to win it. The Geneva convention, and all other treaties dealing with how to fight a proper war are at best guidelines. And they will never hold up in a real war.

And in a real war one of the last things you attack are the enemies soldiers. Taking out the tank factory is better than taking out a tank, taking out the rifle (or bullet) factory is better than killing a solider. Taking out a rail line is better than taking a hill. Taking out a granary and fields is better than shooting down an airplane. You never win a war until one of the following is true 1) the entire enemy population is dead, 2) the enemy population has lost the will to fight. To remove the enemies will to fight you must make the war worse for them than surrender.

You've been reading too much Clausewitz and Machiavelli. The ends don't justify the means. There are moral absolutes for even war, and those who do not abide by them are criminals. A just war is one which seeks to establish a just peace and is fought according to just principles.

The effectiveness of a tactic or strategy does not make it moral. Raping and pillaging is an effective means of demoralizing one's enemy and his will to fight, but it is not moral. Otherwise moral atrocities such as Abu Ghraib and My Lai would be justified -- so would the torture of one's enemies.

Civilian morale is just as important as tank factories and lines of communications. You need to read you some Basil Lidell Hart. And targeting civilian morale does NOT mean raping and pillaging. In most wars, it means stripping them of the notion that war is a glamorous, honorable, far off thing.

As Sherman put it, "War is hell" and "War is cruelty, it cannot be refined".


I am glad you brought up Sherman. After the war Sherman was almost stripped of his command because of his generous surrender terms. His theory was that if you fight a war you fight totally, after the war you treat the defeated fairly. We treated Germany and Japan that way after WWII, look how they did. They fixed their countries, with our help, and today they are world class countries. Sherman was a perfect example.
 
2008-10-18 11:38:54 AM
Don't forget that the most famous painting ever to be painted about the horror of aerial bombing, Picasso's Guernica, was about an attack that killed only about 1,000 people.
 
2008-10-18 11:40:54 AM
It was an industrial site-optics, and had a major railroad marshalling yard...thus, a military target. The bombing just wasn't as bad or unjustified as Kurt Vomitgut has always told us.
 
2008-10-18 11:43:50 AM
www.gumtreemusic.com.au
 
2008-10-18 11:44:47 AM
Any bombing is an affront to humanity.
 
2008-10-18 11:45:32 AM
Norad: Yeah, most war stories are 10% truth and 90% bull-farking-shiat.

You could go to jail for saying that in many countries. The holocuasty thing.
 
2008-10-18 11:46:11 AM
NewportBarGuy: Norad: Did you think that up while your parents pay for your college education?

No, you pay for my college education. It's called the GI Bill.

Thanks, sunshine!


I halfway wish you weren't a TFer so I could sponsor you for that. You'll have to settle for:
img139.imageshack.us
 
2008-10-18 11:52:46 AM
No Such Agency: A bunch of scruffy but lovable GI's robbing a bank behind German lines?
i83.photobucket.com
 
2008-10-18 11:56:28 AM
Norad: Yeah, most war stories are 10% truth and 90% bull-farking-shiat.

That's because the guys who actually lived through the shiat don't actually talk about it. The guy making up lies probably worked in the supply corps.
 
2008-10-18 11:58:27 AM
A.M. Mogwai feeder 2008-10-18 11:40:54 AM

It was an industrial site-optics, and had a major railroad marshalling yard...thus, a military target. The bombing

The strange thing is my grandfather was a railroad conducter at those very railroad yards. I have always wondered what he saw.

The people who say that true war vets never talk about what they saw is true. My father fought in Korea and Vietnam, he was on the Chosen Res. when the Chinese came down. He was one of seven to survive from his company from that. I have the bronze star he won for commanding those seven men on my wall. What he has said I could repeat in about 10 minutes, and that is after 40 years of being his son.
 
2008-10-18 11:58:45 AM
Norad: Yeah, most war stories are 10% truth and 90% bull-farking-shiat.

Except for the number of jews killed in the holocaust. Anyone who questions that number -- which has grown through the years -- is a holocaust denier and an anti-semite.

FTA: It suited the Nazi propaganda machine to claim that half-a-million women and children had been incinerated in the firestorm. It helped persuade a struggling population that this was awaited them all unless they fought for Nazism with their last breath.
 
2008-10-18 11:59:30 AM
People who say "there was no such thing as precision bombing, of course civilians were going to die" are completely missing the point. Read Masters of the Air by Donald Miller or Among the Dead Cities by A.C. Grayling. The American bomber commands strictly adhered to a policy of bombing only military targets, and only very rarely targeted civilian populations (at least in Germany. Japan is an ENTIRELY different story). The British, on the other hand, deliberately and systematically sought to wipe out entire cities, regardless of their military value in order to break the morale of the German people. In fact, it had the opposite effect, but that's not the point here. The Americans bombed Dresden as well: during the daylight, and only the railyards on the outskirts of the city, resulting in few civilian casualties. The British went in at night with the intention of killing and displacing as many people as possible.

My point is that it was possible to minimize civilian casualties and still hit targets of military value. The British simply chose not to.

I believe it was Gen. Hap Arnold who said that if the Allies had lost the war, he and the other leaders of the bomber commands would have been tried for war crimes.
 
2008-10-18 12:01:07 PM
thenateman 2008-10-18 11:58:45 AM
Norad: Yeah, most war stories are 10% truth and 90% bull-farking-shiat.

Except for the number of jews killed in the holocaust. Anyone who questions that number -- which has grown through the years -- is a holocaust denier and an anti-semite.

FTA: It suited the Nazi propaganda machine to claim that half-a-million women and children had been incinerated in the firestorm. It helped persuade a struggling population that this was awaited them all unless they fought for Nazism with their last breath.


I have always heard 6 million, that is since I was a child, I am 42. Like many people point out here, the Nazis kept great records, so it is well documented. Are you one of those racist people that deny the holocaust?
 
2008-10-18 12:01:30 PM
how does 18,000 people getting incinerated qualify as "only"???

should have sad tag
 
2008-10-18 12:01:40 PM
Asian Guy (looking at duraflame logs): Crackerflame?
Black Guy: No, they're Crackleflame logs. What's a crackerflame?
Asian Guy: Dresden, 1945!
 
2008-10-18 12:04:39 PM
This,

wiredmaverick: Actually as it turns out all the civilian (and even most strategic) bombings done in WW2 bascially amounted to a lot of dead civilians and not a whole lot else. The British didn't waiver at all from the blitz and the Germans fought on until Berlin despite Dresden. Even sir Arthur Harris who came up with the idea to bomb German civilian targets admitted in the end that his plan didn't work.

and This,

Dumle: I think it's the severeness of the raid compared to the timing that made it exceptional. At that time, nobody had any doubt about the outcome of the war and sending 1200 bombers to pummel the shiat out of Dresden did not help the war effort one single bit. Sure, there were factories, depots and railyards but even if they had been completely obliterated it wouldn't have made the war shorter. It was already won.

You can talk total war all you want, but in March 1945, the outcome was already decided and everyone knew civilian bombing didn't accomplish much.
 
2008-10-18 12:06:05 PM
Meanwhile, the firebombings of Tokyo are still deemed to be overly flamboyant.
 
2008-10-18 12:13:56 PM
GAT_00: It still was the retaliation for the intentional burning to the bedrock of Coventry, a town with little to no military value.

FTFY
 
2008-10-18 12:19:12 PM
Norad: Yeah, most war stories are 10% truth and 90% bull-farking-shiat.
Except when it is the "holocaust". The number increases every few years, and THEN it is accurate.

So many thousands of survivors all the way down to great-great-great grand children suing everyone and anything that had anything to do with Germany (and nothing to do with them) for money money money money money money money money money political power money money.

Human-leather book covers, lampshades, etc - FALSE
RJF "jewish soap" - FALSE
Abraham Bomba's story of human hair mattresses - FALSE

War is hell. Germans sending civilians (even political radicals) to camps and using them for slave labor was wrong. Reparations? I dont know, but if "yes", then the "jews" and anyone crafty enough to get paid has already done so quite enough.

www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com
Care to watch one or two of his short videos and debate? These are a PRIME example of how facts get slaughtered in war.


Believe it, dont believe it. Refute it, refute parts of it. But if you do anything but believe it ALL, you're labeled a "hater".

The best resource on Dresden is David Irving's book, FREE online in .pdf http://fpp.co.uk/books/index.html

Great books on the "bouncing bomb" and the V-series rocket ("The Mare's Nest".

Dont start calling Irving a "holocaust denier", he cares little about the subject and finds it boring. He's the only historian I can name off the top of my head that actually TALKS to witnesses, friends, family, associates and neighbors of a person he writes about rather than "reading 10 books on Hitler and writing an 11th". He's an honorable man whom I've met twice this year - a great inspiration for any writer, journalist, or history buff (or electrician :) )

Enough of my rant. Off to the photoshop voting!
 
2008-10-18 12:22:33 PM
NewportBarGuy: Norad: Did you think that up while your parents pay for your college education?

No, you pay for my college education. It's called the GI Bill.

Thanks, sunshine!


Worst bill evar.
 
2008-10-18 12:22:49 PM
ctobio: Blompkin: We can tell it was only 18,000 killed because of death certificates. That's because during the end days of a war, the highest priority is always carefully recording every death that occurs. It isn't like there'd be a lot of random undocumented civilians running around. Not during a war.

You underestimate the anal retentiveness of Germans. Of all the people on this planet, the Germans are the most likely to stop in the middle of the war and create a paper trail for all their dead.

I knew an old timer who fought in the 82nd Airborne in WW2. It amazed them that when he got to Germany, a town would be shelled, buildings blown up, and no sooner than the fighting stopped the Germans would gather all the rubble in nice neat piles and try their best to clean the place up.


The weirdos even had records - and PROTECTED them - of the amount and type of food ordered for the guard dogs in the camps. Records on everything (but nothing was found for evidence except statements the British later admitted beating out of them at Nuremburg...hmm).

/slight more rant
 
2008-10-18 12:25:07 PM
the rifle (or bullet) factory is better than killing a solider. Taking out a rail line is better than taking a hill. Taking out a granary and fields is better than shooting down an airplane. You never win a war until one of the following is true 1) the entire enemy population is dead, 2) the enemy population has lost the will to fight. To remove the enemies will to fight you must make the war worse for them than surrender.

Granary? Where they make grannies?
 
2008-10-18 12:26:47 PM
Dubai Vol: Retroactive moralizing is the real bullshiat here. Nobody complains about the German bombings of London, Coventry, etc, now do they? Or how about the original, the Japanese bombings of cities in China? Who decries that?

No, everyone points fingers at Dresden, when all sides used the same tactics for the same reasons. The reasoning was that bombing cities would destroy the will of the people to fight. All sides acribed to the theory and bombed civilians for that specific purpose.

To go back generations later and call this specific raid some kind of exceptional horror is asinine.


Those other bombings deserve severe criticism. The point is that they were done by the enemies of freedom, democracy and all things good, etc. Dresden was done by my side. We're supposed to be the good guys. Bomber Harris will burn in Hell forever.
 
2008-10-18 12:27:18 PM
snow9999: Like many people point out here, the Nazis kept great records, so it is well documented.

I don't think that is correct. As I recall, Jewish investigators did not use German records to arrive at the number of dead. Except perhaps census records. Of course that would be problematical. One may have fairly accurate pre-war data. But post war? Many Jews fled Europe prior to the war etc. etc.

Many of the present day number amounts came out of the Nuremburg trials. I myself would be wary of any information extracted by such hideous torture.
 
2008-10-18 12:42:14 PM
Dubai Vol: Retroactive moralizing is the real bullshiat here. Nobody complains about the German bombings of London, Coventry, etc, now do they? Or how about the original, the Japanese bombings of cities in China? Who decries that?

Everybody.
 
2008-10-18 12:45:06 PM
Arkcon: So fire bombing Dresden wasn't as bad as they say? Great. That makes the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that much worse. Yay. We win again. Oh, wait ...

Are you confused about something?
 
2008-10-18 01:03:32 PM
grimnir: Dubai Vol: Retroactive moralizing is the real bullshiat here. Nobody complains about the German bombings of London, Coventry, etc, now do they? Or how about the original, the Japanese bombings of cities in China? Who decries that?

Everybody.



What, nobody decrying the firebombings of Japan? Everybody goes on about how the two atomic bombs were an atrocity, but the fire bombing campaign killed over 2 million people. (Though, we did firebomb even city in Japan...)
 
2008-10-18 01:07:01 PM
www.commondreams.org

There has never been any disagreement on the severity of the Tokyo air raids of March 9-10, 1945 which used 300 bombers loaded with incendiaries with casualty estimates running from 80,000 to 200,000 destroying 16 square miles of Tokyo. Everyone agrees that the toll was far worse than either of the atomic bombings. It was the worst single air raid in history. It was followed by by additional bombings on May 23 and 25 that destroyed over 50 square miles of Tokyo using high explosives dropped from 500 and 502 bombers respectively.
 
2008-10-18 01:16:02 PM
i229.photobucket.com

/Thanks again, Vern!
 
2008-10-18 01:43:36 PM
As someone who is married to a Polish woman whose grandparents were killed by the Germans, I couldn't give the slightest shiat how many Germans died in the bombings. Cry me a goddamn river.
 
2008-10-18 01:43:41 PM
West-hating commie propaganda.
 
2008-10-18 01:43:51 PM
I guess these German historians don't know how to use google.
 
2008-10-18 01:48:08 PM
snow9999: My mother was in Dresden when it was bombed. She describes the people sitting in the park dead beacuse the concussions destroyed their insides. She described how the fire bombs left the nicest colors on the walls. She described the bodies stacked in piles.

It is easy to play revisionist history, it was a horrible two days for anybody that was there.


I'm late to the thread,.
My grandmother was there, and somehow survived because of a wall that fell onto her. No, she wasn't a nazi. She was nurse who happened to be a german citizen in what became East Germany.

What the hell kind of drama queen thinks a carpet bombing resulting in a 3632-degree (Fahrenheit) firestorm, and 18,000-25,000 people dying isn't "dramatic"? Fark subby who thinks 18,000 people dying in one raid isn't dramatic. It wasn't Hamburg or Nagasaki, and it wasn't 9/11.

Did anyone really think that propaganda doesn't happen by all sides in a war? Like our kill rates in Vietnam - we'll never know how inflate the numbers are, but the inflation doesn't lessen the horror or how "dramatic" the atrocities were.

Yes, I fed Subby The Troll.
 
2008-10-18 01:50:17 PM
CygnusDarius: /Thanks again, Vern!

What's "for France?"
 
2008-10-18 01:50:36 PM
Tellurianix: As someone who is married to a Polish woman whose grandparents were killed by the Germans, I couldn't give the slightest shiat how many Germans died in the bombings. Cry me a goddamn river.

Because all Germans were evil?
Is it true that all Polish people are stupid?
Your attitude is very similar to the terrorists we've helped create over the past 8 years. "The americans killed my relative/friend. Therefore all americans are evil, and it is ok/good when they die. In fact, I'll help kill them!"

WTF is wrong with you?
 
2008-10-18 01:54:33 PM
"You can talk total war all you want, but in March 1945, the outcome was already decided and everyone knew civilian bombing didn't accomplish much."

We knew in '45 that we had the A-bomb. We also knew that Germany had better scientists than we did, better missiles in the V-2, and had also been working on an A-bomb for years.

YOU going to take a chance the war's basically over?

Kiss London and Moscow goodbye if you're wrong.
 
2008-10-18 02:23:07 PM
I'm trying to figure out how the bombing was not just as dramatic as previously said. "Dramatic" does not necessarily mean "body count" ya know. What was dramatic was the 2000 degree firestorms and people dying of suffocation from the oxygen being sucked out of their basement/bunkers. It was the "how" not the "who" that mattered. Well except for nazi and soviet propagandists, but are those worth getting worked up about when we already know everything they say is going to be a lie?

Dresden was a mess, it was overdone with poor planning but that is what happens in war. People who started crazy or went crazy from the horrors convince normal people that a little more collateral damage is acceptable than might otherwise be accepted. shiat goes down, people die.

Then the game continues.
 
2008-10-18 02:25:20 PM
Three people, I think, have referred to Slaughterhouse Five's refrain as "And so it goes." That's not it; it's simply "So it goes."

/Finished teaching that book to my last class yesterday
//Very interesting thread
///Poo-tee-weet?
 
2008-10-18 02:28:25 PM
Dee Snarl: Three people, I think, have referred to Slaughterhouse Five's refrain as "And so it goes." That's not it; it's simply "So it goes."

And So It Goes was a pretty song, though.

/and you're the only one who knows
 
2008-10-18 02:34:42 PM
Witchydiva: What the hell kind of drama queen thinks a carpet bombing resulting in a 3632-degree (Fahrenheit) firestorm, and 18,000-25,000 people dying isn't "dramatic"? Fark subby who thinks 18,000 people dying in one raid isn't dramatic

18,000 is a very bitter number of dead.

Thing is, it's not like the movies.

Ever see anybody die? Just get their brains blown out? There's no background music, no slow mo. They're just there one minute and then they're just a piece of meat. It's saddening as hell.

And to die 18,000 strong in a man made oven... that's sort of dramatic.
 
2008-10-18 02:52:49 PM
Petrograd: In any case, the death and destruction remains one of the true tragedies of the war.

Heh, you talk like a fag, and you're shiat's all retarded.

I get nervous when people start talking about "one of" the tragedies -- In a war so total and ubiquitous, it's truly hard to narrow things down.

I get -really- annoyed when people talk "only" about six million Jewish people dead in the Holocaust and ignore the other six million murdered because they were considered subhuman, or completely ignore the eighteen to twenty-four million Stalin murdered because they were his countrymen. The figures baffle the mind and make it hard to keep any perspective. The whole war was a tragedy.

Was Dresden itself such a senseless tragedy? I'm not convinced.

My biggest "Allied war crime" debate is with Nagasaki, on the simple principle that a nation completely unwilling to accept defeat, with a military ruler as its God, can change to unconditional surrender in such a short period of time. I understand why Nagasaki was bombed, but I sure wish Truman and LeMay let another week pass. =(
 
2008-10-18 02:56:38 PM
goodbomb: I thought the whole point about Dresden is that it wasn't a military target. ie no factories. JUST civilians. do i have it wrong?

Yep. Vonnegut was less than honest about that part.

There were valid military targets in and around the city. Now, you can lump in the civilian populace in that number. In the morality of WW2, there were no such thing as non-combatants, because of total mobilization everyone was part of the war effort, from the farmer growing wheat to feed the soldiers, to the seamstresses making uniforms to the troops, to the slave workers building V2 rockets for the Reich. Humans were war materiel if they were able to contribute to the war effort. That was the morality of the war then. I'd like to think we're a little more civilized today, but in the context of the time, this was acceptable. The allies couldn't call the Germans on this either... when Karl Doenitz was tried for crimes against humanity at Nuremberg for waging unrestricted submarine warfare, Nimitz came to his defense, for the Allies did the same in the Pacific theater.
 
2008-10-18 02:59:28 PM
stucka: My biggest "Allied war crime" debate is with Nagasaki, on the simple principle that a nation completely unwilling to accept defeat, with a military ruler as its God, can change to unconditional surrender in such a short period of time. I understand why Nagasaki was bombed, but I sure wish Truman and LeMay let another week pass. =(

Think about the situation though. No one outside of the US knew what nukes were, they were truly fire from the gods. While the firebombing of Tokyo might have killed more people, the citizens and emperor could understand it. They could see the hundreds of planes and thousands of bombs. This is 1 plane dropping 1 bomb and then the city just being gutted and with a giant ball of fire floating over it.

That kind of shock can cause massive changes, and it also argues against the emperors divine right to rule.
 
2008-10-18 03:00:23 PM
ctobio: There were valid military targets in and around the city. Now, you can lump in the civilian populace in that number. In the morality of WW2, there were no such thing as non-combatants, because of total mobilization everyone was part of the war effort, from the farmer growing wheat to feed the soldiers, to the seamstresses making uniforms to the troops, to the slave workers building V2 rockets for the Reich. Humans were war materiel if they were able to contribute to the war effort. That was the morality of the war then. I'd like to think we're a little more civilized today, but in the context of the time, this was acceptable. The allies couldn't call the Germans on this either... when Karl Doenitz was tried for crimes against humanity at Nuremberg for waging unrestricted submarine warfare, Nimitz came to his defense, for the Allies did the same in the Pacific theater.

I'm curious - and not trying to snark or troll here - as american civilians who pay taxes that fund the "war on terror", does that make the entire tax-paying population eligible targets? I do understand that times are completely different, but I'm curious as to how far the logic goes.
 
2008-10-18 03:08:46 PM
stucka: I get -really- annoyed when people talk "only" about six million Jewish people dead in the Holocaust and ignore the other six million murdered because they were considered subhuman, or completely ignore the eighteen to twenty-four million Stalin murdered because they were his countrymen. The figures baffle the mind and make it hard to keep any perspective. The whole war was a tragedy.

Well, yeah, Hitler was a piker compared to Stalin. But he was an ally during the war, so we, uh, downplay that part.

My biggest "Allied war crime" debate is with Nagasaki, on the simple principle that a nation completely unwilling to accept defeat, with a military ruler as its God, can change to unconditional surrender in such a short period of time. I understand why Nagasaki was bombed, but I sure wish Truman and LeMay let another week pass.

Well... the problem was that the Japanese weren't quite convinced we had more of these "new, cruel bombs". They seemed quite willing to call our bluff until we set off another one. We'll never know if another week would have had them change their minds, but we were somewhat less concerned about minimizing Japanese casualties as we were about Allied casualties, and every day that hostilities continued meant more Allied combat deaths could occur when victory was at hand. Yes, we traded a few dozen combat deaths for tens of thousands of incinerated Japanese, but frankly one Japanese was worth a whole lot less than one Allied soldier when the Allies were going to win the war. It's a tragic calculation... especially if you're on the losing side.

The moral of WW2? Don't start a war, especially a total war, unless you're going to win it.
 
2008-10-18 03:14:45 PM
Witchydiva: I'm curious - and not trying to snark or troll here - as american civilians who pay taxes that fund the "war on terror", does that make the entire tax-paying population eligible targets? I do understand that times are completely different, but I'm curious as to how far the logic goes.

As far as the terrorists are concerned, yes. This is one of the reasons the WTC was targeted. This is why terrorists are happy to bomb civilians. If the terrorists had an air force, they would be happy to carpet bomb Western cities (remember, the Terrorists don't hate just the US, they hate The West in general) Their morality is actually a bit of a throwback, as the Western world (particularly as a result of WW2) do not have the stomach for total war, while the so-called terrorists do.

So... what to do? It's not like we're going to change the terrorists' minds. Do we respond with total war in kind?

Something to think about...
 
2008-10-18 03:25:09 PM
EmperorTippy: That kind of shock can cause massive changes, and it also argues against the emperors divine right to rule.

There were many in the Japanese high command who remained unconvinced after the first, and even the second bomb. Even after the second bomb, a plot was foiled to steal the recording of Hirohito (part of a failed coup d'etat) speaking to the Japanese people announcing the surrender.

Had the second bomb not been sufficient, we could have produced a bomb about one every 2 months- the next bomb could have been ready in September. Instead, that plutonium core for the next bomb was the one that killed Daghlian and Slotin. It was used in the Able shot of Operation Crossroads in '46.
 
2008-10-18 03:35:02 PM
I've been to Dresden. When I was there, you could still see burned out buildings and the scorch-marks on the stone. I don't believe the new casualty figures.
 
Displayed 50 of 220 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report