Bomber boys - bbc one

[Bewolf]

You see guys, if the RAF was only out there to bomb industrial targets, like the US did in Europe, with collateral damage in the civilian populations taken into account, then still uncool, but that is war.
"Intentionally" targetting civilians is what is the issue here. That is entering german territory in regards to the treatment of innocent human beings. Even the Russians did not go this far but a very short period at the end of the war.
I can't help but to think that you are aware of that. And if you are, then what are we argueing about?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

You see guys, if the RAF was only out there to bomb industrial targets, like the US did in Europe, with collateral damage in the civilian populations taken into account, then still uncool, but that is war.
"Intentionally" targetting civilians is what is the issue here. That is entering german territory in regards to the treatment of innocent human beings. Even the Russians did not go this far but a very short period at the end of the war.
I can't help but to think that you are aware of that. And if you are, then what are we argueing about?

I'm not sure what we are arguing about either, everybody agrees intentionally targeting civvies is bad, but I think it is being suggested it was a one sided affair i.e. only the British did it........which we also all know is utter BS.

it's just a shame Hitler didn't surrender....would have saved alot of lives.

[kendo65]

Concerning the earlier reference to the Falklands situation,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/fe...tion-falklands

Is it just me or does the current Argentinian premier come across a little like a South American Sarah Palin? Her comments regarding the British sending a 'destroyer' (with emphasis on the alleged threatening character of the word) were more than a little ludicrous imo

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I'm not sure what we are arguing about either, everybody agrees intentionally targeting civvies is bad, but I think it is being suggested it was a one sided affair i.e. only the British did it........which we also all know is utter BS.

it's just a shame Hitler didn't surrender....would have saved alot of lives.

oh don't be daft Bongo, we're not saying only the British did it, what we're saying is that the celebration of the men who created and perpetrated such policies is out of place, and poses a questionable double standard, period.

Uh and I prefer your mugshot than this new profile pic btw

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

oh don't be daft Bongo, we're not saying only the British did it, what we're saying is that the celebration of the men who created and perpetrated such policies is out of place, and poses a questionable double standard, period.

Uh and I prefer your mugshot than this new profile pic btw

But I will have to say again that the British SIMPLY DO NOT celebrate Harris.

yes I guess Harris did employ a 'double standard' but at the time I'm guessing nobody minded so much.....too busy picking bodies out of the rubble after the indiscriminate attacks from german bombers V1's and V2's and strafing attacks on civillians by fighters (yes it happened, my father saw it)

one big difference was the allies dropped leaflets before the raids, giving warning what was likely to happen......I don't believe that courtesy was extended the other way.....unless the warnings were sticky taped to the nose cone of a V2.


I like the zippy pic.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

But I will have to say again that the British SIMPLY DO NOT celebrate Harris.

yes I guess Harris did employ a 'double standard' but at the time I'm guessing nobody minded so much.....too busy picking bodies out of the rubble after the indiscriminate attacks from german bombers V1's and V2's and strafing attacks on civillians by fighters (yes it happened, my father saw it)

one big difference was the allies dropped leaflets before the raids, giving warning what was likely to happen......I don't believe that courtesy was extended the other way.....unless the warnings were sticky taped to the nose cone of a V2.


I like the zippy pic.

So what's a statue if not a celebration of someone?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

So what's a statue if not a celebration of someone?

a reminder?.......

next time theres a 'Harris day parade' then let me know, somehow it just seems to evade the calendar through lack of publicity.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

a reminder?.......

next time theres a 'Harris day parade' then let me know, somehow it just seems to evade the calendar through lack of publicity.

..a reminder? Of what exactly? Of area bombing? Because when I google Sir Arthur Harris the first thing that comes out it's his Area Bombing thing..

It's like saying "Oh, I will make a statue of Mussolini because he improved the rail system and introduced the pension schemes, just as a reminder you know.."

this is when you get desperate for some sense Bongo, your explanation really doesn't compute

[Hood]

I'm struggling to think of anyone military we celebrate as a nation in the UK, or any military event. I guess D-Day and Battle of Britain day get a small mention but that's it. Like most countries we remember and honour the dead and the sacrifice they made.

I also view statues as reminders, not as glorification of the individual. Statues don't mean anything unless you know who the person was. As the biggest bogey man in history I'd even say Hitler deserves a statue. Problem is it wouldn't be a focus for reflection on mankind's predilection for tragedy but would be a symbol for Nazis everywhere and it might be viewed as celebratory in that context. I guess that is a thought for another time and place.

Hood

[ATAG_Dutch]

Celebrate - mark with a festival or special event

Commemorate (relating to stone, plaque etc) - be a memorial of.

Definitions from OED.

And Stern, if you can't see what was funny about that statement, given the bases of National Socialism, I'm not going to help.