U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-18-2020, 09:17 AM
 
2,162 posts, read 995,376 times
Reputation: 3894

Advertisements

How were the Allies supposed to bomb Auschwitz? It was at the far end of bomber range, across enemy controlled territory. It would have been similar to the Ploesti raids that cost many aircraft and lives. There were no targets of military value at Auschwitz, and the key to minimizing prisoner deaths was to shorten the war by destroying the Axis military.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-18-2020, 10:29 AM
 
20,504 posts, read 8,145,659 times
Reputation: 9110
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRM20 View Post
, and the key to minimizing prisoner deaths was to shorten the war by destroying the Axis military.
We failed at that task. By the end of WWII, 1,100 Jew remained alive in Poland.

This was an Anti-Semitic era. The US administration in charge certainly had portions of that. FDR turned the St. Louis away, consigning most of he 900 to die. Lets be honest and admit, America did NOT use its full capability towards saving Jews in these death camps. We did look the other way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2020, 10:54 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
4,077 posts, read 1,799,624 times
Reputation: 3892
Default Too much work, not enough hands

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
We failed at that task. By the end of WWII, 1,100 Jew remained alive in Poland.

This was an Anti-Semitic era. The US administration in charge certainly had portions of that. FDR turned the St. Louis away, consigning most of he 900 to die. Lets be honest and admit, America did NOT use its full capability towards saving Jews in these death camps. We did look the other way.
In Sept. 1939, the US barely had a military. In retrospect, Yes - we should have thrown open the ports & invited every displaced person - Jewish, Roma, anti-Fascist & anti-Nazi, anyone who wanted to come - to come & live in the US. Their success would have become our success.

But we were coping with the Depression, the economic system was in chaos, there were breadlines & soup lines in the cities. & there was anti-Jewish feeling in the US, although not (I think) to the fatal degree that it manifested in Germany & then Nazi Germany.

The FDR admin was scrambling to build up our military, produce more war material, put the country back to work, run heavy industry 24/7, put agriculture back on its feet. It was too much, federal government (& state & local government) were all overwhelmed. There was far more demand for political/economic action to correct the economic problems than there were resources to put everything right. The bigger problem: No one knew precisely how to put everything right, & there were lots of options that seemed reasonable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2020, 10:57 AM
 
5,671 posts, read 2,468,451 times
Reputation: 4503
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
On precision bombing
My first thought was that while the camps could be eradicated, so too would the prisoners therein. The article acknowledges that. I had forgotten about the previously-discussed idea of bombing the tracks until someone mentioned it.

So imagine Auschwitz is laid waste. It's put out of action. So too are most of those being held there. There would be some survivors, but how do you suppose the SS would have dealt with them? I'm guessing they wouldn't even bother trying to transfer them - they'd have been shot, with bomb craters serving as mass graves.

And then what? The military announces that we've put a death camp out of action but everyone being held there is now dead - oh, and by the way, 10% of the aircrews flying the missions are now KIA/MIA/POW. How do you think that will go over?

On the nature of World War II
The romantic revisionism of the war is that it was fought to free nations. It wasn't. In the European theater, it was fought to defeat Nazi Germany because the Third Reich insisted on invading... well, pretty much every country within reach unless they were really inconvenient to invade (ex: Switzerland) or was happy to play along (ex: Italy). Bombing a death camp wouldn't have furthered that end.

Of course, a Polish Jew was no less worthy of life and liberty than any American or Brit. But that wasn't the calculus, and it isn't even the calculus now. Nations are and were more interested in the fates of their own than in the fates of those of other countries. It seems an unlikely expenditure of limited resources to be made at that time. The goal of the war wasn't to free Jews and give people democracy - those just happened to be nice fringe benefits (in some cases) of rolling back the Nazis.

This question reminds me in some respects of others pertaining to the war:
Shouldn't we have intervened sooner?
Shouldn't we have gone to war to liberate eastern Europe from the Soviets?

And other questions not often asked but which still are predicated on the same sort of utilitarian thinking:
Shouldn't we have freed Spain from its fascist dictator? (maybe Portugal, too)
Why didn't we ensure that liberated South Korea was democratized as with Japan?

[I'm not asking those questions - I'm just noting that they're similar]

On the way Jews and Poles were perceived
In the 1940s, there was a lot more of the sentiment of 'otherness' in the perception of Jews. We still see it today - it was a lot stronger then. Also, there was less of a cultural connection with eastern Europeaners. Had there been a death camp in, say, France, that was engaged in the assembly-line extermination of French Jews then I think that would have been a somewhat different story. They would have still been Jews and all that entails for the anti-Semitism of the time, but there were a lot more Anglo/U.S.-French cultural links than Anglos/Americans and Poles. Just like humans tend to care more about 'their own' in regards to nationality, so too is that a thing with regards to ethnicity.

Of course, this all speaks not to 'should we have' but 'why we didn't'. Still, this is one of those cases perhaps of trying to place modern moral standards on figures of the past. Should we have done so in a moral sense? Sure, in the same way that we should have intervened in Uganda in the 1990s in a moral sense. But even today, we do not intervene in many cases where we have the capacity to end death and suffering.



I suppose Auschwitz gets all the attention because of the scale - more were killed there than elsewhere.



This occurred to me, too. Then I remembered Ploesti, so I did some digging. Turns out the western Allies were quite active in bombing Romania, which was definitely on the Soviet's turf, so to speak. But then, perhaps such operations were ironed out with Stalin, whereas it was understood that Poland was off-limits. I don't know. But I am unaware of the western Allies undertaking bombing campaigns there.
The main reason Romania was bombed was to take out the German oil production...………..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2020, 03:14 PM
 
15,931 posts, read 14,307,305 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
If you got that out of my post, I'd suggest you have someone read what I wrote and then explain it to you.

The interest of the western Allies in seeing eastern Europe free was nowhere close to being commensurate with the cost of prying it out of Stalin's clutches. That only explains why they did not expend blood and treasure trying to do so. But make no mistake about it: the reason eastern Europe was subjugated under the totalitarian thumb of the Soviets was -- surprise, surprise! -- because of Soviet aggression and malice. Period. That was the cause. By definition. A third-party declining to intervene is not the cause. By definition.

In short, there is nothing in my post that mitigates Soviet culpability in turning the states of eastern Europe into its own puppet dictatorships existing for no purpose other than the service of Moscow. Don't try and drag me into your pro-USSR fluffery.

"Stalin's clutches"?
But they were not in Stalin's clutches.

They were in German clutches, you see.

And the *allies* were not in a hurry to "expend blood and treasure" trying to set them free.
Why? Precisely for the reasons you've mentioned above.

But when Stalin's clutches threatened WESTERN Europe, ( say, France) - that's when it was a different story.

That's when allies were willing to land in Normandy.

In short, I'd suggest you re-read what you wrote. The inconvenient truth, I understand, but thank you for it yet again nevertheless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:42 AM
 
749 posts, read 882,661 times
Reputation: 1619
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
"Stalin's clutches"?
But they were not in Stalin's clutches.

They were in German clutches, you see.

And the *allies* were not in a hurry to "expend blood and treasure" trying to set them free.
Why? Precisely for the reasons you've mentioned above.

But when Stalin's clutches threatened WESTERN Europe, ( say, France) - that's when it was a different story.

That's when allies were willing to land in Normandy.

In short, I'd suggest you re-read what you wrote. The inconvenient truth, I understand, but thank you for it yet again nevertheless.
Maybe you missed it but he did lay it out clear as day in some prior post right there :

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
there were a lot more Anglo/U.S.-French cultural links than Anglos/Americans and Poles. Just like humans tend to care more about 'their own' in regards to nationality, so too is that a thing with regards to ethnicity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:35 AM
 
Location: Russia
481 posts, read 76,363 times
Reputation: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pruzhany View Post
Six million Jews died in the Holocaust. Five million others perished under the Nazi regime. When facing such an abhorrent figure historians have long argued– could we have done more? Should we have done more?


https://www.historynet.com/should-th...al-history.htm


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:57 AM
 
12,798 posts, read 19,025,440 times
Reputation: 20692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimogor View Post
Not sure what the point of the attachment is, or the reference to "jew-owned" newspapers.
Maybe I am mistaken but are you on some subtle holocaust denial suggestion? If so you can take your trash somewhere else - Stormfront maybe.

The plaque is from Auschwitz - it doesn't say 1.5 million died in the holocause in total, it is refering to the 1.5 million that died in Auschwitz only, if you are suggesting some sort of contradiction in death counts. Nazi's murdered 6 million jews and about 8 million "others" - russian POWs, disabled, gays, political opponents, gypsies, non-jew poles and russian civilians.

If I am misinterpreting your thoughts, I apologize. That's why it's always suggesting you leave some TEXT in your attachments to explain yourself.

Last edited by Dd714; Yesterday at 10:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Roaring '20s
1,861 posts, read 479,017 times
Reputation: 7174
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffdoorgunner View Post
The main reason Romania was bombed was to take out the German oil production...………..
It was postulated that Poland was not bombed by the western allies because it was understood to be in the Soviet sphere of influence. Romania was understood to be in the Soviet sphere of influence at it was bombed by the western allies.

Why Romania was bombed isn't relevant to establishing the fact that being in the Soviet sphere of influence didn't preclude at area being subject to bombing by the U.S. and UK.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:23 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
4,077 posts, read 1,799,624 times
Reputation: 3892
Default We needed the USSR in the war

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
It was postulated that Poland was not bombed by the western allies because it was understood to be in the Soviet sphere of influence. Romania was understood to be in the Soviet sphere of influence at it was bombed by the western allies.

Why Romania was bombed isn't relevant to establishing the fact that being in the Soviet sphere of influence didn't preclude at area being subject to bombing by the U.S. and UK.
The target wasn't Romania as such, it was the Ploesti oil fields & refineries. & the importance was such that

"The first US bombing of a European target was of the Ploieşti refineries on June 12, 1942 and the oil campaign continued at a lower priority until 1944."

(My emphasis - more @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_ca...f_World_War_II)

The problem with bombing Auschwitz was the distance the bombers would have to fly, & that destroying the death camps wouldn't shorten the war. A further reason was that the US & UK had promised the USSR a second front repeatedly. The Soviets were fighting off the Nazis on Soviet territory, & taking (& inflicting) horrendous losses. If we couldn't provide the second front immediately, we could damage the Nazi war machine by destroying fuel supplies.

The Soviets were eager for any help we could provide. & so that's what we did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top