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 01-23-2020, 04:16 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
5,895 posts, read 3,846,464 times
Reputation: 9909

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ram2 View Post
I read a biography of Henry Ford, published in 1922, that had a preface with wording that specifically mentioned Jews. No other ethnic groups were mentioned. Jews must have been on the minds of many back then.
I grew up in Ohio in the 1950's and it was my experience that a majority of older white people were intensely bigoted. There was a triad of hostility toward blacks, Catholics and Jews. Henry Ford was born and lived out his life in Michigan. His sentiments towards Jews was by no means unusual and was perhaps the norm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-26-2020, 09:04 AM
 
20,660 posts, read 8,286,911 times
Reputation: 9268
Britain considered a plan to bomb Auschwitz.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...371?li=BBnb7Kz
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2020, 12:40 AM
 
Location: New York Area
18,322 posts, read 7,203,075 times
Reputation: 13996
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
Yes, more should have been done. Anti-Judaism was very prevalent then, as always. Liberals find space for lots of downtrodden people; Jews, not so much. The rules change when Jewish people are involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2020, 09:44 PM
 
20,660 posts, read 8,286,911 times
Reputation: 9268
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Yes, more should have been done. Anti-Judaism was very prevalent then, as always. Liberals find space for lots of downtrodden people; Jews, not so much. The rules change when Jewish people are involved.
Sad, but true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2020, 03:43 PM
 
34,523 posts, read 17,789,540 times
Reputation: 19534
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
Britain considered a plan to bomb Auschwitz.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...371?li=BBnb7Kz
Many plans were considered. Arguably, that's what strategy and grand strategy is - considering a multitude of options, before allocating limited resources. If the thought process was that a faster occupation of Germany was the better option, I'm not sure one should read malicious intent into it.

War is a cold business. You can only expend a payload of bombs once, right? If the projected outcome is to either keep 1 trained allied fighting man alive for an additional week or to do the same for 10 starving Auschwitz inmates - that is not an easy choice and I do not envy those who had to consider it.

The Nazis weren't going to be out of options if Auschwitz or the rail lines were bombed. It's not as if they were delicate in their methods before the camps were built.

Last edited by Dane_in_LA; 02-07-2020 at 03:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2020, 04:17 PM
 
Location: New York Area
18,322 posts, read 7,203,075 times
Reputation: 13996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Many plans were considered. Arguably, that's what strategy and grand strategy is - considering a multitude of options, before allocating limited resources. If the thought process was that a faster occupation of Germany was the better option, I'm not sure one should read malicious intent into it.

War is a cold business. You can only expend a payload of bombs once, right? If the projected outcome is to either keep 1 trained allied fighting man alive for an additional week or to do the same for 10 starving Auschwitz inmates - that is not an easy choice and I do not envy those who had to consider it.

The Nazis weren't going to be out of options if Auschwitz or the rail lines were bombed. It's not as if they were delicate in their methods before the camps were built.
Believe me the diversion of bombs would have been minuscule. The scale of the slaughter at Hitler's killing machine was not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2020, 05:26 PM
 
34,523 posts, read 17,789,540 times
Reputation: 19534
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Believe me the diversion of bombs would have been minuscule.
WWII bombing was imprecise as all out. Look at the USAAF attack on the Vemork heavy-water plant. 143 B-24s dropped 711 bombs on a well-defined area target, and 600 missed completely.

Quote:
The scale of the slaughter at Hitler's killing machine was not.
Quite aware of that. But the Nazis were quite efficient at killing even without the camp machinery. Could some have been saved by the camp's partial destruction? Undoubtedly. Most would have met their end anyway - it's not as if the local population was particularly sympathetic. And Auschwitz was a shockingly low-tech affair, those are hard to put out of commission with mere bombing.

As I said - right or wrong in retrospect, targets weren't picked with malicious intent. (Except towards the Nazis.) Ultimately, no matter what targets you choose to bomb, you condemn someone from your own side to an untimely death. Such is war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2020, 08:38 PM
 
Location: New York Area
18,322 posts, read 7,203,075 times
Reputation: 13996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
WWII bombing was imprecise as all out. Look at the USAAF attack on the Vemork heavy-water plant. 143 B-24s dropped 711 bombs on a well-defined area target, and 600 missed completely.

Quite aware of that. But the Nazis were quite efficient at killing even without the camp machinery. Could some have been saved by the camp's partial destruction? Undoubtedly. Most would have met their end anyway - it's not as if the local population was particularly sympathetic. And Auschwitz was a shockingly low-tech affair, those are hard to put out of commission with mere bombing.

As I said - right or wrong in retrospect, targets weren't picked with malicious intent. (Except towards the Nazis.) Ultimately, no matter what targets you choose to bomb, you condemn someone from your own side to an untimely death. Such is war.
I think the worry, seriously, was what to do with the survivors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Maine
2,518 posts, read 1,791,804 times
Reputation: 4381
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
We should have bombed the tracks. Done well, meaning over a long distance with many bombs hitting it, it would have taken a long time to fix. For one thing, grading many sections of track would have made repairs a lengthy endeavor. Plus, it would not have been hard to hit many such tracks to many camps during the course of hitting nearby targets.

Bombing the camp would be a tricky call. It would save lives on a net basis. The turns of killing the population were HUGE. Estimates have indicated 400k could live there, and the camp killed 5-10x that. So lets say it was done before the camp had killed the last 2 mill, lets say 1/2 the 400k die in a raid. 200k killed, 2 million saved. Same kind of discussion Hiroshima bomb stirred.

But the collateral damage would be killing a large chunk of the current population.
Bombing the tracks would have been a useless waste of time and resources, The Japanese had the railroads and streetcars in Hiroshima up an running in a very short time, only 3 days for one streetcar line.
https://grapee.jp/en/56034
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:42 PM
 
Location: Howard County, Maryland
6,417 posts, read 4,073,693 times
Reputation: 18270
Quote:
Originally Posted by roadrat View Post
Bombing the tracks would have been a useless waste of time and resources, The Japanese had the railroads and streetcars in Hiroshima up an running in a very short time, only 3 days for one streetcar line.
https://grapee.jp/en/56034

I don't know the geography around Auschwitz, but if there were any rail bridges in the vicinity, those would have been excellent targets. It takes longer to repair a bridge than it does a stretch of ground-level track.
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