Hermann Goering Quotes

Some scholars look back at the allied bombing of German Cities in WWII with criticism that it was morally improper to bomb populated cities, and that the use of the adjective “exterminating” indicated that Churchill was more interested in killing Germans than strategic victory. This revisionist history has two failings. First, the Germans had already bombed Coventry, London and other civilian targets in England as well as cities in Holland, Poland and other countries killing many civilians. As a result, under the rules of war, Germany was no longer entitled to protection for their cities. Further, Hamburg and other targets were manufacturing sites of war material and as such lost the protection anyway. Even Dresden, which had very little war manufacturing was the main location for R&R of German Officers and by their military presence in the city converted it into a legitimate target. FDR agreed with Churchill, that the bombing was a good strategy to cause Hitler to fall as they thought the public would rebel. They were wrong however and his grip on the population through the Gestapo and the military was so strong that, it took a land invasion and occupation to put an end to Hitler. However, the devastating bombing all but crippled the German weapons development and deployment. For example. The Germans had developed the Jet Airplane Engine and actually put a few in the fight at the end if the war. Without the bombing, they would have had many more and countered the allied air supremacy. However, it is also true that Churchill and many Englishmen and some Americans believed that the English were morally entitled to retaliation for the innocent civilians killed with the German bombing of civilian targets.

The Nazis occupied the cities, but the partisans survived in the mountains. The resistance was ferocious and very effective. From a German Soldier’s point of view, the Yugoslav front was the most dangerous assignment where his odds of being killed was even greater than the Russian front.

One of the predictions of the oncoming war with Germany.

These tactics were revolutionary in China and the rest of the world. They were unexpected and were very effective. The non communists however were corrupt, exploitative, and divided. The communist revolution in China might well have not succeeded had the capitalist forces not been so corrupt and badly led.

Lawrence of Arabia

He signaled his subordinates that it was OK to commit war crimes against the Italian Partisans.

This speech was given in the early days of WWII when it was far from clear that we would win.

The Muslims had internal wars but they had—and still have--two sets of morality as to the laws of war. This illustrates the classic Islamic discrimination against non-believers to which the minority of Muslim terrorists still adhere,

Prior to this order, some German submarines had assisted the survivors of torpedoed ships. None did after and some actually machine gunned survivors in the water. One aspect of the quotation that is particularly interesting was the Admiral’s justification example of the Allied bombing of German Cites. What he did not say was that this practice did not begin until Germany—at the insistence of Hitler—ignored the Geneva Conventions and bombed London, Coventry and other English cities. Hitler declared London an “Open City”. The Allies retaliated by bombing factories that were in German Cities. After the war Donitz was found guilty of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare and using thousands of slave laborers in his shipyards. He was sentenced to 10 years, one of the lightest sentences if the German War Crimes Trials.

During WWII, Mauldin was at the front lines and in the fox holes with the troops getting ideas for his cartoons most of which were drawn on the battle field;

Although this may seem obvious to most, there has been, in recent years, an attempt by some to introduce the concept of proportionality into the war equation and definition of war crime. Defense after attack many argue should be proportional to the attack. So if Nation A shoots down a plane of Nation B, according to this logic Nation B is not supposed to invade nation A. Brecher points out the absurdity of the concept from a war point of view. It is however used by many to criticize the defenses against terrorism where modern weapons are used against terrorists and those that harbor them.

Hopkins was a social worker with no military of political experience. But the President trusted him implicitly. Most American military officers and Ambassador to England Joseph P. Kennedy, a Nazi sympathizer & father of JFK, believed that England could not stand up to Hitler. Any military aid we gave England would fall into the hands of the Germans. Everyone was shocked when Roosevelt sent Hopkins to England to make a military recommendation. To impress Hopkins with something he thought Hopkins would be interested in, Churchill led a tour of workers cottages built by the government. Hopkins surprised Churchill and his aids who would never forget this statement & then asked to see the military facilities. Hopkins distressed the American military by recommending that Britain could hold out against invasion if they received military aid. Despite the contrary military advice, FDR accepted Hopkins’ recommendations, and the rest is history. He had been right and much of the military wrong.