Yeah I read that all of the civilian targeted bombings literally made the war last longer- they were counterproductive for pretty obvious reasons.
Firstly, Nazi Germany wasn't democratically controlled so public opposition hardly mattered. Secondly, the city dwellers were the people who hated Hitler the most, so the Allies were just killing the Nazis' political opponents for them :surprised-pika:
Which ended up being the start of a proud US tradition
so the Allies were just killing the Nazis’ political opponents for them
there is even a rumor (wink wink) that Dresden was bombed because it's East Germany and it was gonna go to the Soviets; i'm not a big history buff, but there's some resonance here between the bombing of Dresden and the bombing of Belgrade in 1999 where in both cases a lot of civilian infrastructure was "accidentally" damaged
"Hey, you bombed this city until it looked like the surface of the moon. Bombings are horrific. I am carrying around this deep personal horror at what I saw and it is so great that I'm experiencing a mental break. Now check out this cool Sci-Fi I conjured up as a coping mechanism."
Yeah, on second thought putting it into the context of the book it's definitely not, I just couldn't recall if he made any mention of actual military targets. Given that it's about his experience there it probably wasn't a really standout detail of the event.
Unfortunately, he kind of did, but in a totally accidental way. I think the message of the book (and Vonnegut's real experience) totally stands on its own regardless.
But the number of deaths in the book are now known to be inflated and inaccurate. Vonnegut based his research on a leading historian who was considered an expert on Dresden, David Irving. Decades later, Irving is infamous for being a Nazi apologist who uncritically accepts Goebbels's propaganda at face value and any numbers he comes up with should be thrown in the garbage can. But Vonnegut didn't know that at the time. I'm sure for Vonnegut, living through the bombing, the larger number felt more accurate.
A quick googling (don't cite me) puts the numbers at around ~25,000 dead vs. ~135,000 dead.
Kinda by accident but having re read it after learning about this it really does read a lot more like a general and utter horror at the devestation of war. In the same book he utterly ridicules an American propogandist for the Nazis, highlights the horrific treatment of the Soviet POW's etc. And sets up one of the narrator's fellow soldiers as being a basically wannabe nazi and total arsehole. The rest of his books etc. Do make me think this is a guy who has seen war and been scarred by the horror of it all. I honestly think its a combo of dodgy history as others have said and the fact he was actually there.
Ahh fuck did Vonnegut really do a Nazi apologism? Dammit.
Nah the bombing was pretty indiscriminate (or the stated goals differed from the actual goals) and there were lots of civilian casualties.
Yeah I read that all of the civilian targeted bombings literally made the war last longer- they were counterproductive for pretty obvious reasons.
Firstly, Nazi Germany wasn't democratically controlled so public opposition hardly mattered. Secondly, the city dwellers were the people who hated Hitler the most, so the Allies were just killing the Nazis' political opponents for them :surprised-pika:
Which ended up being the start of a proud US tradition
Angloid military strategy
They can't oppose us if literally everyone who could oppose us is dead taps head
there is even a rumor (wink wink) that Dresden was bombed because it's East Germany and it was gonna go to the Soviets; i'm not a big history buff, but there's some resonance here between the bombing of Dresden and the bombing of Belgrade in 1999 where in both cases a lot of civilian infrastructure was "accidentally" damaged
Hardly. He did Pyongyang 75 in Germany.
"Hey, you bombed this city until it looked like the surface of the moon. Bombings are horrific. I am carrying around this deep personal horror at what I saw and it is so great that I'm experiencing a mental break. Now check out this cool Sci-Fi I conjured up as a coping mechanism."
Yeah, on second thought putting it into the context of the book it's definitely not, I just couldn't recall if he made any mention of actual military targets. Given that it's about his experience there it probably wasn't a really standout detail of the event.
Slaughterhouse Five was basically just PTSD by way of Sci-Fi. They definitely didn't go into the high level tactical utility of Dresden.
Unfortunately, he kind of did, but in a totally accidental way. I think the message of the book (and Vonnegut's real experience) totally stands on its own regardless.
But the number of deaths in the book are now known to be inflated and inaccurate. Vonnegut based his research on a leading historian who was considered an expert on Dresden, David Irving. Decades later, Irving is infamous for being a Nazi apologist who uncritically accepts Goebbels's propaganda at face value and any numbers he comes up with should be thrown in the garbage can. But Vonnegut didn't know that at the time. I'm sure for Vonnegut, living through the bombing, the larger number felt more accurate.
A quick googling (don't cite me) puts the numbers at around ~25,000 dead vs. ~135,000 dead.
Oof that's a rough one.
Kinda by accident but having re read it after learning about this it really does read a lot more like a general and utter horror at the devestation of war. In the same book he utterly ridicules an American propogandist for the Nazis, highlights the horrific treatment of the Soviet POW's etc. And sets up one of the narrator's fellow soldiers as being a basically wannabe nazi and total arsehole. The rest of his books etc. Do make me think this is a guy who has seen war and been scarred by the horror of it all. I honestly think its a combo of dodgy history as others have said and the fact he was actually there.