Allied Terror Bombings in World War II:
Right or Wrong?

World War II started when Germany took over Poland in 1939. Immediately, all of Europe was plunged into the bloodiest war of history. At first, England and France were the major allies against the Axis powers: Germany, Italy and Japan. After a couple of weeks of fighting, Germany took over France by means of superior tactics and determination. German morale was high as Germany defeated all of her enemies in continental Europe. Yet, Hitler, the dictator of Germany, knew that in order to take Europe, he would have to defeat his most powerful opponent: England. To do this, he would have to knock out England's superior fleet, and to do this, he would have to knock out England's air force, called the RAF (Royal Air Force). He sent his air force (called the Luftwaffe) to attack the RAF’s factories and bases and the English cities. The RAF fought back heroically against drastic odds and Hitler's attempt to take England failed. After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Germany declared war on the United States and the United States entered the war on the side of the Allies. The Americans and the British began to bomb factories in the heart of Germany. They used enormous bombers, which carried tons of bombs. They soon began to bomb cities as well, using an infamous system: the terror bombing.¹

Traditional bombings were targeted at enemy factories, air force bases or government buildings. They delivered bombs which could penetrate strong materials and explode after a certain point, doing tremendous damage to structures on a wide scale. With the terror bombings, the Allies stopped bombing military targets and began to bomb civilian targets, such as whole cities. These bombings were done with a new type of bomb, which had less penetrating power, but were more explosive and flammable. They caused fires, which would destroy whole cities and all the inhabitants in them.²

The system of terror bombings was invented and pushed by Arthur T. Harris, the commander-in-chief of the Bomber Command during World War II. He believed that "no German city was worth the bones of a single British grenadier."³ When the United States came into the war, Americans wanted to bomb during the day. The British were against the idea, since they thought that casualties would be too high. The Americans invented a system, which they thought would work. They attacked in huge block formations of about 300 bombers each. Any enemy plane would therefore have to face 3,000 machine guns, which seemed to be an impenetrable defense. These formations did down many enemy aircraft, but sustained extremely heavy losses in return. In one raid, the Americans suffered the loss of 153 planes.⁴ This was partially because the Germans had set up squadrons called "Bomber Killers," which specialized in attacking bombers. However, the Americans changed all that by bringing into the battle a new fighter called the Mustang. The Mustang had the longest range of any propeller-driven plane in history. It was also a superior fighter the Germans could not defeat. With this advantage, the Allies decided to knock out the air defenses of German cities in one massive attack. This attack was called the "Big Week." In a single week, the British put 2,300 bombers (plus escorts) over Germany, every day, and the Americans put 3,800 bombers (plus escorts) every night. The Luftwaffe fought back, but the Mustangs shot down 450 planes.⁵ After this, the Germans were practically defenseless against raids, and the bombers were never again challenged in the air.

After the annihilation of the Luftwaffe, the Allies began to pulverize German cities with bombs. Six of Germany's leading cities were leveled: Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne, Dresden, Leipzig and Dortmund. Being the capital, Berlin was the most extensively bombed. It was bombed for fourteen months straight. A thousand acres were destroyed and ten square miles of built-up city were leveled. When the Russians took the city in 1945, at least 54,000 bodies of civilians were found.⁶ In Dresden, a charming Baroque city, 135,000 civilians were killed in one American raid and two British ones, thanks to a system in which the bombers ringed the city with fire, thus forcing all of the oxygen out of the city and causing fires which were over 1,000 degrees and could be seen 150 miles away.⁷ The other cities were also leveled, but their losses were less horrifying.

How could anyone think of justifying such a cruel and barbaric way of fighting? Not even during the barbarian invasions were civilians so unjustly massacred. However, there are those who think that it was not only just, but necessary and advisable for future wars. Probably the most common reason given is that these bombings were a retaliation for the Battle of Britain, in which Germany also attacked the city of London.⁸ Another argument, commonly given nowadays, is that results had proven the terror bombings effective against an evil. Nazism was an evil and the terror bombings were a means used to defeat this evil. Therefore, there was nothing wrong with them.⁹

The reason that Arthur T. Harris and others who supported the terror bombings gave during the war was that at nighttime it was almost impossible to bomb a factory in a city and German factories were in cities. It was necessary to fly at night since it saved planes. Therefore, the only way for the bombers to hit the factories was to bomb the whole city.¹⁰

It cannot be denied that Germany did bomb London during the Battle of Britain, as it had in World War I. When the Germans first began to carry the war to civilians, the Allied countries were rightfully indignant at such brutality. Why then, did they later try to justify something they used to shudder at with horror? Unfortunately, the most probable explanation is revenge. Many British had seen their homes burning and their friends dying. When they had a chance of harming those responsible for the evil done to them, they bombed them with relish. However, this spirit of revenge is not only wrong, but also sinful, since it was directed at innocent civilians.

Though it sounds true, the second opinion was shown to be false in the war itself. Towards the end of the war, when, according to those who supported the terror bombings, Germany's morale should have been at its lowest, German production was not only rising, but was the highest it ever reached in all the war. This shows that the bombings had little effect on Nazism. In other words, the evil was defeated by other factors, not by the terror bombings.

Arthur T. Harris's opinion was also wrong. The British could have easily attacked during the day, as the Americans did. Harris said that this would entail too many casualties, but this is ridiculous. After the "Big Week," German resistance was almost nil. Furthermore, Harris believed that the factories were in the cities. When the terror bombings started, this was true. However, once the Germans realized the danger to their war production, they moved factories to the countryside or to occupied territories.¹¹ Harris continued to bomb the cities even after the factories had been relocated.

Why, then, were the terror bombings carried out in World War II? Why did the Allies put millions of dollars into killing citizens? Because it was the best way to defeat an enemy? The results show otherwise. Britain was all for the terror bombings and almost all of her bombing raids were done against cities. To the contrary, the better part of American bombings was aimed at military targets, as the traditional bombings were. Which one did more damage to the Germans? The Germans themselves declared that the American bombings did the most damage. Shortly before the end of the war, a group of Luftwaffe generals and officers issued the following statement: "There is no doubt that the Americans harmed us the most. The Russians were negligible as far as their home front is concerned, and we could have easily stood the British attacks on our cities. But the American devastation of our airfields, factories and oil depots made it impossible for us to keep going."¹²

With this, it is seen that the Allied terror bombings were wrong morally, militarily and practically. Since their use is evil and wasteful in lives, they should not be resorted to again. How, then, does one defeat another country's war effort? The solution is very simple. To do what the Americans did in World War II in Europe: to attack important military sites instead of cities. With modern technology, there is no need and no excuse to destroy whole cities in order to destroy military targets.

Paul Slobodnik
School year 1996-‘97

_____________________________________
Endnotes

¹James Lucas, Command (New York, NY: Military Press, 1988): pp. 170-172.
²Ibid., p. 175.
³Ibid., p.207.
⁴Don Congdon, Combat World War II (New York, NY: Arbor House, 1983): p. 319.
⁵C.L. Sulzenburger, History of World War II (Washington, D.C.: American Heritage Publishing Company, 1966): p. 419.
⁶Cornelius Ryan, The Last Battle (New York, NY: Simon and Schuster Press, 1966): pp. 14-17.
⁷Edward Bauer, World War II Encyclopedia (Westport, CT: H.S. Stuttman Inc., 1978): pp.170-172.
⁸Richard Collier, The City That Would Not Die (New York, NY: E.P. Dutton and Company Inc., 1963): p.206.
⁹Lucas, op. cit. p. 206.
¹⁰Sulzenburger, op. cit. p. 421.
¹¹Lucas, op. cit. p. 206.

Bibliography

Bauer, Sir Edward. World War II Encyclopedia. Westport, CT: H.S. Stuttman Inc., 1978.

Collier, Richard. The City That Would Not Die. New York, NY: E.P. Dutton and Company Inc., 1963.

Gongdon, Don. Combat World War II. New York, NY: Arbor House, 1983.

Lucas, James. Command. New York, NY: Military Press, 1988.

Ryan, Cornelius. The Last Battle. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster Press, 1966.

Sulzenburger, C.L. History of World War II. Washington, D.C.: American Heritage Publishing Company, 1966.