Slashdot Mirror


WW2 Aerial Photographs Go Online

aquarium writes "The Guardian Unlimited reports that unique aerial photographs of some of the key events of the Second World War are to be made available for the first time over the internet. The photographs are being made available through a website created by The Aerial Reconnaissance Archives (TARA) at Keele University - an official place of deposit for the National Archives at Kew, West London. The entire archive of more than five million aerial reconnaissance photographs, shot by the RAF over Western Europe during the conflict, is going online starting Monday. They include American troops landing on the Normandy beaches on D-Day, the seizure of the Pegasus bridge by British paratroops, the aftermath of the first 1,000 bomber raid on Cologne, and the German battleship Bismarck as the Royal Navy hunted her down. The multiple photographs taken by the high resolution cameras meant they were able to create 3-D images through an instrument called a "stereoscope". The technique was used to construct a detailed picture of the Normandy terrain ahead of the D-Day landings."

83 of 556 comments (clear)

  1. New Additions to the archive... by Kotukunui · · Score: 5, Funny

    Aerial photographs of their servers being "slashbombed" and crashing in flames.

    1. Re:New Additions to the archive... by aheath · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to the BBC, "The pictures will go online on Monday." In the meantime, you can see six of the pictures at the BBC News web site if you read the article "WWII archive photos go online".

    2. Re:New Additions to the archive... by Tremanhil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This was linked to on Fark early this morning, hence the slashdot effect actually happened prior to it appearing on slashdot.

    3. Re:New Additions to the archive... by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Best guess, its probably some old server on the end of a shared university 10mb line or something. JANET are going to be so pleased.

      Don't be so certain, JANET (the Joint Academic NETwork, which links together UK universities) has a 10 Gbit/s backbone. That's a pretty fat pipe...

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    4. Re:New Additions to the archive... by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 4, Funny

      Remembering the total fiasco Kew Public Records Office made of putting the 1901 UK census records online using IIS, it'll probably take them 3 months downtime to realise that they should have used SCO/Linux servers.

    5. Re:New Additions to the archive... by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mean seriously - is it fair to post an article on Slashdot that centers around photographs? It's just taunting everyone because we all know we'll never get to see - as the server is having its shit ruined.

      Guess its time to subscribe.

    6. Re:New Additions to the archive... by Sinus0idal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed they do, but a lookup shows that they have chosen to host this site away from Janet... hence its dotted.

  2. what is a steroscope? by bluelip · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is a device that is a more complex version of a 'View Master' toy. Take two images from different angles. Feed one image to the right eye and the other to the left. Performs amazingly well.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
  3. Charlie And The One Hour Processing Factory by ten000hzlegend · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Believe it or not, Roald Dahl, the slightly scary looking and GREAT writer of childrens novels was awarded the international aerial photography award during the Second World War for taking highly detailed shots of the Gaza Strip, Crete Gardens and perhaps most famously, the Great Pyramids... he later detailed these flights in his biography

    I have a remarkable print upon my wall of these black and white photos, clear, amazing for the time and look almost isometric, perfect angle shots

    Not bad for a man who wrote about a "cunning" fox

    Kudos

    1. Re:Charlie And The One Hour Processing Factory by EinarH · · Score: 5, Interesting
      If I remember corrctly he enlisted in Kenya (he worked for Shell Oil Company) in 1939.

      Later (in 1940?) he was shoot down over Liby while flying a rec. aircraft. After some months in hospital he had to fly the Hurricane fighter jet. And with only ten hours of training he shoot down two german bombers over Greece. He also participated in the great battle over Athens.

      After that he started to get mediacal problems (headaches?) and they transfered him to Haifa, Palestine. But he started to get black-outs and in 1942 they transfered hoim to Washinghton as an Air Attache.

      I read about this in a biography many years ago. Great reading with many good stories both pre-war and from the war.

      --

      Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.

  4. Slashdot Blitzkrieg by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Funny
    That server surrendered faster than the French! Okay, it's just a joke, we already settled it yesterday, the French fought valiantly in WWII.


    But seriously, the archive sounds like a great idea. There should be more historical material of this sort accessible online.

    1. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by TheWart · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just to be sure, the site is not responding, but is it actually because of a /.'ing? In a different article I read about this, it said the site will nt be up until Monday, and because of that, it was not responding when I tried to access it yesterday.

    2. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Dunkirk was a victory...

      Put it this way, the French lines collapse and the Belgians surrender. You've got nobody defending your flanks, and Germans are pouring thru and attacking from behind. Getting any troops out is great, getting the bulk of your army away to fight another day is amazing.

    3. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by angst_ridden_hipster · · Score: 4, Informative
      the french were the only ones who actively aided the nazis in rounding up jews and sending them to the ovens

      Bullshit!

      Read your history on Poland, Latvia, Austria, Lithuania, and Romania.

      (I'm not trying to start a flame war here. This is a list of countries where there was extensive collaboration with the Nazi policy of genocide against Jews and Gypsies. This is not to say that there weren't people in each of these countries who risked their lives to resist the Nazis and their policies.)

      --
      Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
      www.fogbound.net
    4. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even so, it was a fiasco. We British made an AWFUL lot of mistakes in WWII, it's still a fucking mystery why the Germans failed to capitalise on them.

      Why didn't the Germans invade England? Why didn't the Germans support their U-Boats properly? Why didn't the Germans use chemical weapons in their V1s and V2s? etc etc etc I think, in the end, that it comes down to one simple ting, Hitler was not only evil, he was really fucking stupid too.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    5. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      On chemical weapons in the rockets.

      It would have been very costly to the Germans to do that.

      Say in July 1944 had the V1s and later on V2s been equiped with chemical weapons it might have killed...twice as many British citizens as the conventional warheads did, seeing as a V weapon's warhead was 1,870 pounds in the V-1 and 2,000 pounds in a V-2.

      http://www.ww2guide.com/vweapon.shtml
      V-1 Number lauched: 10,000 against the UK, 12,000 against Western Europe (up to 18,000 V-1s launched total.)

      V-2s - 1,120 were launched against England (1,050 actually impacting the ground in that country )

      "About 4,320 V-2 rockets were fired by March 27, 1945 with another 600 expended in training which mainly took place near Blizna, Poland."

      "The total bomb tonnage for the Second World War dropped by both the RAF and the 8th and 15th Air Forces in Europe on Germany totalled 1,234,767 tons of bombs more than 60 percent of which were dropped between July 1944 and April 1945."

    6. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by Bromrrrrr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because the Germans couldn't win.

      Don't know if I'm so sure about that, I think there are only 1 or 2 things that they really did wrong (or rather, right for all of us offcourse)

      Why didn't the Germans invade England?
      Because they didn't have air superiority over the channel and lacked amphibious capabilities. The Allied raid on Deppe in '42 showed that it was folly to attack without specialized ships and craft. Had the Nazis gone across in 40-41 in ferries and river barges they'd have failed.


      You're right, the question should should have been: why did they give up on England or rather give up on pummeling the RAF. I think the battle of Britain is the one point in the war where they could have won everything.

      The RAF was on the brink of collapsing, giving the germans the air superiority they needed to invade. If they could have subdued England it would have been very bad for all of us indeed.

      Luckilly for us Hitler was an idiot so he was dead set on going against Russia and wanted vengeance for the bombing of Berlin, but I think it was pretty close.

      --

      What a rotten party, have we run out of beer or something?
    7. Re:Slashdot Blitzkrieg by quigonn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why didn't the Germans use chemical weapons in their V1s and V2s?

      Chemical weapons were never considered by Hitler because he was actually a victim of a gas attack in World War I, when he was fighting for the Germans. After that, he temporarily lost his eyesight, and regained it after two weeks being blind. During the rest of his life, he always had health problems and a lot of long-term after-effects caused by the gas.

      --
      A monkey is doing the real work for me.
  5. Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Bender_ · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Will they also have pictures of the devastated dresden after they bombed the city center crowded with hundreds of thousands civilian refugees and no military targets in sight?

    1. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by deadite66 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      does germany have pictures of the nazis bombing london?

    2. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Captain+Pedantic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, they do in the print edition of the Guardian. Curiously, the BBC are showing all of the pictures printed in the paper except that one.

      There is no way the parent post should be modded flaimbait. The firebombing of Dresden was a major atrocity of WW2, and the person who lead it, "Bomber" Harris should have been tried as a war criminal. Instead, there is a nice statue of him in London. Also, he had a nice sidelne in using chemical weapons on Kurds in Iraq.

      --

      None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
    3. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Good question there... You can find pictures of Darmstadt which was bombed as a preparation for Desden, home of the famous Dresden technique where incendiary bombs are thrown in a way that would raise the temperature so the rest of the city can burn and suffocate. Aka the shoehorn technique.

      Why have you been ranked "flamebait" (flame? did someone say flame?) while 10 million civilian Germans were killed that way and countless Japanese children too I do not know.

      Probably because we are a few, ex Allied or ex Axis countries decendants, who have taken the trouble of verifying historical facts and get both sides of the story. My own history books never mentioned all the civilian bombings, they mentioned Hiroshima, Nagasaki but they never did mention Kobe and the fact that regular bombings did more victims than the A bomb everyone talks about when they try to sound informed. We were never asked to read The Graveyard of The Fireflies (or watch the modern animation). Now that would tell us a bit more about WWII's reality.

      I think those who did live it aren't too proud (my own stepd dad being a B-24 flight engineer) and those who were on the receiving end never had a voice... Because it doesn't look too good.

      Remember, we were the GOOD ones. If we did look bad, it meant the commies were the good ones, so that simply had to go.

      Well, I want to thank you for having the courage to stand up and reminding us what good it actualy was. I hope that instead of replying to this post and yours in hatred, people just start wondering "What the fuck are you two talkign about" and double check any points made here on the Internet. That in itself would be a heck of a victory.

    4. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Will they also have pictures of the devastated dresden after they bombed the city center crowded with hundreds of thousands civilian refugees and no military targets in sight?

      Yesterday, I was at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC. As I was wondering around (for the first time since I was 6, wow!), I happened upon a V-1 flying bomb and a V-2 rocket. These devices were used by the Germans against the civilian population of London; firebombs, similar to those used on Dresden and Hamburg, were also dropped by the Germans on Coventry and Belfast.

      Certainly, the firebombing of German cities was an atrocity; but these acts were conducted in response to previous deliberate targetting of UK cities by the Luftwaffe. This is the historical context which I think the parent post is lacking in.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    5. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Regardless of whether you call the bombing of Dresden a war crime, genocide, an atrocity, a massacre, or just a sound tactical decision - it happened. For that reason, I hope the site when it becomes accessible does contain pictures of it, if they exist.

      Because it is important that the horrors of war be documented; not as records of "atrocities" or "necessary evils", but merely as an illustration of what we are all capable of when we fail to resolve our differences peacefully. There is little to be gained by pointing fingers of blame; but there is much to be lost if we do not strive to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

    6. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Doomdark · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Certainly, the firebombing of German cities was an atrocity; but these acts were conducted in response to previous deliberate targetting of UK cities by the Luftwaffe. This is the historical context which I think the parent post is lacking in.

      Sure, but that's a lousy excuse for atrocities. That the scope of german bombings was miniscule compared to allies' may be irrelevant, but the fact is none of those civilians was responsible for bombings. Further, Hitler was considered a brutal barbarian (and rightly so); allied bombing raids did nothing to make US and UK look any better. Strategic bombing was also clearly MEANT to "break the german will", by targeting alongside 'real' military targets also civilian ones... so those weren't accidents by any means. It would have been normal to have civilian casualties, obviously, but pure collateral damage would have been much less. This was, like you said, pure revenge.

      It's too bad those bombing barons were never held responsible for their callous disregard of human life (both for their own soldiers and enemy civilians); and the worst thing is it had very little positive effect on war itself. German industrial production kept on raising all through 43 (during heaviest bombing raids), all the way to summer of 44; after which germans started losing important resources (iron ore from France, Romanian oil from Ploesti), and then war industry started to decline. And as to spirit to fight... it was actually studied (after the war), and it was found to have little effect there either. Will to fight between heavily bombed cities, and those that weren't was nominal (study was done by USAF, by the way, to try to evaluate how well campaign went). One can wonder how anyone thinks that killing your loved ones makes you less willing to fight against enemy that caused the deaths.

      But not only were german civilians grilled alive by tens or hundreds of thousands; allied also lost over 100k air force personnel during the war; most of them during bomb raids. And yet many still consider generals who devised these strategic bombing campaings heroes. Sad how winners can write and rewrite history.

      --
      I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
    7. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll bite your bait..

      Genocide == the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

      What the Allies did during WW2 was not genocide. It was a devastating fire-bombing performed to ruin the moral of Germany's remaining forces. The people on the ground were of no single racial, political, or cultural group.

      Fact is, Hitler's army dropped the first bombs on civillian targets in London. It was unintentional, apparently due to bad navigation, but it opened the door to Allies targetting civillian targets.

      The way I see it, you have a warcrime if one side bombs the other's cities. You have a mutual agreement if you decide to retaliate with the same medicine they fed you.

      So anyway, the over-simplified remark that this was genocide would likely cause someone to respond in a slightly heated manner. That's likely the reason for the mod.

    8. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by /dev/trash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First rule of war. The victors never face war crime trials.

    9. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by carn1fex · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually the attacks on civilian targets by both sides began with the accidental bombing of a british city by the germans, mistaking it for an airfield. Then the brits hit back and things escalated. The V2 wasn't used until the end of the war.

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    10. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by E_elven · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh gee, don't anyone mention Hiroshima.

      --
      Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    11. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Aardpig · · Score: 2, Informative

      It first occured while neo-cons were in power so it must be an absolutely awful idea.

      Actually, "shock and awe" is the logical and moral successor of the Geman Blitz. So the neo-cons didn't invent it, they just followed the lead of the Nazis.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    12. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Samlind1 · · Score: 3, Informative
      The RAF learned the "Dresden" technique studying what the Luftwaffe did to Coventry on November 14th, 1940. After Coventry was raised, the Brits gave it back to the Germans. Harris never expressed any remorse, believing he was right until his death.

      By design and by capability, Japan's war production was distributed into a huge number of small shops, the Japanese military leaders feeling this method would blunt any attempt at effective strategic bombing by the US. Up until January 1945, they were right.

      Curtis Lemay had been working the 8th Air Force in England during 1942-43, and then sent to the Pacific theater in July 1944, rising to head the 21st Bomber Command in January 1945. Using what he had learned from the Brits in England, he proceded to fire bomb Japanese cities into ashes. On March 9-10, 1945 the firebombing of Tokyo killed 110,000 people, far more than either atomic weapon did.

      He went on to lead the Berlin Airlift, and to head the Strategic Air Command from 1949 to 1957, becoming Air Force Chief of Staff in 1961. He also was George Wallace's running mate in 1968.

    13. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by missing000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like it or not, indescriminate bombing of civilians is a war crime as defined by the Fourth Geneval Convention.

      I think it's a bit daft to assert any civilian massacre is OK because they did it to us first. By that logic, the battle would never end. Each side would continue attack in crazily justified retribution.

      Also, the sins of the master can in no way be deemed a crime punishable with instant death of millions.

      It amazes me that tripe like the parent is insightful to anyone.

    14. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by alext · · Score: 4, Informative

      There might be a statue, and of recent vintage (1992), but Harris was a controversial figure even during the conflict with many questions in Parliament and from the church about the area bombing strategy.

      Here's a letter Churchill nearly sent at the time, saying that he wanted no more "wanton destruction". Not that his position is exactly uncontroversial either, hence this National Archives topic.

      PS Regarding the church position, my father remembers reading comment in newspapers from a Canon Bell condemning area bombing, but surprisingly there doesn't seem to be any record of this books I've read, or on the net.

    15. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by Banjonardo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Do notice what Churchill says on his letter: for the purpose of increasing terror. I do believe that's also in the US Army (or is it air force) charter: to bring terror upon the enemy.

      This is why the more knowledgeable of us have no clue why "terrorists" and "to terrorize" became bogeymen words after 9/11: the US Military, and that of all the world, were MADE specifically to do this, among other things.

      --

      -----

      Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton

    16. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by l0wland · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps you forgot whatever happened to the person that invented these flying bombs. Was he ever convicted for warcrimes? No, it was far worse.

      --

      "Honey, I feel a certain distance between us..." "Really? A 31ms ping ain't that bad..."
    17. Re:Also pictures of dresden genocide? by jedrek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remember, we were the GOOD ones.

      Whatever you may think, war - in it's purest form - has no morals.

  6. Anything that helps... by bc90021 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...more people understand what a tremndously heroic thing all those soldiers did can only be a good thing.

    For those of you who have never seen "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers", I recommend them. Remember, freedom comes at a price, and we should all be very thankful to all those who have paid it, and one way is by learning about, and appreciating the sacrifices made. As this archive will only further add to our accuracy or the historical events, this can only be a Good Thing.

    1. Re:Anything that helps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      And also remember when watching Private Ryan and Band of Brothers... (particularly) the British, and to a lesser extent Canada and Free French also fought and died while making spectacularly brave raids -- and much of the D-Day innovations and intellegence data was obtained/developed by the British. Not that Spielberg or Tom Hanks bothered to cover such things, it was just the good old boys of the USA who did everything.

    2. Re:Anything that helps... by Complicity · · Score: 4, Insightful
      For those of you who have never seen "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers", I recommend them.

      I am in 100% agreement with this statement. I'll go one further and state that it is my firm belief that Band Of Brothers should be mandatory viewing in every school across the WW2-allied countries.

      The mini-series may only depict American soldiers, but what they did in that war was representative of every nation involved. Those men deserve all the recognition they can get for the massive sacrifices that had to be made.
      --
      - c -
    3. Re:Anything that helps... by Aardpig · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For those of you who have never seen "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers", I recommend them.

      And for those of you who haven't seen U-571, don't bother. Whoever was responsible in portraying the capture of an Enigma machine as the work of the USA, when it was in fact done by Brits aboard HMS Aubretia, should be shot. If you weren't aware of this pretty-insensitive reworking of history, you can read about the fuss it caused here

      Let's give credit where credit is due; WWII wouldn't have been won on the Western Front without the USA; but the Brits held out for a couple of years against the greatest military in the world, and were instrumental in defeating the Luftwaffe and the Afrika Korps. That shouldn't be taken away from them.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    4. Re:Anything that helps... by fltsimbuff · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just pointing something out here... Most of these movies are made in "Hollywood", in the USA. For what? Entertainment. Movies are made for a particular audience, and since these movies were made in the USA, they were meant to to entertain, install pride, and patriotism of into the American Viewers... If a movie is made in any other country, who do they concentrate on? Then do the same. Because the USA filmmaking industry is so big, many films go out to other countries for their entertainment value, and thus are going out beyond the target audience. Some appreciate the origin of the movies, and the intended audience, and some just whine about it. If I saw a movie from Japan, I would expect to see if glorifying their history and/or culture. Same with any other country. If people want to see facts, they watch a documentary. If they want to watch something entertaining, that leaves them with a sense of pride and patriotism, they watch a movie. That said... If you do not like the way events are slanted in a movie about WWII, then watch something out of your own country. That said, I know that the winning of WWII was in a very large part due to the British that fought and died as much as it was by Americans... The thing to remember is that Britain was a smaller nation, and yet was able to hold the Germans off for a very long time... Besides the revolutionary war, and that pesky war of 1812, Britain has long been an close ally. I have great respect for the people there, and their contributions to the world. Not that I usually hold a grudge, but I cannot say the same for certain other unnamed french and german countries... :P (Yeah, I still sore about the war. I'll get over it.)

    5. Re:Anything that helps... by plierhead · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yeah the fire bombing of Dresden by British and American forces was indeed heoric .. murdering innocent civilians in the thousands - knowingly, on purpose.

      Those acts were horrific but they were carried out with the intent of shortening the war by breaking the morale of those civilians and others in other German towns and cities who heard about them.

      Many hundreds of thousands of civilians were indeed killed by those raids, but during the day those same "innocent civilians" were out making bombs, planes and tanks in Germany's armament factories. Pretty much all males in Germany from age 14 upwards (though much less so females), including millions of slave labourers impotred from the occupied countries, spent their entire days directly supporting Germany's war effort. Bombing them was a valid action of war that resulted in a lower overall loss of life. And no matter how you cut it, given that the Germans started the whole thing off, it was better to kill them than be killed by them.

      --

      [x] auto-moderate all posts by this user as insightful

    6. Re:Anything that helps... by humblecoder · · Score: 5, Interesting


      Let's give credit where credit is due; WWII wouldn't have been won on the Western Front without the USA; but the Brits held out for a couple of years against the greatest military in the world, and were instrumental in defeating the Luftwaffe and the Afrika Korps. That shouldn't be taken away from them.


      While we are handing out credit for the victory in WW2, let's not forget about our friends, the Russians. The Russians fought the brunt of the German war machine, and wore them down through sheer attrition. I don't recall the exact number of Russian war dead, but it ranges in the millions. If the Western Allies had to face the main core of the German army, I don't know if we would have won.

      The German army was so strung out by the time of D-Day that they had to resort to conscripting men from many of their Eastern European conquests (Russians, Poles). It was these men who manned the beaches of Normandy, by and large, on D-Day. There is even a story about how the Allies captured a group of soliders from the Far East (Korea, I believe). It turned out that they had been conscripted in the Russian army to fight the Germans, captured by the Germans, and then conscripted into the German army! Other than the German officer pointing a Luger at them from behind, they were not very motivated to fight in this battle.

      If you are interested in learning more about the contributions of the US during WWII, I urge you to read _D-Day_ and _Citizen Soldier_ by the late Steven Ambrose (the same historian who wrote the book _Band of Brothers_ on which the mini-series is based). If you want more insight into the Russian Front, a good book to read is _Stalingrad_ by Anthony Beevor. While this book doesn't cover the whole Eastern campaign, it does give a lot of insight into the brutality of the fighting on the Eastern Front. While the Germans and the Western Allies were at war with one another, there was a great deal of respect between the grunts on both sides. However, the Germans and Russians absolutely hated each other, which made for brutal fighting conditions, the likes of which were rarely seen on the Western Front.

    7. Re:Anything that helps... by gilgongo · · Score: 4, Informative

      > For those of you who have never seen "Saving
      > Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers", I
      > recommend them.

      While I don't disagree with the sentiment of what you say, I wish those films were not so blatantly US-centric. Anyone watching them would be perfectly justified it concluding that America fought against the Axis powers alone and the Europeans and Anzacs had nothing to do with it.

      And just to decimate my karma even more, I would remind anyone who is inclined to think of America as an unusually heroic military force that they have never won a significant military victory without superior numbers or equipment. I don't believe any other nation in history has that distinction.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    8. Re:Anything that helps... by vrt3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Both the Poles and the British intercepted an Enigma machine. You can read the whole story on Wikipedia; in a nutshell: the Poles intercepted a commercial non-military version well before the start of the war. It was however close enough in construction to be useful in understanding how to decrypt Enigma's messages. In '39 the Germans started to use more advanced versions, and the Navy used even more advanced versions. Therefore the British tried (successfully) to capture a Navy version from a U-boat.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    9. Re:Anything that helps... by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 2, Informative
      And just to decimate my karma even more, I would remind anyone who is inclined to think of America as an unusually heroic military force that they have never won a significant military victory without superior numbers or equipment. I don't believe any other nation in history has that distinction.

      On the other side of the globe at the time, an out numbered and out gunned US Navy and Marine Corps defeated the other third of the Axis powers: Japan. The most critical battle of the war, Midway, the US Carrier fleet out numbered 3:4 by Japan's Carrier fleet, and about 5:1 with the respect to the rest of their fleet. Yet the US pulled out a victory. One of the US carriers, the Yorktown I do beleive, had barely limped into Pearl Harbor, had three months worth of repair work slapped on in 48 hours, and had been thrown into the fray. As horrible as the battles of Iwo Jima was, the US inflicted a 3:1 kill to loss ratio on the defenders.

      Against Japan, the US forces held their own despite the fact that the Pacific theatre had taken a back seat to the European theatre until Germany had been defeated.

    10. Re:Anything that helps... by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You took a rather odd view of Canada's involvement

      As a Canadian, I tend to downplay my own importance and that of my country. What won WW2 was massive force supplied by our neighbours to the south.

      We *were* a formidable force at that time because it was needed then, but now we are only known as Peacekeepers and world-class snipers (and maybe comedians). I don't speak for all Canucks, but I think we like it that way.

  7. Wondering... by iota · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well the TARA archive is already slashdotted...
    But I'm most interested in getting answers to these questions --
    -- What's the license/use/citation policy? e.g. Can I make prints?
    -- Can I buy/license a copy of the entire archive? (Perhaps loaded onto one of these).

  8. Server Age by RoadkillBunny · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think the server hosting the pictures was from Second World War too...

    --
    Cheers,
    RoadkillBunny
  9. Way to go by gwernol · · Score: 5, Funny

    Great, now we've Slashdotted the Second World War. Do you have any idea what we might have done to history? Doesn't anyone watch quality movies like Timeline anymore?

    --
    Sailing over the event horizon
  10. uhm, by relrelrel · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just so everyone knows, the website: (http://www.evidenceincamera.co.uk/) has not been slashdotted, it isn't online yet, I went there about 3 days ago and it was the exact same.

    --
    --- any post that takes longer than 20 seconds to write, isn't worth writing
    1. Re:uhm, by LearnToSpell · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, that's stupid. How can we slashdot it when it's not even up yet? *sigh* I'll just keep clicking reload until it's up and I can't connect, I guess. At least we'll be able to smash it when the dupe story comes along tomorrow.

  11. Re:Dear Trolls by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's a reason they use AC for their trolling: being cowards, they prefer anonymity.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  12. Hey - there's uncle Martin by rcpitt · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I predict that there will be a budding hobby of trying to identify people in shots that are close enough.

    I expect the war games people will have a field day with all this stuff.

    --
    Been there, done that, paid for the T-shirt
    and didn't get it
  13. It's not slashdotted by bobbabemagnet · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those of you who didn't read the article, it says the archive will be opened on Monday. That's tomorrow. Don't get your knickers in a twist, just come back tomorrow and see it.

  14. Visuals? by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Interesting


    This would be truly amazing (especially for WW2 history buffs) since the only images ever seen of the conflict from non-participants have always been from a first-person cameraman (possibly staged) perspective (or fighter/bomber cams).

    I want to see the Russian move into Berlin from above.

    What will be the resolution of these photos?

  15. Re:High resolution??? by scrote-ma-hote · · Score: 3, Informative
    You realise resolution has a lot to do with resolving power, which in turn has a lot to do with optics.

    In this context it refers to how well you can tell two pieces of information apart at a distance (there's probably a correct definition, but I can't be bothered finding it).

    dictionary.com: 6. The fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an image, as on a video display terminal.

    Like a lot of other terms, the original meaning has been taken by computers and placed somewhat out of the context it was originally used for.

  16. Checking for unexploded ordinance by sam0ht · · Score: 5, Interesting

    These pics could be useful for people who want to check for unexploded bombs. If you see a line of craters with a gap, the gap is likely as not the location where one fell into the earth and didn't go off. So if they include the results of bombing runs, it could be useful.
    I had a friend who did this, inspecting WW2 photos for signs of unexploded bombs for property companies.

    1. Re:Checking for unexploded ordinance by toxic666 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dude, you obviously know little about UXO. It may be one tool, but it is not reliable in making determinations about UXO. At best, this is a limited tool for only one source of UXO.

      Most of the UXO they deal with in Europe is artillery shells and mines, and they do not have any kind of regular pattern.

      Talk to one of the large group of Belgian engineers who are still disposing of it. And not just WWII aerial bombs, but artillery from BOTH World Wars. Including the gift that keeps on giving, chemical munitions. The mines were concealed in the first place.

      Most UXO is found the old fashioned way -- farmers and construction workers who call it in.

    2. Re:Checking for unexploded ordinance by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Most unexploded ordnance is found the old fashioned way"

      When it stops being unexploded?

  17. Not just europe... by Cyno01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A few months ago i had my senior pictures taken by this little old guy with a terrible tupee, but while he was setting up his equiptment he was telling me about how after high school(he graduated from the same school as me) he joined the navy as an ariel photographer for the pacific campaign. I guess he flew missions for mapping iwo jima and a few other of the key islands. It was interesting to hear about to say the least, to bad this is /.d, but form the other posts i assume its all european photos.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  18. Re:Any pictures of Dresden, Germany? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dresden was a strategic military target in so many ways that you dishonour the memory of your father with your pathetic revisionism.

    Also I think you'll find that Britain dropped lots of those bombs too, not just the US.

    Large scale terror bombing was invented by the Luftwaffe.
    Presumably you don't put their raids in the same category as the US/UK raids on your father's home because the targets were mere untermenschen?

    I'm glad your father died before he spawned more garbage like yourself.

  19. This is their server's finest hour! by Monkey+Liar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Never has so much bandwidth been sought by so many, from so few.

    --
    He who fights with Monkeys must take it upon himself not to become a Monkey.
  20. Re:High resolution??? by rcpitt · · Score: 2, Informative
    The optics back then rival all but the absolute best now - and because color was not an issue, the film was first class too. The other thing to remember is that most of this stuff was not 35mm - it was at worst 120/620 (roll film) in something like a Roliflex or it was "gun camera" stock which was longer rolls of similar size - between 6 and 10 times the size of 35mm or larger.

    For those who have never seen the results of a large (or even medium) format B&W camera you're in for a surprise - the grain size is smaller, the continuous tone is better (than color) and the results astounding.

    --
    Been there, done that, paid for the T-shirt
    and didn't get it
  21. From your own link by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the section asking if the bombing was justified:

    One popular charge against the bombing is that the city was not a military target. However, other evidence suggests otherwise; The city contained the Zeiss-Ikon optical factory and the Siemens glass factory (both of which were entirely devoted to manufacturing military gunsights). The immediate suburbs contained factories building components of radars and electronics, and fuses for anti-aircraft shells. Other factories produced gas masks, engines for Junkers aircraft and cockpit parts for Messerschmitt fighters. After the attack, Germany was to claim that Dresden's industry was only making civil goods, a notion which much of the world accepted, and still accepts, as true.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:From your own link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dresden raid, on the other hand, killed 25.000 - 30.000

      The Germans killed 30,000 civilians in a terror attack on Rotterdam. The Germans opened their campaign on Stalingrad with a bombing raid which killed 30,000 in three days. Auschwitz killed 7000 people per day, or one Dresden per week. The Soviets lost an average of 10,000 soldiers per day on the Eastern front.

      The siege of Leningrad starved two million civilians, including the shelling of refugee convoys of women and children. Several million civilians were killed in China (we'll never know exactly how many). Six million civilians were killed in Poland, and between 15 and 20 million in Russia.

      Total casualties in WWII averaged about 30,000 every single day. 60% of them were civilian. Welcome to full-scale, modern, industrial slaughter, in which a Dresden is practically routine.

  22. They kept that well hidden. by rufus_tuesday · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a former student of the University of Keele, I am shocked and stunned that the place is actually home to something interesting! For those who've never been, Keele is a village on top of a hill with a University which was built on the land of an old RAF site, hence the link with Kew in this case I would guess. It's not exactly the centre of the universe. Other features of note include a nearby motorway services and the fact that it was where 'A very peculiar practice' http://www.phill.co.uk/comedy/practice/ was filmed (starring Peter Davison, later of Dr Who fame).

    1. Re:They kept that well hidden. by Adlopa · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, two mentions of Stoke in one story on ./ in one day. As I live and breathe...

  23. Re:Any pictures of Dresden, Germany? by Cnik70 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Remind me once again, who declared war on who first? I think you'll find that Germany declared war on the US first. And Germany was the nation that started the bombings of civilian targets with their campaign on London.

    --
    -Cnik
  24. Axis Powers Reaped What They Sowed by reallocate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "He started it" carries a lot of weight when Western civilization is at stake.

    If the Germans had not placed Hitler in power, if the Germans had not sustained him in power, if Hitler had not plunged Europe into a war of conquest and genocide, then not a single Allied bomb would have ever fallen on German territory.

    To use another cliche, you reap what you sow.

    Hitler and the other fascists, including those ruling Japan, had to be stopped, at any cost. The cost of defeat was unthinkable.

    Trying to take the moral high ground in war is pointless. Death is death, regardless of motive. But, that is no reason to avoid fighting to win.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:Axis Powers Reaped What They Sowed by random_static · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If the Germans had not placed Hitler in power, if the Germans had not sustained him in power, if Hitler had not plunged Europe into a war of conquest and genocide, then not a single Allied bomb would have ever fallen on German territory.

      true, but that still seems to me like an awfully thin justification for war crimes.

      maybe it's just that i have a strange viewpoint on this; i'm mainly interested in the morals of violence and what should be counted as a "war crime", and why; blaming the deaths of some number of thousands of noncombatant civilians on how their country made the wrong guy boss a decade earlier just seems like a stretch.

      Hitler and the other fascists, including those ruling Japan, had to be stopped, at any cost. The cost of defeat was unthinkable.

      entirely true, and this comes closer to an explanation for the atrocities in question. still, i'm unconvinced that it's much of a moral (or legal) justification; i'm not convinced somebody should be let off the hook for mass murder just because they can claim that, well, if we'd lost then such-and-such worse atrocity would have resulted. that's very likely true, but does it make the atrocity in question necessary or justified?

      Trying to take the moral high ground in war is pointless. Death is death, regardless of motive. But, that is no reason to avoid fighting to win.

      i agree enthusiastically; i am, as it were, merely bickering about what moves should be considered legal and proper in the fight, and why. though it is, of course, an entirely academic dispute - the winners will decide what counted as fair, and that'll be that, just as it always has been.

    2. Re:Axis Powers Reaped What They Sowed by mce · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Hitler and the other fascists, including those ruling Japan, had to be stopped, at any cost. The cost of defeat was unthinkable.

      Dresden, generally considered to be one of Europe's most beautiful cities before it was totally destroyed in a single night and in addition not at all a military target, was bombed on February 13, 1945. By then, allied defeat itself was unthinkable and its cost no longer an issue. By then it was the cost of victory that was the issue. In my view, the destruction of Dresden was, and will forever remain, a war crime.

      Please help funding the reconstruction of Dresden's worldfamous Frauenkirche.

  25. How about... by seanvaandering · · Score: 2, Informative

    We call this "pre-slashbombing" because hey --- none of us really read the articles and know that the server isn't really online! I'm sure the people over in the UK right now are just laughing their asses off looking at all the requests to the server and saying "Americans..."

    One thing, it just moves me to look at that BBC picture of Auswitz with the smoke coming up and knowing what the smoke stack represents. Unbelievable. It just gives me a new respect for what those people really went through, and thanking my lucky stars I was born now and not then.

  26. How's this Insightful ? by apankrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "They committed senseless crimes, so we responded the same way" - this is pretty lousy argument if you think about it for a second.

    --
    3.243F6A8885A308D313
  27. Dresden, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm an American (family arrived well before the Declaration of Indenpendence even), but my fellow Americans here who speak so boldly about German atrocities against England, or make comments like "war is hell" with regard to American strikes against places like Dresden, are sadly lacking a good understanding of history. I can't blame them though, as American history texts have a very different view of the war than those found in Europe.

    Having studied in Germany for a while, I can assure my fellow countrymen that you have no idea just how appalling it is what we did to Germany.

    Yes, what the Germans did to London was very, very bad. Inexcusable. But, they really just targetted London. The RAF was also quite able to defend the country.

    By the time the allies started bombing Germany, the Luftwaffe was already a wreck, completely unable to function. England suffered in London, but Germany suffered in Frankfurt, Muenchen, Berlin, Hamburg, and so on. Basically, every major city in Germany was levelled. Even many minor cities that just happened to be in the flight path of American bombers. A prime example of this is Muenster, where I studied. The only thing there is a nice university and a bunch of college kids, but it is the last/first city you come to on the border if you are flying from England. It was levelled just because it was a convenient place to drop bombs. As I mention above, by the time most of these bombing raids were occuring against Germany, the war was lost for them anyway, making the raids purely gratuitous.

    To this day, if you are doing any kind of construction in Germany, you have to hire a crew to come out and look for old unexploded bombs. Most Americans really don't understand that Dresden (as just one example of atrocity) was completely non-military. Some sources even indicate that many of the refugees probably weren't even Germans, but rather eastern europeans who were fleeing the Russians coming from the east.

    Then there is that matter of the 50 years of occupation after the war by the Russians that was allowed, even encouraged by the allies. Even though Germany is a united country now, its borders were shrunk significantly by the Russians - where Poland is today used to be a major German state, and historically, Poland was farther to the east. The allies let all this happen, because they wanted to turn Germany into a minor agricultural state.

    Much of the intrigue of the war was the training ground for later US foreign policy "techniques" in places around the world. We like to keep countries down in remarkable ways. In fact, it is quite appalling to watch what America is doing in Iraq right now, as it is basically the same kind of model we tried in Japan and Germany. Germans today hate our guts (as they should), and it is likely we will fail with Iraq due to the same mistakes we have perpetually made elsewhere. Unfortunately, we are poor students of history.

    I am constantly amazed by even my educated American friends who still feel that Germans "aren't sorry enough for the war." This is as silly as calling the French "surrender monekys." Remarks like these just make it that much clearer how little of European history and European affairs Americans understand. What's perhaps even more appaling, is that even after being involved in two european wars, and claiming to be allied with european powers since that time, Americans (especially our governemnt)*still* have no concept of these things.

    1. Re:Dresden, etc. by zata40fan · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The RAF was also quite able to defend the country

      Actually, the RAF had a very rough time of it in 1940 after Germany overran France. They were just barely able to defend their nation and came very close to capitulation. The RAF became stronger only after Hitler turned his attentions to Russia and when the US entered the war. The US was responsible for the destruction of the Luftwaffe and the British never would have made it without America's industrial ability.

      The entire Allied strategy in Western Europe before the landings in Normandy was to destroy Germany's ability to make war. This included destroying any and all factories, oil fields, railroads, and military targets. In doing this, the Allies achieved another goal: complete air superiority over the occupied nations by reducing the Luftwaffe to a token force.

      The Americans version of this strategy involved daylight precision bombing on actual military targets at hight cost through the use of the highly secret Norton bombsight. The American goal, at least was not to kill civilians but to destroy the German war machine. They did not have the same level of hatred for the Germans that the English did. Maybe if Germany had been able to bomb American cities, the US would have seen things differently then and now but the continental United States escaped all damage from both enemies in the war.

      The British thought daylight bombings were too costly in lives and material and stuck to night bombings throughout the war. This and the fact that they did not have the Norton bombsight did not led itself to bombing accuracy since all of Europe was under a strict blackout policy. As a payback to Hitler's official policy of bombing civilian targets like the city of London, the British went out of their way to terror bombing German cities with high explosives and incendiary bombs. This is a terrible policy which did not work on the Germans, just as it did not on the British who re-employed it. The civilians of Germany did not give up just as those of Britain did not. The UK has escaped the criticism it deserves for what they condoned during the war and the US has gotten far more criticism it deserves for it's part in the bombing of the most evil nation in modern history.

      As I mention above, by the time most of these bombing raids were occuring against Germany, the war was lost for them anyway, making the raids purely gratuitous.

      The war may have been lost for them but that doesn't mean the leaders of Germany believed it. The Germans did not surrender until May 8th, 1945 and I think you'll find none of those raids took place after that date. The Germans should have surrendered much earlier but Adolf Hitler would not allow it. The only reason Nazi Germany gave up when it did was because Hitler had committed suicide some days earlier and was no longer there to keep up the fight against the Allies who had clearly won months before. Right up to his last day, he was throwing lives away and he was the one completely responsible for all of those deaths.

      Even though Germany is a united country now, its borders were shrunk significantly by the Russians - where Poland is today used to be a major German state, and historically, Poland was farther to the east. The allies let all this happen, because they wanted to turn Germany into a minor agricultural state.

      Much of Prussia was taken away from Germany after WWI, the result of European rivalries and hatred, not because America had anything to do with it (remember, the US did not want anything to do with the Treaty of Versailles). That more of it was taken after WWII is regretable but that was a result of Russia being unreasonable and wanting more of a buffer between themselves and Western Europe.

      Germany is where it is today because of America. They would be that minor agricultural state you mentioned if America had not helped it become a world power again.

      The attack on Dresden has been justified by others and I won't defend it myself though I will say the 6 million+ people murdered by the Nazi regime and those who lived in occupied Europe at the time would most likely have had very little problem it.

    2. Re:Dresden, etc. by Eluding+Reality · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't disagree that the fire bombing of Dresden was an atrocity, but when Germany began bombing London, Britain was by no means able to defend itself

      At the start of the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe had 3000 planes within range of southern England, the RAF had 1200 planes for defense. At this point, pilots in the RAF were sent into combat roughly 4 weeks after first stepping into a plane. The Luftwaffe could put about 1600 planes in the air every day, more than the entire RAF even owned, the RAF could put 650-700 planes up if needed, although the bare minimum had to be scrambled to keep the reserves strong. The Luftwaffe began the campaign by targeting front line fighter fields and at the rate the bombers were coming in, ground crews simply could not keep runways operational. Had the battle continued as it was, the RAF would have been decimated within weeks.

      The twist however came when an RAF bomber squadron lost their way over Germany and reportedly bombed the outskirts of a major German city by accident. This enraged Hitler who immediately ordered ALL bombers to target London. This single command allowed the RAF to repair the runways and get their planes in the air, and it also meant that they knew where every single German plane was going to. Had Hitler not given that one command, it is likely that the RAF would have fallen in 2-3 weeks, German landing forces would cross the channel before winter set in and Britain too would have fallen. Had this happened, the US would not have been able to get involved and the world today would be a different place.

      I am British and I am not proud of Dresden, I know that I most likely would not be writing this today if it wasn't for the US and Russian forces, but personally I have the greatest amount of respect for the pilots of the Battle of Britain who were willing to face such over-whelming odds against an airforce that had already stormed through Europe and barely stopped for breath, yet they stood up to them and in the end did what was needed of them.

    3. Re:Dresden, etc. by dave420 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm not having a go at you, here. I'm saying this with all sincerety. I respect your views and opinions.

      Yes, London got an absolute shafting in WWII, but so did many other British towns and cities. Coventry, for example, was almost wiped off the map. As for the RAF being able to defend London, how do you defend against a ballistic missile, falling to earth at over 4,500 miles an hour? Tommy gun?

      "By the time the allies started bombing Germany, the Luftwaffe was already a wreck, completely unable to function"

      The Luftwaffe were not "completely unable to function" - in fact, they were very effective at shooting people down. Coupled with their use of the "X-Gerate" (sp?) system of overlapping radio beams for guidance, they were one of the most formidable air forces we've ever seen. (The x-gerate system was eventually reduced to useless when the Brits realised they could pick up the signal, pipe it underground and re-transmit from a new location, while jamming the original, causing Nazi bombers to drop their bombs in the sea and land in Ireland).

      One thing about the ethics of WWII - the Nazis had at their disposal weapons created specifically for civillian destruction, whereas bombing cities used standard military technology (albeit used in an unethical manner). The V1 & V2 had absolutely no military application (they had to be effectively hard-wired to hit London, so using them in the field or for mobile targets was useless). We were lucky the Germans didn't have time to use the V3 super-cannon (you can thank 617 squadron of Dam Busters fame for that score).

      And to top it all off, the guy who was responsible for Germany's vengeance weapons, Werner von Braun, went to head up NASA's space programme (doesn't that make you want to reach for your stars and stripes?)

      Yes, Germany shat on Britain. Yes, Britain and the US shat on Germany. The fact remains, however, it was German tanks rolling into Poland that kicked it off for us, not British tanks rolling into Germany. "An eye for an eye" conjures up images of immature retalliation, but in this case, it was kill or be killed. Germany had to be stopped.

      "The allies let all this happen, because they wanted to turn Germany into a minor agricultural state."

      I agree with that, with Germany's track record, letting Germany turn into an industrialised superpower immediately after WWII might not be the best option (especially for Poland).

      Anyone who's been to Germany, or even talked to a German knows Germany is sorry. Really sorry. They know people attach very harsh feelings to their country (calling the french surrender-monkeys isn't in a similar vein - they surrendered with a remarkable haste, after having the Nazis on the run. Go figure.)

      The one thing you hit the nail on the head with is America's foreign policy. To criticise it in middle america (or near any republican for that matter) instantly brands you a "commie marxist lefty pinko", yet it forces completely "un-american" principles upon the people it is in place to help. Ask an American what America is, and they're most likely to mention freedom and bravery. That freedom, however, is only afforded by America to Americans. All that talk of "every man is created equal" really doesn't ride. "Every American is created equal" is more apt, as even simple rights noted throughout time as being essential to human existance are systematically denied to those around the world who need them, on purely capitalist and commercial reasons. Whole wars are started at the behest of boards of directors. Millions of people are ear-marked as collateral damage before the bombers even leave the runway. If that's freedom, someone needs to get a new dictionary.

      I know Americans are good people. Their government relies on (the abundant) staunch nationalism present in the US to pull the wool over the eyes of the common American. Slap a flag on a MOAB and it becomes a symbol of national power (to be saluted, no doubt), not just another bit of

  28. Again from your link by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Informative

    At 7.30pm this second wave of planes arrived and the first of 500 tons of high explosives began to shake the city centre. Incendiaries, both exploding and non-exploding, continued to fall amid the bombs as a continuous stream of droning bombers passed over the city. Some were aimed at industrial targets around the city but many others concentrated on bombing the centre of the city ... to create a firestorm.

    The populace hid themselves in cellars, crypts and air raid shelters as the heart of the city was ripped apart above them. Others stayed in their homes, thousands of which were destroyed or damaged. The bombing continued, with the addition of oil and landmines.

    The landmines were particularly notorious. They took form of a large metal box suspended by a parachute which would slowly and silently fall and explode above ground level with a deafening roar totally flattening anything that lay under it. The church of St Nicholas in Radford was destroyed by one of these landmines leaving dead and injured in the crypt and only one course of stones standing.


    Just because the Germans were not quite as adapt at killing cilvilians does not mean they were not targeting them - you are implying the sort of smart-targeting in existance today but there was nothing of the sort back then.

    I am not sayng the the firebombing was a good idea, only that there was some military presence there (as there was in most any city of size in Germany) and this confuses the issue quite a bit more than your "revisionist history" comment would lead one to believe.

    I am half German myself and feel quite strongly that despite things like the Dresden firebombing, Germany was doing much worse things overall. Although not that many were killed in the Blitz, you forget that Hitler was fighting multiple countries and using similar civilian demoralizing tactitcs on everyone. They were just spread around more.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  29. get your credit card out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting



    i was there three days ago and there was a nice "shop" button on the menu,the site was dead then as the whole worlds media has been pluggin this all week.

    UK isn't like USA where all goverment data is free, (even though it was our taxes that payed for the data and in this case people died grrr)

    so i expect we (and everyone else) will have to pay to view them just like we did with the 1800 national census, we can't even get friggin weather data without paying for it, so ironicly we (us cheapo web developers) have to get it from the USA

    FFM

  30. Yes, they do show the Dresden firebombing by Quizo69 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I watched an article on this on the news last night, and they indeed showed aerial pictures of the Dresden firebombing, as well as D-Day, Pegasus Bridge and many other photos.

    I commented then to my wife that if Slashdot posted it, no one would see it until next week ;) Seems I was right....

    Incidentally it was interesting to see the Pegasus Bridge photo as I had not too recently played that level in Call of Duty!

    1. Re:Yes, they do show the Dresden firebombing by 4string · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you thought it was interesting to see the Pegasus Bridge Photos as they relate to the Game Call of Duty, get the movie "The Longest Day" (1962).
      The game is extremely similar to the movie, especially the part involving the Pegasus Bridge.

  31. US also used firebombing tactics by Gimble · · Score: 2, Informative

    As I saw on a Channel 4 (UK) Docu last night, the US also used firebombing techniques against Japan.

    100,000 were killed in one raid on Tokyo.

    See Bombing of Tokyo in World War II.