Canadian Military History Volume 18 Issue 3 Article 4 2009 Mass Bombing Some Moral and Historical Perspectives Donald M. Schurman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh Part of the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Donald M. Schurman "Mass Bombing Some Moral and Historical Perspectives." Canadian Military History 18, 3 (2009) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. : Mass Bombing Some Moral and Historical Perspectives Mass Bombing Some Moral and Historical Perspectives Donald M. Schurman Introduction especially the Second World War, Abstract: This paper is an account implies a luxury of means that we his paper was originally by a historian, who participated in (Sir Arthur Harris) did not have. the bombing of Germany (1944-45), delivered at and published by an My paper shows that. Harris, that T of attitudes towards the campaign International Peace Conference in Fiji on the part of military personnel at determined figure, kept himself and in January 1985. It was written long the time and since. It examines the his force just ahead of the Luftwaffe before the Canadian War Museum attitudes of the British Government and its ground support. My paper, was forced to debate the question and their military, and comments on dealing so much with attitude, just the way historians have responded to of the most appropriate manner in the evidence since 1945. The problem manages to include that fact. It which the contribution of Canadians of responsibility and justification is could, perhaps, be argued that more in Bomber Command should be presented in some of its aspects. The resources ought to have gone to the addressed. My interest in the subject treatment is a mixture of the personal navy. I do not argue it but as a naval was not to pronounce on the morals and the professional. historian the idea has attractions of the bombing of civilians, but to for me. On the other hand the idea try to pinpoint some of the thinking When I began the paper I saw it as that the invasion of France would that characterized the attitude of the an attempt to ask where the bomber have been successful, or that it Royal Air Force and Englishmen and offensive had come from, aside could even have been undertaken Canadians and their governments from the obvious one of tit for tat. without Bomber Command seems towards the campaign. As the paper The paper traces the development of wrong to me. My opinion is that shows, the Canadians were a part of the strategic bombing idea through without Harris’s successes the war the Royal Air Force. Quite apart from references to the First World War, would have had a much more integration of the Royal Canadian British air operations in the Middle wearing conclusion, to put it mildly. Air Force into the British service, the East in the 1920s, and the Spanish war Harris said, as I note in the paper, Canadian air force had not the means of 1936-9, and especially by reference that bombers won it. Surely they or capacity to deliver, by itself, a blow to the French airman and author did. However the moralists raise that would have crippled anything Antoine de St. Exupéry. I do ask the important questions. The problem significant in Germany. I think that question “what for,” but that does is that war is, as James Wolfe put it, crews were surprised by the now not imply any scholarly endorsement “an option of difficulties.” To debate very controversial Dresden Raid of of “Don’t let’s be beastly to the those difficulties is possible, it is not February 1945, but they did not object Germans” as Noel Coward wittily put possible to ignore them. Moral high to doing it. My reference to Kurt it as some sort of theological point. ground is a hard place to find in war. Vonnegut’s account of the Dresden That was not my idea then, nor is it However, Richard Overy’s careful raid is not an endorsement of him, now. book Why the Allies Won, comes but a deliberate use of his novelistic The fact is that any debate over closest to supplying the fine print for skill to focus attention when I was in how much force should be applied my generalizations. Fiji as a lecturer among an unknown at any time, in the middle of a war, audience. * * * * * Published© Canadian by Scholars Military Commons History @, Laurier,Volume 2009 18, Number 3, Summer 2009, pp.19-30. 19 1 Schurman - Mass Bombing.indd 19 10/6/2009 1:18:03 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 18 [2009], Iss. 3, Art. 4 RAF Lancasters bomb through cloud. Laurier Centre for Military Strategic and Disarmament Studies (LCMSDS) Photograph Collection Photograph Military and Disarmament Studies (LCMSDS) Laurier Centre for Strategic ertainly the most provocative to do. It might be well to remember ‘Americans have finally heard Cbook about mass bombing in the Buchenwald and Coventry too. about Dresden,’ said Rumfoord Second World War was written by the [a would-be military historian] American novelist Kurt Vonnegut. As Vonnegut repeatedly says, ‘So it twenty-three years after the raid. ‘A It was about Dresden, and entitled goes.’ lot of them know now how much Slaughterhouse Five.1 In it he quotes What Air Marshal Saundby said, worse it was than Hiroshima. So two military men commenting on among other things, was this: I’ve got to put something about it the raid on Dresden as presented in my book. From the official Air in the book by David Irving on the That the bombing of Dresden Force standpoint, it’ll all be new.’ same subject.2 They were Lieutenant- was a great tragedy none can ‘Why would they keep it a secret General Ira C. Eaker, USAF retired deny. That it really was a military so long?’ said Lily. and Air Marshal Sir Robert Saundby, necessity, few, after reading ‘For fear that a lot of bleeding KCB, KBE, DFC, AFC. He begins with this book, will believe. It was hearts,’ said Rumfoord, ‘might Eaker: one of those terrible things that not think it was such a wonderful sometimes happen in wartime, thing to do.’ I find it difficult to understand brought about by an unfortunate It was now that Billy Pilgrim spoke Englishmen or Americans who weep combination of circumstances. up intelligently. about enemy civilians who were Those who approved it were ‘I was there,’ he said.4 killed but who have not shed a tear neither wicked nor cruel, though for our gallant crews lost in combat it may well be that they were too I was there too. with a cruel enemy…I think it would remote from the harsh realities A subject that is cross-disciplinary have been well for Mr. Irving to have of war to understand fully the and one that takes an historian remembered, when he was drawing appalling destructive power of outside his accustomed accumulative the frightful picture of the civilians air bombardment in the spring and clinical or analytical roles invites killed at Dresden, that V-1s and V-2s of 1945. caution. However, it is my view were at that very time falling on ‘So it goes.’3 that it may be wise to let emotional England, killing civilian men, women overtones ply more freely than is and children indiscriminately, as Vonnegut later introduces this customary with historical papers if we 56330 AC Photo US Air Force they were designed and launched dialogue: are to get more balanced assessments https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol18/iss3/420 2 Schurman - Mass Bombing.indd 20 10/6/2009 1:18:03 PM : Mass Bombing Some Moral and Historical Perspectives from our consultations with the past. or even the United States in this to denounce mass bombing when Furthermore, it may be wise to look light then, nor do I now. However, it took place. Both during the war at the consequences of having great as for old veterans who look at any and after it Captain (later Sir) Basil technological capacities lying ready attempt to discuss their past as an Liddell Hart denounced this, what to hand in times of desperation. What attack on some sort of Holy Grail, he regarded as a retrograde method military men, politicians, and indeed and who regard criticism as some of warfare.6 I have remembered with populations do in these circumstances sort of treason, I have nothing to say some sense of frustrated misgiving seems to me to be eminently worthy except that it is 40 years on, and a new my own part in it. On the other hand of discussion in this nuclear age. generation must be served. I still remember my own comrades Indeed, it may be that the history of a On the other hand I have some with affection, and I attended a non-nuclear age may have something right to speak. I was a member of reunion of my own bomber “crew” to teach this present time. Finally, it the mass bombing forces in the war in 1984. I do differ from supporters should be said that this paper does against Hitler. I was at Dresden, of the bombing offensive in that I not search for scapegoats. It is not a overhead on its night of terror.5 do not resent present day attacks on rush to judgment.