Talk:Strategic bombing during World War II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.

deleted[edit]

I deleted this: "and schools. (rev) Laqueur, Walter; Baumel, Judith Tydor (2001). The Holocaust encyclopedia. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-08432-0. [page needed]{ (/ref) }" since the source posted doesn't say anything about schools.

Should we have a city countermeasures section?[edit]

The following first stag at a topic that I feel was seriously lacking in this article, is being censored.

This is it.

~~Perhaps. I would avoid getting into cold war preparations, even if some WW2 activities continue beyond 1945. The U.S. wasn't on the receiving end of strategic bombing (unless you count Japanese bomber balloons). The section might get a warmer reception if it opens with the preparations performed by countries that were attacked. Check the rest of the article to see if there are bits and pieces that can be moved to this new section. Information on industrial countermeasures could also beef your proposed section. The civilian part of things isn't my area of expertise so I can't be of much help to you. I am watching this page, so I can help with edits.~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtgelt (talkcontribs) 21:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Civilian countermeasures[edit]

During the 1940s and 1950s, neighborhoods such as Detroit, MI would practice blackout air raid drills. During this time, the city's Civil Defense workers would immediately activate the neighborhood air raid siren, and families would be required to do the following in order: 1. Shut off all appliances, such as stoves, ovens, furnaces; 2. Shut off valves for water and natural gas or propane, as well as disconnect electricity; 3. Close blackout curtains (plain black curtains that would block light from coming in or going out). This step was changed after the atomic age began, where white curtains began to be preferred as they reflect the thermal radiation of the bomb to a greater degree(see anti-flash white), black curtains were used in WWII to prevent any airborne enemies from seeing light from windows; 4. Get to a public shelter, such as a bomb shelter, or the household basement, and stay there until the local police or block warden dismissed the blackout.[1][2]

In Germany, blockhouses were built in cities, such as Trier, these Hochbunker/ "high-rise" bunkers were a peculiarly German construction, with no equivalents of hochbunkers in the cities of the Allied countries.[3]

Detroit is not important--the goal was only to maintain morale not protect against bombers (look at the map). Even better look, at Richard Overy's new book on the Bombers and the Bombed which has very full coverage on European civil defense. Rjensen (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I know detroit was not very important, however I was simply providing a reader with the type of countermeasures that were practised in a nation of the war. If your cited book has a summary of the typical steps taken, as I detailed above, then great we should include that ref instead, what page is that on? Secondly, blackouts weren't done for mere morale boosting reasons, it's inconceivable that being in pitch darkness boosted morale one iota, the countermeasures really did work. Lastly, just for confirmation: you do agree with a short "countermeasures" section being in the article?
86.44.234.63 (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Overy has several hundred pages on how the people on the ground reacted. the Germany civil defence was superb. other countries like Italy pathetic. browse it at Richard Overy (2014). The Bombers and the Bombed: Allied Air War Over Europe 1940-1945. Penguin Group US.  Rjensen (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Civilian responses to strategic bombing should be sourced from books written by mainstream historians talking about measures taken in Berlin, London, Tokyo, etc. A notional section about "Civilian countermeasures" should discuss civilian volunteerism, ground observer programs, firefighting programs, the establishment of bomb shelters, blackout programs, and the clearing of firebreaks in cities in which buildings were torn down and both businesses and residents were displaced. There is absolutely no reason to talk about exercises taken in Chicago, nor is there reason to mention German blockhouses which were not civilian. Binksternet (talk) 00:02, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I would, moreover, beware of mentioning actions in Detroit (or anywhere in the U.S.), since those will, in the main, be reactions to Soviet bombing in the '50s, not the subject of this page.
Outside that, however, I'd agree with Bink. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The Second World War German Hochbunkers (blockhouses) were build for several reasons and one of them was as civilian air-raid shelters. This is an article on Strategic bombing during World War II cold war defensive measures are better placed in other articles, indeed while a summary sentence or two can provide hooks in this article for links into other articles, details of civil defence measures such as the different types of air-raid shelters are better placed in more specialised articles. -- PBS (talk) 03:05, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes thank you PBS, they were sometimes built for civilians, I understand the confusion though as unbeknownst to me, my earlier link was to the military-centric blockhouse article which is without any mention to civilian uses. The civilian Hochbunker at Trier was indeed the buildings I was referring to, I'm glad at least 1 person here is knowledgeable of these things to be able to catch that. I also completely agree with you that a long winded section that covers firebreaks etc. is not really warranted, that's why I added the see also tags, in an attempt to keep it short. The perhaps odd Detroit pick was simply because I was looking for a description of the generic civilian countermeasures, typical in all combatant countries, to give readers an idea of what most cities at war planned for. Furthermore the Detroit references and countermeasures deal with 1944, so they're not really Cold War related as suggested, I simply added that bit about Blackout curtains being replaced with white ones as the Blackout curtains at Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually made the likelihood of fire higher than it would have otherwise been/they became counter-productive once WWII entered the nuclear war age. If anyone has a better alternative to Detroit being the generic case, then great, even better!
The only addition I would argue for the above short section is probably a sentence about civilian evacuations of cities, as arguably that had the greatest effect at reducing Strat bomb casualties.
A nice concise countermeasures section is all I think this article is seriously missing.
86.41.239.213 (talk) 08:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

United States Bombing of Japan[edit]

This section of the article is the only one that has a conclusion statement:

"On 15 August 1945, Japan announced its surrender to the Allied Powers, signing the Instrument of Surrender on 2 September which officially ended World War II. Furthermore, the experience of bombing led post-war Japan to adopt Three Non-Nuclear Principles, which forbade Japan from nuclear armament."

I am not disputing that the above statement is a fact. I am suggesting that it is superfluous to this particular article. Note that the sections on the aerial bombing of every other nation in the rest of the article have no conclusive statements. The section on Italy does not end with their overthrow of Mussolini. The German section does not end with signing of an unconditional surrender. If you look at the article on submarine warfare,there is no conclusion statement.

The issue is, why is it here and only here in this context? The statement, especially since no other section on bombing has a similar conclusive statement, infers that the nuclear bombardment of Japan caused Japanese surrender. Inferring the cause and effect of Japanese surrender goes beyond the scope of this article.

I agree that nuclear bombs contributed to Japanese surrender. The bombs probably were their number one concern at the moment of decision. However, there are other contributors. These contributors and conditions are dealt with in Wiki article "The Surrender of Japan."

I highly recommend striking "On 15 August 1945, Japan announced its surrender to the Allied Powers, signing the Instrument of Surrender on 2 September which officially ended World War II." The second sentence seems very awkward "Furthermore, the experience of bombing led post-war Japan to adopt Three Non-Nuclear Principles, which forbade Japan from nuclear armament." It probably should be reworded or dropped.

The other alternative is to write a conclusion for every nation. I recommend against that. The results of bombing campaigns is a highly contentious issue. Trying to draw such conclusions will undoubtedly open a can of worms. Again I see conclusion statements as being beyond the scope of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtgelt (talkcontribs) 18:19, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ "The arsenal of democracy, Michigan historical museum, Michigan Department of Natural Resources". 
  2. ^ "MICHIGAN CIVIL DEFENSE MUSEUM, online historical museum". 
  3. ^ "Hochbunker". 7grad.org. Retrieved 2010-06-24.