Could Auschwitz have been stopped.

[miked10270 0]

I sincerely hope that everyone has seen the coverage of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.


LEST WE FORGET!

An interesting point was the speech by the Israeli President... The suggestion that the Allies knew what was happening there (true), and that the Allies could have stopped or at least slowed the holocaust there by bombing the rail tracks. The inmates at Auschwitz heard & saw Allised bombers flying past to other targets (also true).

THis allegation puzzled me & propmpted me to look into WWII bombers again.

I don't think that either the US 8th Air Force flying B-17s & B-24s, nor the Raf flying Lancasters will take it as an insult if I say they were not the most precision of instruments. Despite the use of Pathfinders, Oboe, Norden Bombsights, etc... It was still a matter of "area" bombing, not striking pinpoint targets.

I then looked at the accepted "master" of pinpoint bombing of the time, the DH98 Mosquito. I also looked at a map of Eurpoe & measured some distances.

From there, I found that a Mosquito raid on AUschwitz would be impossible; a Mosquito NFII, which was obviously less laden & had greater range than a laden bomber, could carry out a 20 minute patrol in the area of Bornholm in the Baltic (933Km). Auschwitz was 1,377Km away. - so It'd be a one way trip for Mossies.

B-17s (just) & B-24s (easily) could have reached out to Auschwitz, but as I've said, they're AREA bombers, not precision strike bombers.

So... The questions:

Would YOU have authorised AREA bombing of Auschwitz, knowing what was happening there?

Would YOU divert area bombers from a strike on German cities & manufacturing in favour of strikes on Auschwitz?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[TomAiello 25]

I think that knowing what was going on there would have redoubled my resolve to win the war at all costs. If the generals were telling me that taking out other targets would end the war sooner, I'd probably have gone with that. While that might sound cold blooded, I just think I would have been determined to win the war as soon as possible, whatever that took (yes, even if it took letting the camps continue to operate--disrupting their operations during the war vs. ending their operations by winning the war sooner, I'd take winning sooner).

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[DZJ 0]

Given the operational practicalities, I think I'd have come to the same conclusion as the decision-makers of the day - the best way to save lives at Auschwitz (and everywhere else, let's not forget - there's more to the Holocaust than that one camp) was to win the war as fast as possible.

[mikkey 0]

From what I have seen and read, there was broad skepticism amongst the allies in regard to the reports from the camps. It really only dawned on them how bad it was when the camps got liberated.

If the people in the right places really had understood (and believed) what was going on, they might just have bombed some of the camps.

Here is an article about the issue:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4175045.stm

Quote

Recently published reconnaissance images show the British photographed the camp from the air in August that year - suggesting that by 1944 the RAF had the capability to reach Auschwitz with bombers.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[diablopilot 2]

I think it's pretty easy to arm chair quarterback anything after the game.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

I think it's pretty easy to arm chair quarterback anything after the game.

It's always easy, but also fun...
My dad (who was 4 when the "heavy" bombing started to occur all over France) would tell me that every time the sirens would go off in 1944 (he grew up +/- 3 miles away from a railtrack), his mom would grab him and they would start running for their lives (not quite sure where, but they were running)! Carpet bombing from high altitude was quite common then I believe. He does not hold a grudge towards those dropping the bombs. He's quite grateful I recon...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[miked10270 0]

I'm not looking for any "armchair quarterbacking".

The question is "What would y'all as individuals have done?"

The extermination camps were in Poland. It's out of range of your "precision" bombers but in range of "area" bombers.

Would YOU have area bombed Auschwitz etc... Or would you have left them to operate?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

If Auschwitz or any other genocide were to happen again... it would consume many many lives before it would be stopped.

Too many cooks spoil the broth--Too many countries want their say in the UN so nothing decisive can ever be done. Look at Rawanda--everyone (including the US) sat around with their fingers up their noses whining about sovereignty. Same with Saddam when he gassed the Kurds. Or the Chinese in Tiananmen Square.

With the UN and Europe wanting the world to act together with one voice.... while resolutions are being debated in safe surroundings thousands of miles away, bold actions are watered down over days, weeks, months to make everyone happy... thousands or millions will die waiting.

History repeats itself because people are stupid and strong governments are weakened by all the others. If in any of those cases above, if any one country had ignored the UN and went immediately to stop what was going on--They would have been condemned by the rest of the world.

Look at Saddam. He was screwing with the UN for 10+ years, All the UN did was make him rich with the Oil for Food program. We go with the Brits, Aussies, Poles, and some other friends... and we are made to be the bad guys. There is more concern over Saddams rights than those of his victims. That is the truly disgusting thing.

No, you can count on it. Auschwitz will happen again. Maybe not on that scale. But it will happen again... and again... and again.

Edit to add: Sorry, misread a bit... to answer the question. No I would not have sent a fleet of bombers to drop thousands of bombs in hopes possibly hitting a few rail tracks. All the resources were necessary to end the war to stop ALL of the camps, not just one. And they are applying today's bombing capabilities to those of bombers 60 years ago. The only way to have stopped it would have been to stop the pacifism and engaged Germany the very day the first Nazi boot stepped over the border into another country.

[slug 1]

There's more than one way to Bomb the railroad system that served the concentration camps.

A goups of terrorist/freedom fighters/traitors could have sabatoged the RR system with IED's.

Don't have any info if this was attempted or possiable.

There is also a debate about who knew what when. Did the world outside the camps know what was going on? Could a concentrated effort of sabatoge on the camps infra structure made a difference? I really don't know.

Will something like the C.camps happen again? After reading about "Ethnic cleansing" in Bosnia and the mass killing in cambodia, Rawanda, among others. It does seem to be dark side of human nature, and it will probably happen again

R.I.P.

[Tonto 1]

Probably?

Sudan, Darfur... It's happening NOW. Only 70 000 people so far - but right NOW.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Ron 7]

Quote

From what I have seen and read, there was broad skepticism amongst the allies in regard to the reports from the camps. It really only dawned on them how bad it was when the camps got liberated

Yep, I don't think people knew how bad it was....I have been told that the Allies march a bunch of people from local towns through the camps...They knew of the killings, but even they didn't know the scope.

Don't forget that the red cross had been inspecting camps. The reports were not the truth. The Germans made the camps look nice...Even with the Jews having money and shops, even with a theater. Of course as soon as the red cross left the killing began again. It should be noted that when the red cross was coming the Germans stepped up the killings before they got there to make the camp less populated and to kill of the sick....so the red cross actually caused more killings.

Inspections don't work well.

Quote

Recently published reconnaissance images show the British photographed the camp from the air in August that year - suggesting that by 1944 the RAF had the capability to reach Auschwitz with bombers.

Recon planes are lighter and packed with fuel not bombs...

Just because we could pack a plane with a camera does not mean we could take enough bombs to do any good.

Me?

Given what I know now, I would try to bomb the rail on the way to a bigger target. I would not make it a top priority since the best way to ave them all was end the war.

If I had the intel they had then...Id have done nothing but tried to end the war.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[penniless 0]

Quote

The only way to have stopped it would have been to stop the pacifism and engaged Germany the very day the first Nazi boot stepped over the border into another country.

Who's job would that be, and why?

[penniless 0]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Recently published reconnaissance images show the British photographed the camp from the air in August that year - suggesting that by 1944 the RAF had the capability to reach Auschwitz with bombers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Recon planes are lighter and packed with fuel not bombs...

The best WWII recon planes were DH Mosquitos, stripped of all armament and unnecessary hardware, flew very fast and very high. The cameras were heavy. In 1944 the overwhelming preoccupation of the recon squadrons was finding V1 and V2 production sites and launch sites.

Photo-recon played a very important and all too frequently overlooked role in winning WWII.

[AMax 0]

Quote

Probably?

Sudan, Darfur... It's happening NOW. Only 70 000 people so far - but right NOW.

t

The public opinion is pretty much formed and influenced by mass media. Everybody knows about Saddam. I wonder how many know what happened between tutsi and hutu in Rwanda.
There was no need for precise bombing or large scale military operation to stop the genocide, but the whole world was watching and letting them kill.

[Nightingale 0]

I wouldn't have diverted bombs to auschwitz. simply because if that camp was inaccessible, the trains would have been re-routed to other camps. Auschwitz was not the only camp, just the most well known.

Best way to help was to end the war as fast as possible.

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

Quote

The only way to have stopped it would have been to stop the pacifism and engaged Germany the very day the first Nazi boot stepped over the border into another country.

Who's job would that be, and why?

Who: Anyone willing to take it on. Why:Because it needs to be done.
Unfortunately, something like that will never happen.

[miked10270 0]

"A goups of terrorist/freedom fighters/traitors could have sabatoged the RR system with IED's.

Don't have any info if this was attempted or possible."

The possibility of dropping weapons into the camps was considered but rejected for a variety of reasons.

Guerrilla incursion was ruled out after what happened with the Reinhard Heydrich assassinstion & what happened at Lidice.

It really came down to area bombing the death camps (with the attendant indiscriminate loss of life) or leaving the camps to operate. As an example, the area bombing of Peenemunde caused far greater loss of life to the attendant forced labour camp!

On the other hand, the extermination camps were running at full capacity. Would killing the inmates along with the staff while heavily damaging the camp & slowing the overall death rate be worthwhile?

It's not supposed to be an easy question - it was the question faced.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The only way to have stopped it would have been to stop the pacifism and engaged Germany the very day the first Nazi boot stepped over the border into another country.

Who's job would that be, and why?

Who: Anyone willing to take it on. Why:Because it needs to be done.
Unfortunately, something like that will never happen.

Bear in mind that the Nazis didn't launch full tilt into the extermination programme - they used "Salami" tactics; chipping away at "sub-human" rights bit by little bit. The "final solution" wasn't proposed until the Nazis had been in power for 7 years. Kristallnacht in 1930 provoked a very negative response in the German population.

As Tony Blair said; "We remember above all that the Holocaust did not start with a concentration camp. It started with a brick through the shop window of a Jewish business, the desecration of a synagogue, the shout of racist abuse on the street."

Who would have "reacted" to that? THere were numerous assassination attempts on Hitler but by the time the true nature of his regime was known, a successful assassinationattempt could have tirned him into a martyr.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[slug 1]

Quote

Probably?

Sudan, Darfur... It's happening NOW. Only 70 000 people so far - but right NOW.

t

Hi Tonto

Our media barely reports this info. Where's the UN?
Or other countries that has the military power to intercede.

We even read that some countries have paid "private contractor's" to to put down rebel forces?

Any idea's on a solution? Sounds like the world is sitting on their hands again.


R.I.P.

[ZegeunerLeben 0]

Quote

Guerrilla incursion was ruled out after what happened with the Reinhard Heydrich assassinstion & what happened at Lidice.

>>The assination attempt against Heydrich by SAS trained Czechs in 1942 was ultimately successful, despite the fact that Heydrich managed to chase after them with his pistol. The British government discontinued partisan activities in the face of the brutality of Nazi reprisals, but I believe the American OSS continued operations in Europe till the end of the war.

[marcandalysse 0]

Replying as someone who lost a huge percentage of my family in the camps....

Allied leaders knew about the attacks on Jews throughout the thirties, and still made it tough on Jews to immigrate to America....Some of my relatives managed to get to Canada, then moved to the US.....The Govt could have acted BEFORE the war!

Off the subject somewhat, but related to technology and the Holocaust....a spooky read was the book about Thomas Watson and IBM's ties to the Nazis. They supplied the punchcard machines and processors for the Nazis to keep track of their Jewish and other 'unwanted' population....

marc

[Tonto 1]

Quote

As Tony Blair said; "We remember above all that the Holocaust did not start with a concentration camp.

And Tony Blair would know, coming from the UK. They were the ones to 1st build concentration camps.

Concentration camps in which 25000 Afrikaaner women and children died of typhoid, dysentry and starvation during the 2nd South African war just 28 years before the Nazi's had the same idea.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Tonto 1]

Dunna dude. Just google Sudan Genocide and see what you get..

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[DZJ 0]

Quote

Quote

As Tony Blair said; "We remember above all that the Holocaust did not start with a concentration camp.

And Tony Blair would know, coming from the UK. They were the ones to 1st build concentration camps.

Concentration camps in which 25000 Afrikaaner women and children died of typhoid, dysentry and starvation during the 2nd South African war just 28 years before the Nazi's had the same idea.

t

Actually, the first concentration camps appeared during the Spanish-American War, which predates the Boer War.

[DZJ 0]

Quote

The assination attempt against Heydrich by SAS trained Czechs in 1942 was ultimately successful, despite the fact that Heydrich managed to chase after them with his pistol.

The Heydrich assassins were trained by the SOE, not the SAS.