3 ms·
> So all the allied bombings in ww2 were pointless? More bombs were dropped in Vietnam. Pointless was your word but to address the GP, how effective was that m
by magicalist 5y ago
> So all the allied bombings in ww2 were pointless?
More bombs were dropped in Vietnam. Pointless was your word but to address the GP, how effective was that militarily? Stationed artillery is not an occupation.
- melling 5y agoTo answer his question and not provide a meaningless comparison, YES ALL THOSE BOMBINGS IN WW2 were effective. Now, if someone wants to digress into Vietnam…
- heavenlyblue 5y ago> YES ALL THOSE BOMBINGS IN WW2 were effective. How exactly?
- Timshel 5y agoSome strategic ones at least appear to have ben effective: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_campaign_of_World_War_II https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_campaign_of_World_War_II Not do much for area bombing (cf https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_Wor...). In both case we are talking of multiple years of bombing.
- heavenlyblue 5y agoSo not all of them were effective, and the second link specifically mentions bombings of Dresden and Hamburg as controversial. And it’s very easy to be effective at bombing oil installations as they are not a part of the city.
- hackeraccount 5y agoVietnam probably was pointless because they couldn't bomb where all the weapons were coming from. Bombing Germany in WWII was less pointless because bombs could have an effect on German war material production - and Germany had to defend it like it did. At the end of the day North Vietnam was getting the means to fight it's war from abroad and bombing it back to the proverbial stone age wouldn't stop those weapons from coming in country.