Bombing of Berlin

[Mike K]

Many of the RAF aircrews were kids barely out of school. I did read somewhere, somebody aged 28 volunteered for aircrew but the RAAF medical doctor said to the chap "you are too old for aircrew we prefer the younger ones " Many teenagers think they are invincible and they are generally more willing to take risks , by the time you reach late twenties you become a little wiser and more cautious, this is probably why they deliberately chose the 18 to 20 year olds for aircrew training.

The Lancaster pilot ( David Scholes ) I met in Tassie years ago spent his twenty first birthday on a flying op.

The Germans had school kids on the flak batteries passing ammunition to the gunners. The RAF were trying to start a firestorm in Berlin as they had done in Hamburg but Berlin was more spread out with wider streets. By good luck more than anything else a ball bearing factory in Berlin was hit and badly damaged, Albert Speer had a major tantrum over that.

[Ed Storey]

A visit to the Berlin 1939-1945 War Cemetery quickly brings home the price paid during the Allied bomber offensive.

IMG_3821 copy.jpg

IMG_3831 copy.jpg

[Lang]

The elephant in the room of course is the morality question of carpet bombing civilian populations. It is very difficult 80 years later to put ourselves into the shoes of those at the time.

The British offensive was primarily aimed at the cities and inaccuracy of individual night bombing guaranteed the target of a "ball bearing works" resulted in vast areas of urban dwellings being obliterated. Fire storms caused by incendiary attacks in such places as Hamburg and Dresden could not be interpreted as anything other than a public slaughter. Churchill and Harris freely advertised their aim to terrify the civilian population into submission.

If the jolly British singing Pack Up Your Troubles in the London underground could not be demoralised and in fact were made more determined, the Germans were highly unlikely to have been reduced to submission. It is hard to escape the modern concept of terrorism.

Few of the crews going out day after day allowed these questions to affect their duty but many carried the guilt for the rest of their lives. They are all gone now but those of us who knew and talked with the WW2 crews know a lot of them struggled to justify many missions. Guilt played a big part in many post-war mental problems.

Wars are a rotten business as the people of Syria, Libya, Gaza, Afghanistan,Yemen, half of Africa etc etc can tell you this very moment.

Lang

[Lang]

Robert

I did not wish to offend anyone with my comments and do understand the military a little with 15 years in the trade.

It was more a matter of scale and risk that I was comparing Afghanistan with Bomber Command. Canada had around 50,000 serve in RCAF and RAF during WW2 and lost around 10,000 people in 5 years. Canada has had about the same number serve in Afghanistan and lost around 170 people in 17 years. These are operational and training deaths and neither of these figures includes normal "industrial" accidents eg traffic and machinery accidents which, with modern safety regulations and health care, makes the WW2 figures for such events seem really bad.

The huge numbers involved in WW2 and the guaranteed horrific casualty rate on every mission, every time you went out made bomber command unique in the allied major operations (the U-Boat crews and the atrocious conditions for both sides on the Eastern Front are another story). There was no end in sight and they were there for the duration if they survived - do your allotted missions, have a break, then back into it again.

At least the Afghanistan people know they are not there forever and the casualty rate is minuscule compared with bomber command. This does not reduce the courage and dedication of the people there nor reduce individual experiences.

Many Australian soldiers have 3 and 4 six month tours of Afghanistan under their belt but they have good breaks in between and are monitored closely for any PTSD signs and get early treatment and are not thrown back to the wolves like the WW2 aircrew. Many are keen to go back because it is what they signed up for and the others go because it is their duty. These multiple extended "peacetime" deployments take a huge toll on relationships and family life. I should imagine the other nations in Afghanistan have similar monitoring and problems.

The 20 year olds of 2018 are no less dedicated or courageous than the 20 year olds of 1943 but their situation is vastly different. It is investigation into the historical lack of support for WW1, WW2 and particularly Vietnam, mental problems that has allowed us to treat the current people - for exactly the same - problems.

One other point is that all? the people in Afghanistan come from professional regular armies or volunteers from an active reserve. It is their chosen career and when they signed up they knew dying was part of the job description. In WW2 most nations fighting in Europe had majority conscripted (not Australia) forces and the vast majority of the volunteer group had no military interest but were there to do the right thing then go back to their lives. It does not change the effects upon the individual but you can not say circumstances are identical for every period in history.

Nothing new as the Romans and armies before them were full of people with PTSD but it has taken us 10,000 years to actually try to do something about it.

As I said, wars are a most unpleasant thing.

Lang