On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
I've asked before--out of genuine curiosity--whether Ricochet had changed anyone's mind about a very significantly held belief. Today it changed mine.
In response to Meghan's reflections about the morality of using the atomic bomb, I left this comment:
The greatest cause for moral regret about our conduct in the Second World War, however, I would say is this: We could have bombed the train tracks to Auschwitz. We did not.
Our member David Foster replied:
Claire ... bombing the train tracks to Auschwitz.
I agree that we should have done this; however, railways in WWII prove remarkably resilient against aerial attacks. Unless you were lucky enough to hit a key bridge, they were back in operation very soon It's unlikely that sufficient damage could have been done on a continuing basis to put the camp out of operation.
It is possible, though, that such attacks combined with a heavy leafleting campaign about what was going on in the concentration camps *might* have had a meaningful effect on the will to resist in Germany.
While that one comment wasn't in itself sufficient for me to revise my opinion, it did prompt me to ask myself whether my knowledge of the historiography of this question was current.
Wasserstein's study--to which my link points--is not recent. In asking myself the question, I came across a Master's Degree thesis written by Rondall Raven Rice, in 1996. It persuaded me that David Foster is correct. I've been wrong about a belief I've held for a good twenty-five years.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Feb '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Reference a collection of articles in a book published in 2000: The Bombing of Auschwitz, Should the Allies Have Attempted It?. Authors such as Randall Rice, Gerhard Weinberg, Martin Gilbert, and Williamson Murray, The authors are all over the place on the question.
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Not talking about Auschwitz itself, but the railway tracks. Rice's arguments are persuasive.
Feb '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
And Rice's arguments are countered by others in the book I cite. For example, by the late 1944 when the bombing eastern Germany and Poland became possible, the exterminations were almost done. One essay author makes the point that taking out railway tracks is difficult. Especially when the bombers have to fly all the way across Germany to get to them. (Distance is my point, not the one in the book.) There is also The Collapse of the German War Economy 1944-1945 which argues that is was a systematic attack on RR marshaling yards and canals - the German transportation system - the destroyed the German war economy.
You might want to look at the Amazon.com reviews of the book I first cited.
In hindsight, one raid targeting the SS quarters at Auschwitz would have been a good thing. Possible, and would have sent a good message. Whether it would have saved many lives at that late date is not clear.
May '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Did the military know exactly what was going on at Auschwitz or any other concentration camp? It seems like there are conflicting reports on how much we knew about the atrocities that were going on in these camps. If we knew the extent of the atrocities at Auschwitz or any other concentration camps should we have done more to liberate them?
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
thelonius, I'm actually going to take a stand here--against my own interests and that of Ricochet--and say that this history requires more than 200 words for anything approaching a serious answer. I thought the dissertation to which I linked was a good introduction to the literature on the subject. I'm mostly responding this way as a small, helpless protest against a too-shallow culture of argument on the Internet, one that gives the illusion that questions this complex can be settled neatly. The short answer is yes, they did (and bombed it five times). But the long answer is the part worth understanding.
Apr '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire,
To take one (big) step farther from rail lines - what about bombing the actual extermination camps? I have often wondered about the morality of such a strike.
I vaguely recall reading that a few Jewish rabbis made just that appeal, although I may be mistaken.
Any thoughts, Claire? I am sure you (or another "Ricoteer" will set me straight).
Aug '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire,
Let's take a look at the support of this or any other idea by the mainstream media in the country at the time. We both know the sorry record of the NYT on this subject. One can make a very long list of the things the world could of, would of, should of done. Unfortunately, I can't find many instances of memory, shame or regret that get past institutional sentimentality. The "Tyranny of Guilt" is way oversold. Did you think Bruckner's use of the term Western masochism is accurate, but fails to provide cover for basic collectivist appropriation of history ?
I looked at the paper, "the ultimate Kapo" is a haunted description.
Edited on Aug 7, 2011 at 8:55amMay '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
thelonius, I'm actually going to take a stand here--against my own interests and that of Ricochet--and say that this history requires more than 200 words for anything approaching a serious answer. I thought the dissertation to which I linked was a good introduction to the literature on the subject. I'm mostly responding this way as a small, helpless protest against a too-shallow culture of argument on the Internet, one that gives the illusion that questions this complex can be settled neatly. The short answer is yes, they did (and bombed it five times). But the long answer is the part worth understanding. · Aug 7 at 8:03am
My apologies. I was asking questions that I didn't have answers to. I was unable to upload one of your links. Perhaps my questions would have been answered there. I wasn't trying to engage in a shallow argument or looking for neat tidy answers. I was hoping to tap into the knowledge of the brilliant members of Ricochet.
Jul '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire, I'm with you. I couldn't understand why the allies didn't at least try a thing like this, until I read Michael Burleigh's fascinating exploration of this topic in his recent Moral Combat: Good and Evil in World War II, pages 454-462.
I couldn't possibly do him justice by summarizing his arguments here. Suffice to say that the problems involved with trying to use air power to halt the work of the camps were legion and encompassed all realms: intelligence, logistical, strategic, even political.
We often observe current feats of our air forces and assume that it would have been easy to blow up the tracks leading to Auschwitz. Load up the planes, fly to the site, ID the target, and BAM, game over. Among other things, Burleigh reminds us of the limitations of 40s-era military technology and how difficult -- and dangerous -- it would have been to try to achieve such a precision strike.
Jul '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire, It's a great moral question. The author of "Storm of War" recently addressed the point in his book on World War II. Aside from the logistical problems, howproductive would bombing the camps have been to speedily ending the war? Wouldn't bombing closer targets of higher military value in Germany bring the war to an end faster and thus stop the Holocaust faster than merely bombing rail lines?
Jul '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire, It's a great moral question. The author of "Storm of War" recently addressed the point in his book on World War II. Aside from the logistical problems, howproductive would bombing the camps have been to speedily ending the war? Wouldn't bombing closer targets of higher military value in Germany bring the war to an end faster and thus stop the Holocaust faster than merely bombing rail lines?
Feb '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Below is the first 5 star review of The Bombing of Auschwitz, Should the Allies Have Attempted It? at Amazon.com
http://tinyurl.com/4xle4td
"This collection of essays about the feasibility of bombing the crematoria and gas chambers at the Nazi death camp Auschwitz and the railways leading to it in 1944 presents virtually every aspect of the issue--from the available intelligence about the camp to military logistical and operational considerations to the British and American politics behind the decision not to intervene to the likely casualties caused and lives saved by such an intervention if it had taken place. Don't come to this book expecting facile, clear, categorical answers to the issues. While most authors have their own viewpoints to argue, collectively, the essays present a reasonably balanced set of perspectives on the pros and cons of bombing Auschwitz and its environs. The editors largely leave it to the reader to decide what could and should have been done. They are to be commended for their overall objectivity."
Mar '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Precision bombing didn't exist back then, so taking out just the railroad line, crematorium, or SS HQ, without destroying something nearby would have been hard (Precision bombing was developed to ensure the target was actually hit; not destroying everything for 1/2 mile around it was initially a P.R. bonus). Attacking railroad yards would have much of the same effect, as it is an easier, concentrated target, and would equally apply to trains to Auschwitz as to military equipment to the front.
As far as Ricochet changing my mind, the post on Israeli profiling at the airports (I think it was one of your posts), in that the profiling took hours, and at much slower paced airports, would not be tolerated at American airports. If the choice was between a) showing up 4 hours early for a flight to wait around and be questioned for 3 of them; or b) the fairly small chance of being groped; most would take b.
Sep '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Byron mentions Andre Roberts _The Storm of War_ and I am a few chapters into that book. It is truly excellent. Many luminous details about things I thought I knew. The point of mentioning it here is that I have a new appreciation for what a "damn near run thing it was" if quoting Wellington will allow me to swear inside the CoC. This is not justification for taking less action to lessen the holocaust. It seem likely to me that they could have but I think Victor Davis Hanson has written that we should recognize that in war almost every decision taken is one of attempting to find the least bad option.
Mar '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
I was also wondering the same thing. I should probably read more Andrew Roberts, as well as Claire's links. I also wonder whether Churchill wrote about this?
Given the magnitude of what the Allies did in WWII, versus what Nato is not doing in Libya against a bunch of bozos, or against the massacres in Syria, I'd forgive the Allies for putting the priority on defeating the Nazis, rather than bombing railway tracks before smart bombs were invented.
It's kinda like the A-bomb controversy - who are we to judge?
Edited on Aug 7, 2011 at 2:59pmDec '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
I once asked my Uncle Ray about this subject. I knew he had been an bomber pilot, then, though my personal awareness of his service had been the Cuban Missile Crisis through Vietnam.
This was a very smart, self-taught, man that never went to college and, as such, was never promoted above LTC in a career that spanned four decades.
His answer to me was, "Buy them books and buy them books, you'll learn them nothing." This from a man that did the NYT crossword in ink.
He taught me to never look for the answer in history, or books, when I had a choice. He taught me to use the military practice of always asking the most junior person, "What is wrong with this plan?"
In my, relatively low-stress world, the answer might be, "Chris, these tires will never hold up, over there," or something similarly mundane. But often correct.
I never knew about his WWII career, when he was alive, but I am ashamed for having asked a man that escaped four POW camps and walked all the way "home" each time, why he didn't bomb the routes to camps.
Jun '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
If you look at the aerial maps of where the allies were bombing during the second world war, it is clear that the major train depots were all within bombing range. Had the allies bombed the depots thousands of lives would have been spared. In one of Ellie Wiesels memorable speeches he reminded us that US policy at the time, was "to not utilize essential military equipment for non essential non military matters". Maybe it's time for our generation to view the film Gentleman's Agreement, which describes the extent of antisemitism in post war USA. As often said by historians: "If we do not learn from the past, then we are doomed to repeat it."
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Thelonius and Eliese, I'm not trying to be evasive, but the arguments Rice made rely upon data, ariel imagery, archival documents and the kind of complex arguments that really do require a whole master's thesis. The historiography has changed since I first studied this question, and we now know a lot more about what military planners were thinking and why they made the decisions they did. I spent a few hours reading that yesterday, and I don't think I can summarize it meaningfully beyond saying that he persuasively makes the case that given the knowledge military planners had at the time and our capabilities, attempting to bomb the railway tracks would not have been a good decision--which is an assertion, not an argument, so I wouldn't expect anyone to be persuaded by it, but he makes the full argument, by which I was persuaded. Bombing Auschwitz itself is a different question. Thelonius, if you can't open the link, it may be because it's in PDF format--do you have a PDF reader?
May '11
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Couldn't open up Master's Degree thesis. I normally don't have a problem opening up links. I don't know what a PDF reader is. Are they standard on most laptops? I'm not very computer literate. I barely know how to access this site or any of the satanic porn sites I like to frequent. Thank you for your concern.
May '10
Re: On Bombing the Train Tracks to Auschwitz: Ricochet Changes My Mind
Claire,
My father was a medium bomber pilot in WW2 and attacked railroads, bridges, etc. He said it was not very effective. Hitting small targets is difficult. The attack would have required medium bombers, flying at very low altitudes, in order to get accuracy. These planes had over-powered engines for speed (speed was their defense) and thus limited range (3-400 miles). I measured the distance from his base north of Paris to southern Poland. It is about 6-700 miles.