Chomsky/Hitchens/Milosevic/Bush

[Otto]

That depends on the context in which you do it.

On a general level, no  - it's been a wartime atrocity like Hiroshima.
You can criticise it and question the necessity of doing so. I don't
do so, because logically they could have dropped the bomb upon us too,
couldn't they? I suspect a rascist component in the decision for Japan
which for me makes Hiroshima the much bigger crime.

Was Dresden necessary to end the war in Europe? It may be so or not.
Was Air Chief Marshal Arthur Harris right in claiming that Dresden had
been a legitimate military target, given its "mass of munitions works,
an intact government centre, and a key transportation point to the
East. It is now none of these things."?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II#British

A lot of European Jews had been transported over those Dresden
railroad tracks. And the war was over twelve weeks later. No, I don't
think that Air Chief Marshal Arthur Harris was a war criminal. He did
his job stopping some real monsters.

If you do so alongside with a few hundred crazy baldheads on the
streets of Dresden nowadays claiming that the days between the 13. and
15, February 1945 were some kind of "holocaust" against the Germans
(like they do on the streets of several German cities every once in a
while) it is apologizing the Nazi crimes, and they are doing it with
the same lies as the Goebbles-propaganda used to do back then.

2009/3/22  <kelber at mindspring.com>:
> Would decrying the firebombing of Dresden make one a Nazi apologist?
>
> Laura
>