On 19/05/2012 13:27, Terry Fields wrote:

Nightjar wrote:

Area bombing was, by the end of the war, more a question of philosophy
than need. Despite the evidence that bombing had only strengthened the
resolve of the British, the official view, mostly promoted by Harris,
was that bombing civilian targets would demoralise the population.

Harris had Directives to follow, one of which contained the following:

I don't recall 'I was only following orders' being much of a defence for
any Germans after the war

"Your Primary object will be the progressive destruction and
dislocation of the German military, industrial, and economic system,
and the undermining of the morale of the German people to a point
where their capacity for armed resistance is fatally weakened".

Assuming that the "undermining of the morale of the German people"
equates to the "demoralis[ing of] the population", then Harris was
following the strategy and policy of his superiors, and that only left
the tactics to be determined.

However, the evidence from the Blitz was that bombing civilians had
exactly the opposite effect; it strengthened their resolve.

I've never seen it argued that pin-point raids on targets would
demoralise or undermine the German people.

It might have been enough to weaken fatally their capacity for armed
resistance though, which was the main point of the directive. Had Harris
followed orders and followed up the second American daylight raid on
Schweinfurt with a night attack the German ability to manufacture ball
bearings would almost certainly have been completely destroyed, instead
of merely being badly damaged. Albert Speer, who was quite well placed
to know, was of the opinion that continued bombing of the site could
have stopped all German armament production within four months.

Colin Bignell