I was a bit unclear, I didn't mean strategic bombing in general, but rather the bombing of cities and civilians.
I remember writing a research paper a couple years ago for a basic history class in uni, about the effect strategic bombing had in WWII. I argued that the strategic bombing of Germany and Japan had done little to shorten the war (or rather very little compared to what commanders thought at the time) with a minor exception for the effect it had on German oil, and that it was more or less a waste of material and civilian lives. Since this thread's on the topic of aircraft, I'm kind of curious what you guys think about it.
I'm guessing this didn't include the two nuclear strikes on japan that brought them to surrender or at least have them that little nudge towards surrendering that they needed?
It did. At the time the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nobody had much of a clue about the long term effects of nuclear war, and the bombing events weren't significantly different from the ongoing firebombing campaign. Tokyo had already been firebombed early in the bombing campaign, killing around 100,000 people, as well as every other major city that could even be remotely considered relevant to Japan's war industry. Nagasaki and Hiroshima weren't even militarily useful targets, and the death count and destruction wasn't much higher or lower than the deaths in other cities. I'm not saying strategic bombing wasn't a component in Japan's unconditional surrender, but if there was one major event that convinced them, it was the Soviet Union declaring war, not the atomic bombings. It's my interpretation that the role the atomic bombings had was vastly overplayed by the US government and media propaganda, at first for the standard reasons of showing off technological superiority but later as a justification after the fact for the greater strategic bombing campaign that in reality only played a minor role (it became especially convenient once the long term effects of nuclear weapons
were known, and strategic bombing in general was being questioned ethically).
Or the fact that both German and Japanese production output dropped to almost nothing by late war, and what they did produce was shoddy as fuck because the working conditions were so bad and supply of power and materials was so chancy. Strategic Bombing was almost unquestionably the single most important military cause of Germany's defeat, and the second most important cause of Japan's (#1 being the submarine campaign).
It really hinges on what you mean exactly by "late war". I'm not sure about Japan, but Germany's economy and production continued to grow at above or at projected rates throughout the war, only plummeting in the final stage when everything finally collapsed (the date I remember is something like September 1944 when the German war economy began to decline). Aside from the bombing of railroads and oil related industry, the effect the bombing campaigns had on the economy was really insignificant. The proponents of it at the time were looking for a "morale victory", where by destroying enough cities and killing or displacing enough civilians Germany (and Japan) would surrender or collapse, and that simply didn't happen (or get close to happening) even at the very end. The bombers were so inaccurate that targeting industry was almost pointless, since very early in the campaigns Germany and Japan began to decentralize industry and make it harder for intelligence to distinguish it, let alone hit it, and aside from fixed installations like dams (as LW mentioned) and the carpet bombing or incendiary bombing of civilians, their success rate was abysmal.
I wouldn't say it had no effect on the war, but enjoying the hindsight we have now, the bombing of targets with no military significance (hello Dresden, goodbye Dresden) in pursuit of a victory condition that didn't happen should be something that can be considered unethical and a waste of resources. Now, the question of whether the other industrial and military targets were worth it comes down to hard numbers, and that's something I'm curious about.
Fakedit: 8 new replies, huraerrugfgh