Destruction of Cities during WW2

It's actually a pretty stunning reason to visit Rotterdam for example. (Which did literally get flattened in quite a few places.) But it's made some of the best and most avant garde architecture anywhere in the world (see Cube Homes), and the impact of the dichotomy of crossing a river or canal, and going from a 12th-14th-ish century city center, to 60 year and younger architecture.

It's artistically stunning... but also really sets in the impact of exactly what happened during those 6 horrible years (WWII).

I can't say I go to Munich for the new architecture, but it's definitely one of the 'unique' things that defines Rotterdam.

I have some sympathy for Jo's going on about this subject. Frankfurt is often given a pass simply because "it was completely destroyed" and has "nothing left that's original." It's a shame because Frankfurt actually has quite a bit to offer. In my own city, Vienna, I have learned to "read" the architecture. In most spots, if the fine old baroque architecture is suddenly replaced by a square block of ugly post war apartments, you can be sure that that is where the bombs fell. Vienna's famous St. Stephans cathedral had its roof burned off and windows blown out, but the structure was basically O.K. The roof has been beautifully and authentically replaced, but they have left in the rather sad post war windows, as a reminder, I suppose. The walls of St Stephans not only have nicks and gashes from WWII, but also there is still a canon ball imbedded in the exterior from the siege of 1683.

I echo the sentiment on Rotterdam. Worth visiting because, not despite of , the fact that it was completely rebuilt in a modern style.

I sympathize. But remember that most people travelling to learn a bit (not just relax) are looking for what is different from home. So Americans, with our brief history, are usually looking for what is old. That's no sin. There is little need to visit what we already have here. We have plenty of post-1940's architecture - some good, much of it bad. It's always nice when old buildings are painstakenly reconstructed - it's certainly better than the alternative glass cube. But a building that didn't have to be reconstructed is better.

We will be in Germany this summer for the first time and we are very much looking forward to it.

The Nazis blew up Warsaw on their way out. The old-town centre was rebuilt to resemble the way it always looked. But there are also lots of ugly post-War buildings in the surrounding area. There is a great book I purchased at the Warsaw History Museum that has photos of Warsaw pre-War, after War and then after being rebuilt. I always recommend people visit Warsaw, especially if they are interested in WWII.

A few months before I visited Warsaw I read Leon Uris' Mila 18. I loved the story so much and even though Warsaw was really flattened I could envision where the ghetto was and could locate some other landmarks. Rebuilt Warsaw is very nice but reading the book did make it more special for me.

In addition to being a good film, "The Third Man" shows late 1940's (~1948) views of the rubble in Vienna.

Thanks for this post, Jo. It was interesting, and I will think about it when I read about the destruction of German cities in the future.

The "Pity of it All" by Amos Alon is worth reading. what hasn't been flattened is Germany and its Nazi history which wiped out millions of good people. Strange that a nation that produced Bach could also produce Hitler and his supporters. I wouldn't spend a penny in Germany.

"Strange that a nation that produced Bach could also produce Hitler and his supporters...."

I get your point, but wanted to add that Hitler technically wasn't produced in Germany. We have to blame the Austrians for that (as well as a number of other top ranking Nazis).

I could say that it is strange that a country that produced Timothy McVeigh also produced Martin Luther King...

Just sayin.....

"Strange that a nation that produced Bach could also produce Hitler and his supporters...."

Or that a country that produced Martin Luther King could have also produced Lester Maddox, George Wallace, or Alexander Hamilton (The Confederacy is founded on the great truth, that the negro is inferior to the white man,...) Stephens.

Even stranger, a country that produced terrorist Menachem Begin could produce, ah, Yitzhak Rabin?

Wow, Barbara, but I guess I've run into Germans with attitudes like yours, too, so...

Jo, I agree, it just makes for interesting architecture contrasts!

An interesting day. Read this and then tonight on the local PBS, the American Experience program the subject was "The Bombing of Germany." If they were not flattened, there was much left standing around core cities and industrial areas in the few cities that came under relentless bombing.

The point that I am trying to make is that there are sections in all of these cities that got pretty trashed, but the biggest part of these cities were NOT flattened or wiped clean. Once you leave the industrial sections or the city centers where heavy bombing took place, all of the surrounding neighborhoods are still very original buildings. Cologne, Frankfurt, and Ostende are good examples. Beautiful buildings abound, street after street after street.

Barbara, those are about the harshest words I have ever read on this forum. I feel sorry for you that you have to carry such hate and bitterness around with you all day long. Doesn't that chip on your shoulder get kinda heavy after a while?

I always interpreted "flattened" basically as a slang word to describle bluntly the effects of the strategic bombing campaign with all its controversy on Germany.

The country that produced ML King, jr. also gave Bull
Connor, Ross Barnett, besides Lexter Maddox (as pointed out above)...George Wallace recanted and repented.

And if you don't want to spend a penny on Germany, there are plenty of people all over the world who will do just that, the Spanish, Japanese, Italians, Americans, the nationalities of South America, Chinese, Polish, Indians, Russians, Australians, etc. etc.

The fact that Americans spent much more than just a penny to rebuild Western Europe after WWII is a very important factor in the existing peaceful relationships. The airlift to Berlin might have been the most visible part but the funds that poured in through the Marshall Plan were even more important. Yes, my mother will always remember the shrapnel inbedded in her neck that she received in a bombing in 1943 (the year she was born) and German and Canadian governments are paying her related health care bills to this day. But what she talks much more often about are the Care packages they've received after the war, how that first banana tasted, how it helped them to fight of starvation.

Wish they'd done something similar after helping to chase the Russians out of Afghanistan. And maybe, just maybe we would have seen different relationships today.

As to the definition of "flattened" I agree that it's used very generally. But not only industrial areas were targeted by bombing raids, train stations as well. And as tourists going to Europe today appreciate very much, most of these train stations are in very central locations. Thus bombing them resulted in heavy dammage of central areas of many cities, not just the well-known ones.

My mother's family did live in a rat-infested basement for years because there wasn't enough residential housing left after the bombing raids over the Ruhr - of course THE industrial heartland and priority target of Allied bombers.

Still, I don't think this statement is necessarily true: But a building that didn't have to be reconstructed is better.

Destruction has happened throughout history, not just during WWII. Even if you visit places that were spared during the 20th century they might have been rebuild after a medevial fire or after one of the many other wars. Many of the beautiful Gothic churches you visit today are reconstructions on sites of older churches.

And many visitors might not even recognize the difference between a building that is "original" or one that has been carefully reconstructed.

A very interesting example of a reconstructed city is Muenster. The "Principalmarkt" has only one building that was reconstructed in the original style, the Rathaus. But the rest was reconstructed in a more simplefied way. It works! This year, the city will tear down an entire stree in the city centre that was "flattened" in WWII and rebuild in a modern way. The new construction will not be a exact reconstruction of the "original" (which original? of which time period?) but one that fits in with the historic style of the city.

Ron - I obviously do not know anything about what Germans think of Americans so I can't answer that question. As a Brit though I do find it interesting how little animosity there is between Germans and Brits. I certainly have never felt any bad feeling from Germans and I don't know any Brit who harbours bad feelings either (although they may make Fawlty Towers 'don't mention the war' style jokes!). Even the WW2 veterans I have met don't seem particularly bitter.

The sad part of this is that most of the death and destruction came shortly before the end of the war and did nothing to affect the outcome. Rothenburg was bombed on March 31, one month before the German surrender. Würzburg was virtually destroyed by British bombers with 5000 killed, mostly civilians. Why did they do it; because they could (it was targeted because it had a lot of wooden building, that would burn). Freudenstadt, a peaceful village in the Black Forest was burned to the ground by French incendiary artillery.

It's not only German towns and cities which were badly bombed during World War 2. London and many British cities were heavily damaged by German bombs, and places in Northern France, Belgium and the Netherlands were all bombed by the allies as part of the liberation, as were Polish towns like Wroclaw.

Wherever you find a lot of 1950s style architecture (Plymouth, Coventry, Brest, Cherbourg, Caen, Le Havre, etc) it is because these places were bombed during the war. Many residents of friendly nations were killed in this bombing. After the war, some towns and cities, especially in central Europe, were rebuilt in the original style, while places in the west were "modernised".

Apropos to Bob's post one of the questions on University Challenge last night was, paraphrased, "Which British city is twinned with Dresden, chosen due to their similar experiences during the war?"

I'll admit I didn't "know" the answer but it was quite easy to make a correct educated guess.

Not quite sure where Ron got his figures for Dresden, but even though the exact numbers are not known, most historians believe it to be around 25,000. Still a lot of dead people.

Visiting a concentration camp is very important for a lot of people. Sometimes it makes it clear how inhumane some people can be, how intolerant, how bigoted. These are good things for anyone to learn, not bad. Yes, they can be extremely sad and moving, but again, this is not a bad thing. School classes go there, people whose relatives died there, people who were locked up there go and revisit. If people don't go to these camps, at some point in history, they will become irrelevant and forgotten. This is something that should NOT happen.

I have met and spoken with 1000's of Germans in my over 2 decades here, both young and old. I would say most detest and hate hitler for what he was able to do to this country. Young Germans feel no more guilt for this, than most white people in the US feel guilty about slavery or the Native Americans or the Japanese that were interred in American camps. Older people recall the hardships and fears if they were young, but you really don't find a lot of German men that were old enough to be fighting in WW2, most of them are dead or in their 90's.

Jo, have you really been living in Germany for 20 decades :)?

duh, think I need new glasses! :-)) thanks, I fixed it now.

JO -- >>>If people don't go to these camps, at some point in history, they will become irrelevant and forgotten. This is something that should NOT happen.<<<

Absolutely right.

I've taken several small groups over. Each time, at some point in the orientation before we go, I'll be reviewing the itinerary and say "...and this is the morning we visit a concentration camp...". Someone will invariable say "What is our other choice? I don't want to see a concentration camp." I always answer: "No other choice. If you travel with me, you visit a concentration camp."

My grandfather is now 93 years old and was wounded, twice, in World War II. In 2002, when he was 85, he met a German World War II veteran while on a cruise to Alaska. He had also been badly wounded in the war. My grandparents spent a great deal of time with this gentleman and his wife over the next several days. My grandfather still speeks of their meeting very fondly, saying neither ever felt anger nor shame, rather they each agonized over how to prevent their great-grandchildren from ever experiencing anything like that.

Great topic, Jo. I appreciate your outlook on life, and appreciate your willingness to share that outlook with us.

As a reply to Ron, we recently celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Berlin airlift here at Dobbins Air Reserve base, to honor General Clay. The guest of honor was Gail Halvorsen, the "candy bomber." I recently heard a story about him on the radio, too, where he said he was tired of hurting people and wanted to help them instead.

On that same radio show, they told of an American pilot who walked into a Frankfurt cafe before the airlift, and all the Germans walked out. The same pilot went to the same cafe after the airlift started, and the Germans all walked to the bar and brought him back a stein. So, lucky for us now, our actions after the war did a lot to change the perceptions that Germans had of Americans.

Last night, my local PBS station aired a documentary about the bombing of Germany during WW II.

Part of the Allied strategy was to inflict so much damage that fear would permeate through the German people and they would overthrow the government.

Unfortunately, the Nazis were so powerful and evil, they didn't care about the people. If any rose up to try to change things, the government would just have them killed.

I have a friend who was a little girl in Berlin when the war started. She said she remembered her parents being very careful about what they said and who they talked to, and if she--the little girl--said anything that would cause trouble, they'd shut her up quickly.

A few years ago, I met a young German man working in the U.S. as a journalist. The conversation somehow turned towards talking about WW II. He said he was tired of hearing about the Nazis and wanted to know why it had to still be talked about. I said your people have to talk about the Nazis the same way we have to talk about slavery--to make sure neither ever happens again.

And Lee, remember, one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.

"As a Brit though I do find it interesting how little animosity there is between Germans and Brits."

I echo Laura's comment re lack of bad feeling. This thread made me think of Coventry the centre of which which was devastated. My father remembered that, when he was on firewatching duty in his home town, he saw the fires of Coventry from 15 miles away. But when the new cathedral was built, next to the ruins of the old one, it was dedicated to peace and reconciliation.

Coventry is twinned with Dresden because of their shared experience. My aunt was part of a church group that went to Dresden in the late fifties and early sixties to help with the recovery of the town.

I think it was Ronald Reagan who said this,

"I would remind you that terrorism in the defense of conservative interests is no vice.
"And let me remind you also that terrorism in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

Maybe. I forget.

Are you trying to quote Barry Goldwater?

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

What an interesting thread. I have been to Germany just once. A year and a half ago I was in Bavaria, which is extraordinarily beautiful. I found the people to be friendly, polite and helpful. Several times during the trip, my husband and I would say to each other -- how could the Germans have done what they did in WWII? How could it happen in a land of such beauty? I think we all wonder this. However, when I think about it, I don't think so much about how the GERMANS could do it, I think about how PEOPLE could do it. If it could happen in Germany, it could happen anywhere. I absolutely believe that.

I don't understand scorn for the Germans and attitudes like Barbara's. I think it's quite foolish. It's important to recognize and study evil, and we should never forget things like Hitler's time in Germany, but to brand an entire nationality based on things that happened in history is misguided IMHO.

One other thing -- Jo, do you know (or does anyone else know) if there are any books written by any Germans after the war that describe how they felt after the war. I've always been curious about what the Germans knew at the time, how they felt after the concentration camps were discovered, how they felt about Hitler before, during and after the war, and that sort of thing. Obviously everyone didn't feel the same way, but it would be interesting to read some first person accounts of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

There are a TON of interesting thoughts on here. Very intriguing to see other's perspectives. Ron, I'm curious why you are so curious about German guilt. I think the analogy about modern Germans not feeling any more guilty than I do about slavery is probably pretty accurate. But you seem really pre-occupied with whether or not Germans feel guilty about what their ancestors did. Almost like you are trying to remind them they did it. It's seems a little weird to me.

As for Barbara, I think most of us probably agree. I'm confused as to why you would be on a travel website if you think traveling to other countries who have done bad things is unethical. Because if that is the case, I'm not sure you could go anywhere. For that matter, you probably can't stay here either. I'm not sure where that leaves you.

As to the original post, I think some people are really attached to the idea of seeing "really old" stuff in Europe (myself included at times). We can see reconstructed things here (see the "Holy Land Experience in Orlando as an example! :~D). That being said, more and more I push myself to go to experience the culture as much as the "stuff" (if not more). Sometimes it's hard, but I think it's important.

So there's my two cents (or maybe it was a nickel).

I enjoyed reading the posts here and many had interesting slants of WWII and Germany. Most tho sound very young and have little personal memory of WWII and seem not to have read very widely about the war or about current politics in Germany. One would have to read at least a dozen or books before one could have an intelligent conversation on this subject. Most of Germany, espedially Berlin, is very aware of German guilt for WWII and hold themselves and their parents to blame. But parts, Dresden for example, altho it is paired with Coventry, badly damanged by German bombing, is home for a strong neo-Nazi base. You have to read about Bomber Harris and Codington to understand why Dresden, for example, was bombed so relentlessly. It is a huge subject and does not answer well to such a casual discussion.

For anyone who is going to be in Dresden this weekend, this anti-nazi human chain might be interesting.

http://13februar.dresden.de/en/index_en.php

I have read dozens of books about this subject, have tons of webpages that I research, have met lots of people who were in the hitler youth, were called up at age 14, whose dads never came back from the Russian POW camps or the war, who were actually in Dresden during the firebombing, but I also talk with Allied soldiers who were part of it, like my step-father, or former POWs who would come visit the little Army base that I used to work in that was also a POW camp, or Gayle Halverson when he was here last year to commemerate the 60 year anniversary of the Berlin airlift.

The former E. Germany does have a problem with right-wingers, but there is a huge amount of protest against them. People show up with whistles so no one can hear what they say. Recently in Leipzig, people would go up to the nazi stands, act as though they were interested, taking tons of literature, then walking away and dumping it. Within a very short period of time, all the literature was gone, in the trash! They simply hate all foreigners, period. Very similar to the white racist groups in the US.

Anything nazi is forbidden here. You cannot even buy a copy of Mein Kampf, though that may end next year. Lots of documentaries on TV though, talking to former soldiers, what did you think, how was it, how do you feel now kind of thing. Very interesting.

Barbara ,, you make no sense. Sorry for you. You can't put a pin in a map on pretty well anywhere on this earth where man had not shown his inhumanity towards his own kind. That includes your country, and mine.

When the subject of "How could the Germans have let WWII happen?" comes up, it's important to note that the Nazis were a political party. Between WWI and WWII many political parties jockeyed for position, and the successful ones had an armed element. The Nazis formed the SS which kept everyone in line, and the Wehrmacht to a large extent resented the Nazis and the SS especially who they viewed as political fanatics whose job was to keep the armed forces in line, along with the fact that entire SS divisions were created and favored with the best equipment and so forth. There was MUCH resistance to the war by ordinary Germans, but as noted dissent was quickly and brutally dealt with. It's difficult for modern Americans to grasp such a society. My mother-in-law is from the Bodensee and had parents who resisted. Some of the males in the family were dragged off never to be seen again, the rest were killed when their greenhouses were bombed, leaving all the young girls orphans.

If one wishes to point at a stereotypical trait which might explain ordinary Germans "going along" with the events of WWII, the love of order, discipline, and rank are often cited. Combined with the iron fist of the Gestapo lurking at every corner, it's not hard to figure out what the deal was.

And yes, one could nuance my very short description of history with talk of the Brown Shirts and so on but that's a bit much to take on in this forum.

Bomber Harris is indeed a controversial figure aside from the moral censure that he brings on. After the war both the US and British governments undertook to study the productivity of the strategic bombing campaign, the way the Americans did it and the way the British led by Bomber Harris with area bombing--forget about the moral question involved with Harris' goal--and both studies, US Strategic Bombing Survey and its British counterpart, reach independently the same conclusion: that bombing cities, pulverising them with high explosives and incendaries as in the case of Dresden, with the intentional purpose of terrorising the civilian population, rendering them homeless did NOT work in achieving the desired result which Harris said he could do, ie., break the will of the German civilian population.

The bombing of Dresden was basically one of terrorisation by targeting the centre of the city, the operation was designed to kill civilians and break their morale. If "they" say that Dresden was a military target, then is the centre of a city a military target?

I can tell which cities had more share of the bombs and shells than others when over the years I visited Essen, Duisburg, Kiel, Frankfurt, Hamm, Kassel, Hannover, and, of course, Hamburg.

On that issue of German guilt, it boils down to whether one buys into the idea of collective guilt. I would hope that no one rational, fair-minded, tolerant person subscribes to collective guilt in this new century.

I find the reasons behind the bombing of German civilian targets incomprehensible. When Hitler tried to do the same to London it had not worked. This was despite the fact that the bombing campaign lasted from Sept 1940 to May 1941 and during one period of 11 weeks London was bombed every day bar one.

"When the subject of 'How could the Germans have let WWII happen?' comes up, it's important to note that the Nazis were a political party."

I will add to that. You need to go back to the end of WWI. The Allies settled for an armistice, rather than entering Germany and forcing the Germans to lay down their rifles. This left a sense of not having been beaten within Germany.

The terms of the armistice were repugnant to the German people. They were asked to foot the bill for the entire war. This left Germany in a state of economic crisis for a generation.

Finally, the fear by the Western Powers of the growing communist movement at the end of the war, helped grease the skids for a fascist movement to take root.

My point is that there is plenty of blame to go around....

This has become an interesting discussion thread. As someone said, it's a complicated subject, and controversial.

Someone asked about books on the subject: here's a book mentioned in a recent article in The New Yorker on the rebuilding of Dresden:

"Reunification, and the restoration of German national identity, made the country's wartime suffering speakable, and a spate of books, articles, and documentaries appeared, including, in 2002, Jorg Friedrich's hugely popular book "The Fire: The Bombing of Germany, 1940-45."

Jo's last comment about concentration camps got me thinking...

A lot of times, it's not about the rebuilding of old monuments, or the revitalizing with new architecture a la Rotterdam.

Sometimes, it's about not rebuilding...

In Vienna, at the Zentralfriedhof there is a Jewish section of the cemetery.

After going through all the glorious grave markers of the likes of Beethoven, Mahler, Wolf, Strauss, Strauss, and Strauss, and then seeing the statuary and mausoleums of other famous or well off Viennese, you find this dark, and over grown area of the cemetery. Where all the markers are gray, and the grass grows high.

Tradition in Austria is that family takes care of graves. Graves have been taken care of by family members for several hundred years. You'll even find fresh flowers next to them.

Yet, when you get to the Jewish section of the cemetery none of the graves are taken care of, and the grass grows almost as the bullet holes in many of the grave stones.

This area of the cemetery is completely unkempt, and there are no fresh flowers - because there is no one left to leave them. (Of the 65,000 Jews in Vienna an estimated 800 escpaed, and 2,000 survived. Many moved to Israel.)

So yeah, lots of the cities have been war damaged, but I can't think of a single other thing in Europe that's affected me as much as walking through that cemetery.

I have yet to go to a concentration camp. Sadly, I don't think I need to. =(

Yes, it is ironic that the British led by Bomber Harris should believe that you can bring a nation to its knees by targeting civilians who become legitimate targets in total war. The Blitz did not break the will or morale of the British people, but then Harris believed that area bombing of cities would cause such disruption and create such havoc in the civilian population that it would bring about a collapse of German civilian morale. Of course, it did not happen...the German people showed that like the British people they could take it. Also area bombing was easier than precision bombing which the Americans were carrying out.

I want to thank everyone for a really fascinating thread. As one of those "young'uns" mentioned previously, not even my parents have memories of WWII (dad was born in 1951). When those who lived through it all pass away, it will be up to the following generations to remember and re-tell the stories.

Recently I read a book called "It Happened in Italy" by Elizabeth Bettina which talks about the experience of Jews in Italy during WWII. I found it both fascinating and moving and highly recommend it.

This area of the cemetery is completely unkempt, and there are no fresh flowers - because there is no one left to leave them

Flowers in a Jewish cemetery are a no no. Under Jewish law flowers represent life, therefore they have no place at a gravestone.

Rome was not bombed by the Allies in WWII because of it's ancient and cultural significance (as if the rest of Europe wasn't significant). Although a bomb was inadvertently jettisoned by an American bomber and fell on The Vatican.

German cities were given the choice on how to rebuild. Some German cities decided to reconstruct or replace what was destroyed with traditionally styled buildings, while others decided to rebuild in the modern style. But, that shouldn't preclude anyone from visiting those cities. I think that when people travel to Europe, especially from the U.S., they tend to want to see places that "look" like old Europe. They like the quaintness of it all instead of the concrete, steel, and glass that they left at home.

I would imagine that if you were to ask anyone who was around at the time London or Berlin were destroyed, they would argue the point that they were indeed flattened, at least some areas. When you are homeless and in the streets, I don't think that your choice of words really matters. I argue in regard to your point that all it took was a new roof, water, and electrical lines to rebuild. Huge sections of cities were utterly destroyed by incendiary bombs, leaving only brick or stone facades behind. With no internal support and damage from the fires, these too came down.

Actually yesterday in Caen they found a WWII bomb and had to evacuate the neighbourhood. So this is still a topical subject, in a way!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8515568.stm

As for cities and buildings being rebuilt (whether as before or in a modern style) I don't see that as not being authentic in any way - their destruction was part of their history, as is their reconstruction or replacement.

Also WWII is often cited as a watershed in European warfare and destruction (mainly because of its scale and that it is recent history) but destruction (whether by war, volcano, earthquake or redevelopment) has been a part of European history for centuries. When you marvel at the boulevards of Paris and its imposing 19th century architecture, remember that it's thanks to Baron Haussmann and his demolition of medieval Paris (some of which can still be seen around the Marais quarter).