Bombing of Dresden in World War II

Please post your comments and suggestions for this article.

Comment by Jim on February 21st, 2011 at 3:42 pm

This was a war crime in the highest degree! This is only WW2 propaganda to cover up the fact the Allied force committed their share of holocaust bombing of innocent civilians. I believe the report by British historian David Irving in his book “The Destruction of Dresden” Jim

Comment by Dr. Andreas Krell on March 22nd, 2018 at 7:19 am

Reference [16] (F. Reichert) indicating a maximum of about 25,000 casualties is misleading:
In 1994, Reichert had justified his number (25,000) by counting (i) about 21,000 burials on two larger Dresden cemeteries and (ii) assuming that the sum-number of victim burials on all other cemeteries “should hardly have exceeded 2,000” (p. 58 in [16]. However, the total of burials of this second group (ii) was increased by an order of magnitude (!) to “almost [once more] 21,000” (= p.39 in [X])as result of new investigations of a Dresden Historian Commission in 2010 (See [X] = Final Report of this Commission at; F. Reichert was member of this Commission.
Thus, it was a remarkable merit of this Commission which, for a first time, was able to present “counted” casualty numbers with a total close to 42,000 victims of the areal raids of Feb. 13-15, 1945.
P.S.: I KNOW that false references of [X] (pretending a total of maximum 25,000 casualties was claimed by this Commission) have been distributed (e.g. in; still waiting correction). Unfortunately, a total of “maximum about 25,000” was, indeed (though wrongly), claimed by the SUMMARY paragraphs of [X] (e.g. on p.40/41 [X]) – in contradiction to the own, original research results on p.36-40. The dissense was caused by political pressure frankly addressed by M. Neutzner (= editor of [X]) on p.22 of his separate Report published March 17, 2010 ( where we read they were “confronted (!!) with the request to correct the former number of 35,000 casualties … because, with the new political conditions, this became possible now” (original German: “… mit der Aufforderung konfrontiert, die bislang vertretene Zahl von 35.000 … zu korrigieren. Ein wesentliches Argument (??) dabei war, dass … nun unter veränderten Bedingungen … revidiert werden könne”).

Comment by Jennifer Tanabe on March 22nd, 2018 at 10:39 am

Thank you, Dr. Krell, for your comment. The text will be revised to correct this misleading information. Thank you again for taking the time to help make NWE a valuable information resource.

Leave a Reply

return to top