56
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2025
56 points (100.0% liked)
news
24152 readers
930 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This isn't some sort of new revelation. This is how great power wars work. Industrial capacity is all that matters. Who can keep producing ammo, fuel, and guns longer wins. The germans lost WW2 because they failed to secure soviet oil fields, and their factories got fire bombed so they couldnt fight back anymore. Not because the USSR, or US or UK had better tech.
Ukrainians are just realizing theyre the suckers that the US is using to test out its weapons against Russia and that the US doesn't give a fuck if every Ukrainian dies in the process.
Going by WWII logistical documentation, the Nazis highest levels of military production was by the end of the war, because basically all the factories had been moved into massive underground complexes.
The interesting thing about bombing and missiles is that machines like lathes and mills, especially the ones from the 1940's are actually incredibly difficult to destroy unless they are directly hit by a bomb or a missile. Most allied bombing did was completely destroy the building infrastructure, which forced periods of rapid reorganization as equipment was recovered.
The Nazi problem was that they wasted much of their time and resources early on in the war after their initial victories in Poland and France investing in fortifications that they themselves had just proven to be ineffective, utilizing privatization and mass slave labor to run that initial war economy, which is incredibly inefficient, and that even with the increase in production, they couldn't come close to matching Soviet or U.S. levels of production, or even force reorganization of the major factories powering the war machine.
If anything Allied bombing forced the Nazis to actually become centralized and efficient in their industrial war production, it was just too little, too late.
It's a given that in a prolonged war war production will be constantly increasing, but being forced to produce everything underground, in secure facilites, and to move many factories from where they were would seriously hamper that growth. It's not that bombing campaigns were ineffective it's just that production increased exponentially. So while bombings did decrease it the actual production numbers still went up overall. Of course the Nazi's made many other mistakes too, but the allies, and USSR wouldn't have continued their bombing campaigns, which are very expensive for them, if they were not seeing significant success. It's just that the numbers are weirdly presented. Think like this: Year 1, 100 factories, they build 50, 10 get bombed. Now they have 140. Year 2 140 factories, they build 50, 15 get bombed, Now they have 175.
It looks like their production increased by almost double. Which could make you think bombing campaigns were ineffective. But without those bombing campaigns they'd be at 200.
I get what you are saying, but there is a huge flaw in your logic here. You are treating military ventures, particularly WWII military ventures, as if they have a quality assurance team with statistically controlled practices and a feedback mechanism that allows them to make adjustments and understand what they are doing, or why it is effective or ineffective, or if it the effect justifies the costs. They did not, and to some degree, still don't.
The U.S. still hadn't even figured out by WWII that it is a really good idea to have troops stationed behind the front lines when pushing on an offensive in order to regroup scattered soldiers, which left multiple divisions scattered on offensive thrusts and lead to the infamous moments like what was portrayed in "A Bridge Too Far" or in the Hurtgen Forest, a mistake that they literally repeated from WWI in the Aragonne Forest. In that vein, they did multiple troop air drops, which which have repeatedly and soundly been shown to be ineffective at best, and completely wipe out a combat unit at worst, despite what Hollywood and video games would have you believe, because of what military planners thought, which was mostly that it seemed bad ass.
The bombings absolutely caused chaos in Germany and took their toll on the population, but their actual effect on German industrial production was relatively limited in hindsight, especially when compared to the bombing campaigns in things like the Second Gulf War. It is unclear if it could have been considered an effective campaign from that measure. But generals love their planes and destroying civilian infrastructure, and bombers and jets are admittedly pretty cool to look at and watch fly.