Civilians and Civilian Vehicles in CM2? Your thoughts?

[Mad Russian]

Originally posted by Stavka_lite:

Now I may be wrong but I think that the firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo targeted the civilian populations in order to break their morale and stop supporting the war. Like I said I could be wrong but I don't think so.

I stand corrected. Dresden was an attack on the city population. The Japanese cities are harder to put into that class because so much of the industry was done in the little shops around the towns. So to hit the town was to hit the industry. Not as much as people may think but still a legitimate target.

What is crazy about the "break their morale to fight" theory is that it has been shown many times to have the opposite effect.

Panther Commander

[Code13]

Anyone who thinks or even remotely tries to argue that the allies didnt deliberately target civilians needs some serious education about what happened in the war.

On the other hand one thing the Alies didnt do was for einsatzgroupen (sp) to round up and kill civilian populations, the allies did not raise whole villages to the ground and kill everyone who lived their out of reprisal for partisan activities and, most importantly the allies did not deliberately try to commit genocide on an industrial scale.

But they did deliberately and knowingly kill the civilian populations of Germany, France and Italy for various reasons.

[Dave H]

Originally posted by Code13:

Anyone who thinks or even remotely tries to argue that the allies didnt deliberately target civilians needs some serious education about what happened in the war.

On the other hand one thing the Alies didnt do was for einsatzgroupen (sp) to round up and kill civilian populations, the allies did not raise whole villages to the ground and kill everyone who lived their out of reprisal for partisan activities and, most importantly the allies did not deliberately try to commit genocide on an industrial scale.

But they did deliberately and knowingly kill the civilian populations of Germany, France and Italy for various reasons.

Don't forget Japan.

[V]

Originally posted by Dave H:

Don't forget Japan.

We won't...

[Lioneyes]

edited because the next post makes a lot of sense.

[ January 26, 2004, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: Mrrshan ]

[Michael Dorosh]

All you newer guys need to realize that this subject is generally off topic, and will either get locked or moved to the general forum. If you really want to discuss bombing without reference to CM, best to start a topic in the GF - but be advised they tend not to last long. There have been exceptions and a search of the GF archives may net you some interesting viewpoints.

From my perspective, the conversation seems a little silly. The quotes from Harris have been provided. Civilians were considered legitimate targets and no airmen were tried for war crimes - German and Japanese included - after the war.

If anyone is seriously contending that the western Allies were either

a) guiltless, or,

"as bad as" the Germans or Russians for promoting mistreatment of enemy civilians

they have no leg to stand on.

That would be a good point to end the conversation.

[V]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

All you newer guys need to realize that this subject is generally off topic, and will either get locked or moved to the general forum. If you really want to discuss bombing without reference to CM, best to start a topic in the GF - but be advised they tend not to last long. There have been exceptions and a search of the GF archives may net you some interesting viewpoints.

From my perspective, the conversation seems a little silly. The quotes from Harris have been provided. Civilians were considered legitimate targets and no airmen were tried for war crimes - German and Japanese included - after the war.

If anyone is seriously contending that the western Allies were either

a) guiltless, or,

"as bad as" the Germans or Russians for promoting mistreatment of enemy civilians

they have no leg to stand on.

That would be a good point to end the conversation.

They can, of course, close or move the thread as they see fit. But I disagree with anyone who attempts to imply that the Allied objective in the Dresden raid was nothing but cold blooded murder.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by V:

I disagree with anyone who attempts to imply that the Allied objective in the Dresden raid was nothing but cold blooded murder.

You have yet to provide documentary evidence of this. In a court of law, you would need to demonstrate motive and means. So what is your evidence? And your own thoughts and perceptions are rather irrelevant; you must demonstrate that the USAAF and RAF ordered the bombing solely to kill enemy civilians. I doubt you will be able to provide that sort of proof, frankly, but am willing to listen.

Contemporary sources are best, naturally, as hindsight can only cloud the issue. What were they thinking at the time?

And even if it turns out you can find a document signed by Harris, Spaatz or whomever stating that the goal of the raid was to kill enemy civilians - how would that be "murder" if the killing of civilians via aerial bombing had been legitimized. I would suggest aerial bombing was accepted as an "act of war" in WW I and the Zeppelin raids.

Had Dresden been declared an Open City?

[V]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by V:

I disagree with anyone who attempts to imply that the Allied objective in the Dresden raid was nothing but cold blooded murder.

You have yet to provide documentary evidence of this. In a court of law, you would need to demonstrate motive and means. So what is your evidence? And your own thoughts and perceptions are rather irrelevant; you must demonstrate that the USAAF and RAF ordered the bombing solely to kill enemy civilians. I doubt you will be able to provide that sort of proof, frankly, but am willing to listen.

Contemporary sources are best, naturally, as hindsight can only cloud the issue. What were they thinking at the time? </font>

[Michael Dorosh]

Then we agree.

I am not sure I see the correlation between Old Glory flying over Pearl Harbor and Dresden, though, but that is usually the nature of these types of discussions. I think the roasting alive of tens of thousands of men, women and children in Hamburg (or Dresden) is of the same order of tragedy as the loss of 3,000 servicemen at Pearl Harbor. Certainly the victims were equally unwitting in both instances.

Had Japan submitted their declaration of intention to the US government on schedule, perhaps the latter would not have been seen as treachery. We'll never know. Both Dresden and Pearl Harbor have taken on monstrous overtones due to their execution. Both could be justified at the time, and could still be justified depending on interpretation, as legitimate acts of war.

[V]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Then we agree.

I am not sure I see the correlation between Old Glory flying over Pearl Harbor and Dresden, though, but that is usually the nature of these types of discussions. I think the roasting alive of tens of thousands of men, women and children in Hamburg (or Dresden) is of the same order of tragedy as the loss of 3,000 servicemen at Pearl Harbor. Certainly the victims were equally unwitting in both instances.

Had Japan submitted their declaration of intention to the US government on schedule, perhaps the latter would not have been seen as treachery. We'll never know. Both Dresden and Pearl Harbor have taken on monstrous overtones due to their execution. Both could be justified at the time, and could still be justified depending on interpretation, as legitimate acts of war.

I wasn't meaning to compare what happened in Dresden with Pearl. But when thinking about the bombings which the Japanese suffered, it helps to remember the state of mind of the men who were carrying out and ordering those bombings, and the major events which put them into the position to have to do those terrible deeds. I am sure not many of them were sitting at home on December 6th, dreaming of the day they would get to drop bombs on the Japanese.

[WWB]

Back to the main subject. I think civilians should generally not be included. The examples of them clogging roads highlights alot:

1) That is not in the zone CM simulates. That would be the very sharp end. You want to simulate a traffic jam? Simple, make reinforcements show up late and spariodically.

2) Those civilians were fleeing the zone CM simulates. That is why they were clogging the highways. Unlike in the US, where warfare around one's home was a very rare thing, europeans were somewhat used to seeing fighting about. They understood what reasonable people did. Hide valuables too big to carry, grab the rest and flee to the countryside. Failing that hide in a basement until the shooting stopped. Except for the largest cities, warfare was generally civilian free because they (rather intelligently) got the hell out of the way.

WWB

[V]

Originally posted by WWB:

Back to the main subject. I think civilians should generally not be included. The examples of them clogging roads highlights alot:

1) That is not in the zone CM simulates. That would be the very sharp end. You want to simulate a traffic jam? Simple, make reinforcements show up late and spariodically.

2) Those civilians were fleeing the zone CM simulates. That is why they were clogging the highways. Unlike in the US, where warfare around one's home was a very rare thing, europeans were somewhat used to seeing fighting about. They understood what reasonable people did. Hide valuables too big to carry, grab the rest and flee to the countryside. Failing that hide in a basement until the shooting stopped. Except for the largest cities, warfare was generally civilian free because they (rather intelligently) got the hell out of the way.

WWB

Those are some very fine points. Thanks for getting the thread back on topic.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by V:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Then we agree.

I am not sure I see the correlation between Old Glory flying over Pearl Harbor and Dresden, though, but that is usually the nature of these types of discussions. I think the roasting alive of tens of thousands of men, women and children in Hamburg (or Dresden) is of the same order of tragedy as the loss of 3,000 servicemen at Pearl Harbor. Certainly the victims were equally unwitting in both instances.

Had Japan submitted their declaration of intention to the US government on schedule, perhaps the latter would not have been seen as treachery. We'll never know. Both Dresden and Pearl Harbor have taken on monstrous overtones due to their execution. Both could be justified at the time, and could still be justified depending on interpretation, as legitimate acts of war.

I wasn't meaning to compare what happened in Dresden with Pearl. But when thinking about the bombings which the Japanese suffered, it helps to remember the state of mind of the men who were carrying out and ordering those bombings, and the major events which put them into the position to have to do those terrible deeds. I am sure not many of them were sitting at home on December 6th, dreaming of the day they would get to drop bombs on the Japanese. </font>

[V]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by V:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Then we agree.

I am not sure I see the correlation between Old Glory flying over Pearl Harbor and Dresden, though, but that is usually the nature of these types of discussions. I think the roasting alive of tens of thousands of men, women and children in Hamburg (or Dresden) is of the same order of tragedy as the loss of 3,000 servicemen at Pearl Harbor. Certainly the victims were equally unwitting in both instances.

Had Japan submitted their declaration of intention to the US government on schedule, perhaps the latter would not have been seen as treachery. We'll never know. Both Dresden and Pearl Harbor have taken on monstrous overtones due to their execution. Both could be justified at the time, and could still be justified depending on interpretation, as legitimate acts of war.

I wasn't meaning to compare what happened in Dresden with Pearl. But when thinking about the bombings which the Japanese suffered, it helps to remember the state of mind of the men who were carrying out and ordering those bombings, and the major events which put them into the position to have to do those terrible deeds. I am sure not many of them were sitting at home on December 6th, dreaming of the day they would get to drop bombs on the Japanese. </font>

[Mark Gallear]

Don't want to get into the war is hell thing.

Civilians are a feature in the early Blitzkreig period - causing chaos in the Allied lines as they fled. Theey are also a feature in some other conflicts - ietnam.

Otherwise rather not see any thank you .

[marc420]

Hi,

The two scenarios where I can picture the inclusion of scenarios being useful both show occaisions where civilians can indeed be in the zone CM simulates.

1) Retreat over a river crossing. Perhaps Germany, East Front, 1945. German forces holding a bridgehead around a bridge. Goal is to retreat German forces across the bridge, and then either blow the bridge (if you can do that in CM), or deny the Russian forces the crossing.

In this case and time frame, its very realistic to picture a crush of civilians also trying to cross the bridge and flee the russians. It doesn't seem at all out-of-bounds to have a traffic jam of both civilian and military vehicles trying to get across that bridge prior to the Russians breaking through the last of the rear-guard. Perhaps the Germans get VPs for the number of civilians who get safely across the bridge.

A Dunkirk scenario could probably have a similar situation.

2) City fighting. In any city-fight, there were always civilian around. Generally they'd be huddled up in a church or a cellar, but its not at all possible that everyone in a city evacuated prior to the fighting occuring in the city. Stalingrad is a well-documented case of this, but it happened all over. Having civilian units on the map would be a way of penalizing players for firing on the locations where they were located. If possible, I'd also want penalties for locating defending troops in the same locations as civilians, ie you can't use them as human shields.

But this would definitely create a situation where you'd have to be careful as the attacker in indescriminately opening fire on a city.

Lastly, personally I'd be careful about believing too much of the war propaganda myths about either side. In general, the regular German army was probably not as bad as most people think, and the Allies were not as angelic as most people think. To name just two examples, the Germans didn't put any troops in the Monte Casino monestary until after the Allies carpet-bombed it. Ie, the Germans respected the neutrality of that site. And it was only a few years later in Korea that American troops were willing to open fire on crowds of refugees coming down the road, because they suspected there were communist forces hidden in the refugees.

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I doubt many Luftwaffe pilots really had a beef with Rotterdam, Coventry, or London, though, either.

Ever since I was a little boy, I've dreamt of someday bombing Rotterdam.

I would bring to the cowering Dutch a sort of 'Rotterdamerung'.

[MarkEzra]

"we're not here to do the right thing...we're here to follow F***ing orders" This thread is an excellent example of why there are no civilians in war GAMES...The facts are otherwise just to horrible to construe.

[dangerousdave]

I would be for the addition of buxom women in liederhosen. Other than that, no civies please.

[Znarf]

Originally posted by MarkEzra:

... This thread is an excellent example of why there are no civilians in war GAMES...

Agreed and WOW. Guess I touched a live wire. Battlefront's marketability concerns are more than justified by the sad tangents this string spawned. I'd still like to see it as a game element, but I don't think it would be sound business judgment....

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Znarf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MarkEzra:

... This thread is an excellent example of why there are no civilians in war GAMES...

Agreed and WOW. Guess I touched a live wire. Battlefront's marketability concerns are more than justified by the sad tangents this string spawned. </font>

[Lars]

Can we at least put Seanachai's Honda Civic in the game?

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Lars:

Can we at least put Seanachai's Honda Civic in the game?

Not until one of the Modders works it over to restore all the parts that were stripped off it when it was stolen.

[Lars]

Why bother?

It has a date with a Tiger.