Yes, I was rather aware of that.
And while I have no issue with bombing the hell out of military targets, including industry and transportation, even if there is significant civilian collateral damage, I do draw the line at deliberately targeting civilian areas with bombs which would burn their homes to the ground and burn millions of civilians to death.
As McNamara said 'had we lost the war we would have been tried as war criminals, and what makes it right if you win but not if you lose?'.
Well said, Bob.
Yes. That would be the McNamara who lost the only war he ever oversaw, wouldn't it?
In total war, civilians ARE a military target, since their efforts sustain the military effort. Goebbels said that two more Hamburgs (Operation Gomorrah) would have ended Germany's ability to fight the war. Sadly, we didn't have the capacity to deliver them.
Pontificating on matters of morals with regard to a global, total, good vs evil conflict is a little bit silly.
Every civilian who failed to make it to the tank factory the following day was a minor step on the road to victory.
Had we lost the war we would have been tried irrespective of how we had behaved, because that was who we were fighting.
Harsh. A war he never wanted to fight and which he argued against from the start. His subsequent actions being driven by a slightly bizarre loyalty to the office of the POTUS. Until he finally had enough.
And a war which perfectly highlight the inadequacy of the sort of bombing that Lemay and Harris so strongly supported. Highlighted by McNamara as much as anyone in that administration at the time.
Of course. Attempting to bomb a largely non-industrialised country into submission was utterly retarded. After all, you can't destroy a military and industrial infrastructure that doesn't fůcking exist. Virtually all of North Vietnam's arms and materiel came from Russian freighters and over the Chinese border. Short of stopping those at source, the effort was hopeless.