cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash) (08/11/90)
From: convex!cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash)
I got into an argument recently over which caused more casualties--the
bombing of Hiroshima or of Dresden. (I was arguing that conventional
weapons can inflict damage of proportions that we associate with nukes.)
It seems to me that I remember that Dresden casualties were estimated at
somewhere between 70 to 200 thousand. I think that casualties at Hiroshima
were around 50 thousand. Anybody have any reliable figures?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist. |
Peter Cash | (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein) |cash@convex.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (08/15/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: convex!cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash) >... I think that casualties at Hiroshima >were around 50 thousand. Anybody have any reliable figures? Whose reliable figures? :-) It very much depends on who you ask. The "official" figure for Hiroshima is something like 90k, as I recall, but Japanese estimates go as high as 250k. Part of the difference is the difficulty of estimating how many bodies were never found. The low estimates come from "hard evidence", the high ones from trying to count people who were simply never seen again. The truth is probably somewhere in between. (The problem has some resemblance to the difficulty in assessing kills by anti-aircraft gunnery. Even with determined attempts at enforcing strict rules of evidence, WW2 inland gunners consistently scored fewer kills than coastal gunners, because the inland gunners couldn't count a kill unless wreckage was found, and there was no such independent check on coastal kill claims. The problem still exists: the official British figures on antiaircraft kills in the Falklands -- mostly over water -- significantly exceed the total Argentine losses.) As to the original underlying question, there is little doubt that really determined firebombing campaigns, notably Hamburg, Dresden, and Tokyo, easily produced casualties in the same range as Hiroshima/Nagasaki; I believe that the Tokyo figures significantly exceed H/N by anyone's count. Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
PAPAI@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Jonathan Papai) (08/16/90)
From: PAPAI@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Jonathan Papai)
in message
<1990Aug11.015024.19481@cbnews.att.com>, convex!cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash)
asks?
?I got into an argument recently over which caused more casualties--the
?bombing of Hiroshima or of Dresden. (I was arguing that conventional
?weapons can inflict damage of proportions that we associate with nukes.)
Some statistics and background information from:
"The Second World War",John Keegan,1989, # 0-670-82359-7
p. 420 "During 1941...the RAF...brought itself to accept
that the bombers it already deployed must in the future be used
to kill German civilians, since the factories in which they
worked could not be hit with precision. ...
In July 1943, firestorms killed 30000 in Hamburg;
Wurzburg,4000; .... ; Magdenburg, 12000."
p. 433 "Altogether, 600,000 German civilians died under
bombing attack and 800,000 were seriously wounded."
p. 576. "On 9 March 1945, {the author is British}, Bomber
Command attacked Tokyo with 325 aircraft armed exclusively with
incendiaries, flying at low altitude under cover of darkness. In
a few minutes of bombing, the city center took fire and by
morning 16 square miles had been consumed; 267,000 buildings
burned to the ground, and the temperature in the heart of the
firestrom caused the water to boil in the city's canals. The
casualty list recorded 89,000 dead, half as large again as the
number of survivors treated in the city's hospitals. Losses to
the bombers were below 2 per cent and were to decline as the
campaign gathered force. ....
By July, 60 per cent of the ground area of the country's
60 larger cities and towns had been burnt out."
p. 584 "It was the uranium 235 version of the bomb that
the B-29 Enola Gay dropped over Hiroshima on the morning of 6
August 1945; a few hours later; while 78,000 people lay dead or
dying in the ruins, a White House statement called on the
Japanese to surrender or 'They may expect a rain of ruin from the
air'. No word being received, on 9 August, anothe B-29 flew from
Tinian to bomb the city of Nagasaki, Killing 25,000. The United
States temporarily exhausted its supply of nuclear weapons and
awaited the outcome of the damage done."
[end of quotes]
Sorry, don't know about Dresden. Good book by the way.
I think I saw in the local paper that 3 of the original crew of
the Enola Gay would appear at the Rickenbacker Air Show this
weekend near Columbus, O. The pilot of course is from here. Can
anyone confirm? Cost is free with a $5.00 parking to go to
charity.
****************************************************************
Jon Papai *"Every attempt to make war *
Papai@kcgl.eng.ohio-state.edu *safe and easy leads to *
*humiliation and disaster." *
*W.T. Sherman *
****************************************************************art@cs.bu.edu (Al Thompson) (08/16/90)
From: art@cs.bu.edu (Al Thompson) In article <1990Aug11.015024.19481@cbnews.att.com> convex!cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash) writes: | | |From: convex!cash@uunet.UU.NET (Peter Cash) | |I got into an argument recently over which caused more casualties--the |bombing of Hiroshima or of Dresden. (I was arguing that conventional |weapons can inflict damage of proportions that we associate with nukes.) Actually, the figures I have seen give the fire bombings of Tokyo as far worse than either H or D. | |It seems to me that I remember that Dresden casualties were estimated at |somewhere between 70 to 200 thousand. I think that casualties at Hiroshima |were around 50 thousand. Anybody have any reliable figures? No, and nobody ever will. The figures vary from 50k to 200k depending on who you read and when they stop counting. For example, today there are people dying in Hiroshima who are counted as Bomb victims. They may well be, but these same people are getting into their sventies and eighties, a time when we all tend to go. If somebody took a dose of radiation forty five years ago and now develops a cancer, does that mean he was a victim of the radiation? No person, professional or otherwise, can say.
smh@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Stephen Head) (08/16/90)
From: smh@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Stephen Head) [Re: Hiroshima/Dresden] > It seems to me that I remember that Dresden casualties were estimated at > somewhere between 70 to 200 thousand. I think that casualties at Hiroshima > were around 50 thousand. Anybody have any reliable figures? According to the "The Destruction of Dresden", by David Irving, the most reliable figure for Dresden dead comes from the city government's own estimate, 135,000. Hiroshima dead were counted as 71,379 according to the Japanese. There are only rough estimates for Dresden because of the destruction of records and remains incurred by the city at the time of the Soviet occupation, in the months after the attack. Steve Head
Bits_of_Magic@uunet.UU.NET (08/23/90)
From: <ames!ames!claris!portal!cup.portal.com!Bits_of_Magic@uunet.UU.NET> How many bombers took part in the Dresden and Hamburg bombings? Could we put together such strikes today? We have far fewer bombers now, but does their increased capacity make up for it? Ken Zarifes <bits_of_magic@cup.portal.com>