The Historical and Religious Significance of the Bombing of Civilians in World War Ii

The Historical and Religious Significance of the Bombing of Civilians in World War II
By Patrick Taylor
For as long as there has been war there have been soldiers, and as long as there have been soldiers there have been civilians. A civilian is defined as any person not in armed forces yet time and time again people have launched attacks against these neutral parties for both political and economic reasons. Although these attacks have taken many forms, one of the most severe and vicious ways this has been done is through aerial bombing. This tactic can be even more harmful than other forms of attack due to its very nature. While bombings kill as many civilians as other similar attacks, aerial bombing can destroy the buildings and infrastructure of a place as well, devastating the area for years, even after the bombing has stopped.
Many areas have been affected by aerial bombing through history, but possibly none as much as London and the rest of Britain during the Blitzkrieg on Britain during World War II. Beginning on September seventh in 1940 and ending on the tenth of May in 1941, this blitzkrieg killed over 40,000 civilians and wounded more than three times that. Over half of these casualties were in London itself and at least one million of its homes were destroyed. These figures are impressive, however they cannot show exactly how much damage was actually done. When people’s homes were destroyed they had few places to go. Then during the next bombing they might not have any form of shelter and this attack will have driven more families out of their homes, creating a vicious cycle. However, homes and civilians were not the only points of this attack. Strategic military points were bombed as well, giving the British even less protection against future bombings. An article in Time magazine said it best with this quote, “With their blows at military objectives they mingled many a savage shot below the belt, at civilian targets and morale.” This statement perfectly encapsulates the aerial bombing of civilians, a shot below the belt, used less to harm your opponent and more to destroy your opponent’s spirit. On September 16th, Time published another article about the Blitz on London. In this article they went into more depth about exactly what these bombings were supposed to accomplish. “There was no more "armed reconnaissance" last week — the raids were to destroy, kill, retaliate a thousandfold. Night raids were no longer designed for insomnia — they were designed for the sleep of death” . How can anyone, of any country, of any political stance approve of actions such as those in the above quote? These actions were taken deliberately to harm innocent people simply because they lived in a country during a war. Even worse, these actions were not specific to just Britain. Hundreds if not thousands of towns and cities were destroyed by aerial bombing during World War II alone throughout all countries. If we include other conflicts since then our results could easily reach the ten thousands! Not only are these actions immoral, they are also illegal according to International Humanitarian Law. Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of The Draft Convention for the Protection of Civilian Populations Against New Engines of War of 1938 deal with aerial bombing. Article 2 states “The bombardment by whatever means of towns, ports, villages or buildings which are undefended is prohibited in all circumstances”. Article 3 echoes this, saying “The bombardment by whatever means of towns, ports, villages or buildings which are defended is prohibited at any time when objects of military character cannot be clearly recognized”. Articles 4 and 5 go into further details about bombing in general, though not entirely at citizens. These articles were drafted in 1938, two years prior to the blitz on Britain, meaning that Germany was in direct violation of these articles. The United Nations “Laws of War” also touch upon civilian bombing, but in much less detail compared to these articles. During World War II the aerial bombing of civilians was mainly used by the axis powers. However, the allied powers used this tactic as well. One area that was heavily bombarded was the German town of Wesel. Wesel was an important supply depot to Germany and as such an important target for the allies. By the end of the war, 97% of the town was destroyed and its population had dropped from 25,000 to 1,900 people. Although it was an important, if not vital supplier for the Germans, was it worth the cost of 20,000 human lives? Another, even more devastating and tragic example of allied bombings is the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. These bombings killed 80,000 and 100,000 people respectively and destroyed over 70% of each city. This was only from the initial affects, however the nuclear radiation still lingering kills people to this day. Although this bombing won the allies the war in the pacific, it killed hundreds upon thousands of people and decimated two cities. The question is, did the ends justify the means? As you can plainly see, the bombing of civilians has had a huge impact on history, but what about its religious implications? After all, part of the reason World War II was fought was because of the intense and hateful persecution of a religion, namely the Jews and the bombing of civilians was not very common until the start of World War II. Some people have even compared the bombings to the bible, such as one Hamburg citizen who described the sound of bombings as “The devil laughing”. Not only can the devil be compared to the bombings, but God as well. Psalm 11:5-6 states the following “The LORD tests the good and the bad, hates those who love violence, And rains upon the wicked fiery coals and brimstone, a scorching wind their allotted cup”. Fire raining from the heavens to strike the wicked seems awfully similar to bombs raining down from the sky to strike down your enemies. The bombings also helped people to be more religious. With bombs raining down at every hour, the only people you could truly count on were the government and God. People truly had no choice but to become more religious, if only to make things seem less bleak. Religion and aerial bombing have another aspect to their relationship as well however. Quite simply, aerial bombing of civilians is attacking and killing unarmed, innocent people. The 6th commandment clearly states “thou shall not kill”. However, this is directly violated by of the bombing of civilians. Civilians should not be killed, nor should any other person, yet the bombing of civilians remains to this day, though it is less common. It is easy to see that the bombing of civilians was and continues to be a terrible thing. It kills innocent people who have done nothing wrong and destroys their homes and businesses. This tactic has brought cities to their knees, taking its people along with it. Although wars have been won with this tactic, at what cost? Yes, Aerial bombing won us World War II, but what else did it do? It killed tens of thousands. At what point can we, as humans say that it is okay to destroy something that civilization has taken years to build? When is it okay to kill innocents? May we kill them simply because they live in a country we are at war with, or because we disagree with their governments decisions? No. The bombing of civilians is okay in only the most dire situations, and even then is not worth it. People die when we bomb cities. Not a government, or soldiers or even an idea, but people. And killing innocent people is never the right choice.

Unaccredited. “WESTERN THEATRE: Battle of Britain”. Time 9 September 1940: 16-21. Print
Unaccredited. “BATTLE OF BRITAIN: Into the Heart”. Time 16 September 1940: 19-22. Print
Grayling, A. C. Among the Dead Cities: Was the Allied Bombing of Civilians in WWII a Necessity or a Crime? Walker & Company, 2007. Print.
New American Bible. New York: Catholic Book Publishing Corp. “Draft Convention for the Protection of Civilian Populations Against New Engines of War. Amsterdam, 1938.” http://www.icrc.org/eng/ International Committee of the Red Cross 2005 .10/16/11