Precision bombing the concentration camps in WWII

OK, just had an idea after reading bout how an 8th AF bombing raid near Buchenwald in Aug 1944 caused lots of deaths among the inmates- now tying in with the idea of how the Allies could've strategically bombed the concentration camps & infrastructure to enable the inmates to escape- WI say the RAF had undertaken low-level precision airstrikes to achieve that aim, using Mosquitos or Beaufighters a la the Amiens (Op JERICHO Feb 1944) & Copenhagen (Op CARTHAGE- Feb 1945) jail raids ? How much of a difference could such precision strikes against the concentration camps, rail networks, etc have made ?
 

mowque

Banned
How much of a difference could such precision strikes against the concentration camps, rail networks, etc have made ?

They didn't do it for very good reasons but they all boil down to this. It slows them down.

Win the war. Best way to stop the camps.
 
Given WW2 technology, the term "precision bombing" is an oxymoron.

Allied bombing of the infrastructure in and around the camps will 1) kill inmates in the camps and B) be repaired so quickly as to required repeated bombings over a long period of time for any chance of a lasting effect.

The best way to help those in the camps is to win the war more quickly.
 
Probably they would have killed a lot of people. This kind of arguing is being wise after the events; it was the Nazis who were to blame for the concentration camps not the allies
 

Markus

Banned
Given WW2 technology, the term "precision bombing" is an oxymoron.

Unless one attacks from a very low altitude. But with the closest base in the UK(770 miles away) a attack is not possible because that´s even outside a P-51´s combat radius of 700 miles. If you take off from Bari or Foggia in Italy the distance drops to 600-650 miles.


Allied bombing of the infrastructure in and around the camps will 1) kill inmates in the camps and B) be repaired so quickly as to required repeated bombings over a long period of time for any chance of a lasting effect.
1) Only if we are talking about a high altitude attack and even in this case, the inmates are as good as dead anway.
B) Depends on what infrastructure we talk about. Railroad lines are hard to put out of action and easy to fix. Gas chambers are easier targets.


The best way to help those in the camps is to win the war more quickly.
Generally speaking yes, but a few less air raids on german industry or towns won´t hurt the allied war effort, while destroyed gas chambers will significantly reduce the pace of the killings.


And last but not least, here is my take on an Auschwitz air raid.
 
Given that the total sum of the atrocities there were not widespread knowledge and Allied command would probably view industry and military targets as a better use of bombs, it's doubtful, unless the Nazis decide to build a factory there with slave labor or something.
 
Given that the total sum of the atrocities there were not widespread knowledge....

Do you mean that the Allied military command and civilian leaders didn't know much about the camps? They actually knew quite a bit by late 1942. At least in the US, anti Semites in the State Dept delayed or avoided doing much.

The best way to stop the camps would've been preventive. Let Jewish refugees expelled by the Nazis into other countries. But widespread anti Semitism and hostility to immigrants in general prevented that.
 
Last edited:
Do you mean that the Allied military command and civilian leaders didn't know much about the camps? They actually knew quite a bit by late 1942. At least in the US, anti Semites in the State Dept delayed or avoided doing much.

The best way to stop the camps would've been preventive. Let Jewish refugees expelled by the Nazis in. But widespread anti Semitism and hostility to immigrants in general prevented that.

I mean among the general public and so on. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I recall reading.
 
Top