Literally how do alliedboos defend this ?

>average Veeky Forumstard reading comprehension

that was a french town retards

The beadys just lust after french blood, he craves destroying anything related to France, he simply loves it, pur evil

>DERE WURENT GERMANS IN DA CITIZ DEY OCCUPIDE!

>It is estimated that the bombings in Normandy before and after D-Day caused over 50,000 civilian deaths. The French historian Henri Amouroux in La Grande histoire des Français sous l’Occupation, says that 20,000 civilians were killed in Calvados department, 10,000 in Seine-Maritime, 14,800 in the Manche, 4,200 in the Orne, around 3,000 in the Eure. The most deadly allied bombings under the German occupation were these: Lisieux (6–7 June 1944, 700 dead), Vire (6–7 June 1944, 400 dead), Caen (6 June-19 July 1944, about 3,000 dead), Le Havre (5–11 September 1944, more than 5,000 dead)
Lmao, really showed those ebil nazis

>missing this point so much
>missing any other point too beforehand

>quoting himself
The thread started as 'how do you justify killing frog civvies'

B-B-But muh based Arthur "I called Lubeck a fire starter more than a city even though Coventry is the same thing" Harris

Alliedniggers burn in hell

the german army were cowards hiding behind civilians, much like you saw with ISIS
as a result they were forced to bomb civilian cities, a tragic but unavoidable outcome resulting directly from german cowardice

if they had known honor there would have been no need for the bombings, but then again if the german people were capable of understanding honor, there would not have been world wars

Gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette

There is no honor in total war. The Germans should have fought harder and less "ethically" if they really wanted to win.

i'm from normandy, my family lost everything in the war, all the cities in my region have been almost entirely destroyed, countless people dead, a lot of people suddenly homeless, rapes by the thousands,
My grdparents had german soldiers in their house, they were polite and nice. Now that we're only getting the allied side of the story, germans are seen as devils and allies as near angel beings.
We should have collaborated more, we should have helped germany more, we'd have a powerful europe with a strong culture and identity instead of an americanised melting-pot.

Isn't this the same excuse used to defend German actions?

Seems like a standard bombardment to me. Wehraboos are really scraping the bottom of the barrel it seems.

easy for a yank to say, for you war means sending some soldiers somewhere far away while sitting on your fatass watching the horror from afar you don't know how terrible it is, to have your house, your city destroyed, your family killed, your mother and sister raped, to live in misery.

ANGLO'D

>expecting consistency from Alliedniggers

wew lad

germans were the aggressors, as such their actions are inherently under greater scruteny and cannot be justified as "for the greater good" under any circumstance
the allied bombings however had the greater purpose of defeating the aggressors.

In short: the germans committed atrocities in order to improve their chances to commit greater atrocities, the allies committed atrocities to stop greater atrocities

Kek, except fighting unethically is exactly what ending up motivating hostility against them.

the only way they could have been less ethical is if they used gas
and the only reason they refused is because the British would repay the favor a hundred fold by gas bombing their cities
they were already at maximum practical unethical behavior

>50k dead civilians that aren't even Germans
>standard bombardment
t. /r/shitwehraboossay

The French, especially in the north, have a relatively high percentage of Germanic (read: Aryan) blood. Therefore, the Anglo's instincts compel him to slay them

Well unless someone also brings in the Soviets to the discussion. That's why by "Allies" I usually mean just "western Allies/liberal democracies"

Even more unethical

Is that Motorolla?

I think when the Germans bombed London it pissed off Churchill. He wanted revenge.

It's shit like this that made my grandfather hate the americans more than the Germans, and that's saying a lot

My bad. I thought that was a german town.

Lol krauts already burn in hell

>thread about the allied destruction of French cities
>lol the Germans deserved it either way
The absolute state of Veeky Forums

>Why did you shoot some of the hostages we took to save the rest?!

>implying the french didn't deserve it

What is it you cucks say? "Always kill a traitor before an enemy, jimbo" or something like that?

Wouldn't have been necessary if Germany hadn't invaded and occupied France in the first place.

A French city under german occupation...

I'd love to see a timeline where Arthur Harris firebombs a whole British city because a few G*rmans are there. Would that pussy do it? I'd hope so.

Man that does sound bad.

Revenge for 1066.

Alliedboos can't exist if >99% of humans believe the Allies were righteous

This was mercy. If Hitler wouldn't have offed himself, the whole Germany would be covered in mushroom clouds

No it wouldnt. Berlin and hamburg would be craters, but America simply could not mass produce atomic weaponry this early.