Thesis: While geography may still have played a consequential role in war-time strategy, this was significantly lessened by the efficiency and might of modern systems and technology that had, comparatively, only been hinted at by WWI.
Defense: Of course, geography still controlled the form in which governments would plan an offensive, be it by land, sea, or air, but the important point was that geography no longer proved an insuperable obstacle. Wars could be launched across oceans with full expectation of success. This itself is proven by the U.S. attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; in two sittings, the Americans destroyed their enemy's morale and ensured that the war was won for them, all done with only a handful of airplanes and a couple of ships. The Japanese were cowed into submission by the shock of such horrific and advanced weaponry, the atrocity that such a thing was possible. Though this situation was by far the best example of long-distance war-fare, similar things could be said of Germany (annexed Austria; invaded France, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, and Greece; attempted to take the USSR; "allied" itself with Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, and Croatia) and the USSR (annexed northeaster Romania; attacked Finland; occupied Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.); they annexed, invaded, and allied, with whole mouthfuls of countries, between the two of them almost engulfing Europe (see map of WWII and the Holocaust). For this they crossed puddles, rivers, oceans, you name it. Overall, it was as if political and physical geography did not exist within central Europe. Of course, the matching technology in Britain, with the help of the English Channel, was enough to hold the Germans at bay. Still, both were able to push on with remarkable successful offensives against each other with the use of Jets and bombs. An example of this would be the fire-bombing of Dresden by the British air force. From afar they completely destroyed a city, literally razing it to the ground. Not only with war was geography negligible, but with transportation too. Jews and other "lesser races" were shipped from all over Europe to extermination and labor camps centered mostly in Poland. Again, the geography was not an issue, mostly due to the German organization and efficient construction of trains and train tracks that criss-crossed the continent. So while, geography still held its own in places of middling to high technology and severe topography, it was no longer the maker and the breaker that it was before the 20th century.
Extra Points:
Defense: Of course, geography still controlled the form in which governments would plan an offensive, be it by land, sea, or air, but the important point was that geography no longer proved an insuperable obstacle. Wars could be launched across oceans with full expectation of success. This itself is proven by the U.S. attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; in two sittings, the Americans destroyed their enemy's morale and ensured that the war was won for them, all done with only a handful of airplanes and a couple of ships. The Japanese were cowed into submission by the shock of such horrific and advanced weaponry, the atrocity that such a thing was possible. Though this situation was by far the best example of long-distance war-fare, similar things could be said of Germany (annexed Austria; invaded France, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, and Greece; attempted to take the USSR; "allied" itself with Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, and Croatia) and the USSR (annexed northeaster Romania; attacked Finland; occupied Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.); they annexed, invaded, and allied, with whole mouthfuls of countries, between the two of them almost engulfing Europe (see map of WWII and the Holocaust). For this they crossed puddles, rivers, oceans, you name it. Overall, it was as if political and physical geography did not exist within central Europe. Of course, the matching technology in Britain, with the help of the English Channel, was enough to hold the Germans at bay. Still, both were able to push on with remarkable successful offensives against each other with the use of Jets and bombs. An example of this would be the fire-bombing of Dresden by the British air force. From afar they completely destroyed a city, literally razing it to the ground. Not only with war was geography negligible, but with transportation too. Jews and other "lesser races" were shipped from all over Europe to extermination and labor camps centered mostly in Poland. Again, the geography was not an issue, mostly due to the German organization and efficient construction of trains and train tracks that criss-crossed the continent. So while, geography still held its own in places of middling to high technology and severe topography, it was no longer the maker and the breaker that it was before the 20th century.
Extra Points:
- Controlled the discovery of German actions - only as the USSR swept into POLAND from the North-east could they find evidence of the death camps
- Restricted liberation - those in the middle of German territory had to wait longer to be freed and helped
- Highlights the conditions that Jews had to live with - Warsaw contained 350,000 people, 30% of which were Jews. This population and more was held within 2.4% of the city of Warsaw- 400,000 at height.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is certainly successful as a memorial: it is a strong reminder of the Holocaust simply as a general event; it focuses into more detail, giving specific data on every possible point; there are stories chronicling the short lives of some Holocaust victims. Each of these things were represented within the maps, from numbers to personal anecdotes. Obviously, in such a memorial, there will be a bias. In this case it is towards the victims of the Holocaust and against the Germans, done by paying closer detail to the atrocities that were inflicted. I noted also that while the Germans were often subtly or tacitly rebuked, no such feeling was given towards those who were allied with Germany. Perhaps the makers of the website were a little to focused on those who they felt bore the blame. I am not sure, however, that this memorial assumes anything about the audience that views the site. Obviously, it would be a less argument-arousing experience should the person viewing the maps happen to agree on the guilt of the Nazis. I do believe that while there is a slight bias, it is fairly negligible. Even did I believe differently (which I don't) this site would still be a good source of information. As it is, the Holocaust is memorialized well in this website, a form that the modern world is more likely to connect to.
No comments:
Post a Comment