The BBC's point is that open discussion of these things, and in many ways the very memory of them, was long-suppressed--to the point that they've largely faded from the western consciousness, especially outside France. I doubt 5% of my (very bright) students would be aware that the Allies caused this level of civilian death in Normandy.Originally Posted by Ken White
If I had a point to make (beyond that one), it would be the way in which tolerance of collateral damage has narrowed, to the point that much smaller numbers of civilian casualties are now cause for condemnation, investigation, press coverage, etc. That, I think, is generally a good thing, however much it sometimes impedes war-fighting.
Of course, it remains an open question whether restraint and self-restraint would survive war on the scope and scale of WWII. Certainly, nuclear deterrence was (and is) predicated on a willingness to inflict even larger numbers of civilian casualties.
Bookmarks