Dude, in a half day, a half million people, mostly civilians, were killed. How is that not "the worst single event massacre of all time"? It tops both Japan atomic bombings and the Tokyo fires. If you can come up with a similar event on a similar time-scale, I'm all ears.There it was, an estimate more than ten-fold higher than the highest credible estimates of the death toll, stated as fact. It was more than twice the highest exaggerated death toll I had ever heard.
Also, here was another fallacious statement (albeit by a person remonstrating with the person who posted above):
No one really knows how many people died in Dresden, Hiroshima, Tokyo, or Nagasaki because the bodies were completely burned it's all estimates.No, this is incorrect as well. There are actually very good estimates of how many died in Dresden, compiled by the Germans themselves and intentionally exaggerated by Goebbels for propaganda. Later, the Soviet rulers of East Germany considered it convenient to allow Goebbel's exaggerations to be propagated, in order to make the British and Americans look brutal. This person is correct, however, when she says:
...by any metric Hitler's extermination programs and their side projects were worse.Definitely. The reason fascists equate the Dresden bombing with the Holocaust is to downplay the scope of the Holocaust.
Finally, part of one comment in the thread was simply so spot-on that I have to include it:
Can we please, perhaps, just agree that invoking Hiroshima, The Holocaust, Dresden, The Rape of Nanjing, The Cultural Revolution, The Trail of Tears, The St. Bartholemew's day Massacre, Rwanda, The Black Plague, or The Extinction of the Dinosaurs are all rhetorically excessive when compared to just about any domestic social issue?Amen.
Such rhetorical excesses shed much heat but very little light. Their usual purpose is to demonize the subject of the attack without actually having to bother to do the heavy lifting of justifying the attack with, oh, say, actual persuasive evidence. Usually, when you see this kind of rhetorical excess, it is a sign that the person using it either has a weak argument, is intellectually lazy, or is just interested in polemics. Unfortunately, all too often these days, polemics work.