I suspect even Voltaire might have second thoughts today in a world where gullible millions can be told (and many believe) the CIA and Mossad blew up the Twin Towers and used holograms to convince people aircraft were involved.
The non-Holocaust denier (1974 version) David Irving's "Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe" is apparently based on lengthy consultations with Milch and confirms aluminium shortage as a critical factor in the decision not to pursue the development of the four engine Ju 89 and Do 19. Milch blames Kesselring and Jeschonnek for influencing Goering on cancellation, although another source, Diechmann, says it was perhaps Milch himself who made the suggestion to concentrate on twin engine designs. Irving says "The records do indeed show that of the 4,500 tons of aluminium required monthly for aircraft manufacture, only about half was currently available." Goring had inquired "How many twin-engined aircraft can we make for each four-engined one?" the reply was "About two and a half". "The Fuhrer" concluded Goring, "does not ask me how big my bombers are, but how many there are."
Of course, there was no need to totally terminate the four engine bomber programme. Vital development work could have proceeded on a limited basis with a view to gaining experience for a time when more resources were available, but reason and logic was not the Nazi way. Factions attempted to push forward their own concepts to the detriment of others, through egotistical competition not co-operation. Since dive bombing had proved successful in Spain, even the twin-engine bombers to be developed, like the Ju 88, would have to be strengthened (and thus made far heavier) to withstand the stress of the dive.
The disastrous effect of placing the charismatic Udet in charge of aircraft production and development was evident from his descent into clinical depression, drug addiction and finally suicide, when the catalogue of delay, wasteful development of failing designs, and general incompetence came to light. Of course Goering disowned all responsibility, and as late as 1943 was claiming he knew tandem engines would never work and that twin-engine dive bombers were a bad idea.
When it came to using what they had in the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe had to operate under Hitler's constraint:
Hitler's No. 17 Directive, issued 1 August 1940 on the conduct of war against England specifically prohibited Luftwaffe from conducting terror raids on its own initiative, and reserved the right of ordering terror attacks as means of reprisal for the Führer himself:
"The war against England is to be restricted to destructive attacks against industry and air force targets which have weak defensive forces... The most thorough study of the target concerned, that is vital points of the target, is a pre-requisite for success. It is also stressed that every effort should be made to avoid unnecessary loss of life amongst the civilian population."
Humanity from the Fuhrer? No, just the last vestiges of disappearing reason. The RAF, uniquely in Europe, had the ability to pound German cities in retaliation, so the Luftwaffe would tread carefully and not provoke a major attack. British civilians still died, but as collateral damage during raids on "legitimate" targets, as German civilians did when the RAF went after similar locations. Hitler still hoped the British would accept his terms, making it unnecessary to make good on his empty threat of "He is coming, He is coming!", i.e. the highly problematic seaborne invasion, and launching terror bombing on any serious scale would wreck this. As we know, lost Luftwaffe bombers hit central London first, and RAF retaliation against Berlin followed. Then an outraged Hitler unleashed his direct assault on the civilian population of London and many other UK cities. Irving says Milch noted in November 1940 that over 15,000 British civilians had been killed by Luftwaffe raids since the start of the war whereas only 975 Germans had been killed by the RAF, half as many as were killed in road accidents in the Fatherland.
Of course, there is another significant element to this. Nazism was an evangelical movement. It expected to eventually convert the working masses of its opponents into willing adherents, once their ruling classes and any inconvenient protesting democratically-oriented intellectuals were swept away.
The 5 April 1941 Luftflotte 4 operations order for the attack on Belgrade opened with: “The task of the Luftwaffe is:
a) the annihilation of the enemy’s air force through the destruction of the aircraft on the ground and in the air and the barracks and similar infrastructure
b) destruction of Belgrade through massive attack; destruction of individual factories.”
“government buildings, the War Ministry, the Royal Palace, Parliament, barracks, etc., in order to eliminate the unified military command authority in Yugoslavia.”
“to minimize losses among the civilian population that lived in close proximity to the attack targets (“…um die Verluste unter der Zivilbevölkerung, die in unmittelbarer Nachbarschaft der Angriffsobjekte lebt, möglichst gering zu halten.”).”
Sensitivity from the Fuhrer? No, just practicality, since previously King Paul and his faction , before their overthrow, had been prepared to be allied with Hitler, massive civilian casualties would merely alienate the Yugoslavs. They needed to be brought back on side before “Barbarossa” . However, there may still have been as many as 4,000 civilian casualties during the Luftwaffe’s “surgical strike” on the capital.
For the Jews and other untermenschen there were no such considerations, just the bullet or the gas chamber or starvation to death in a work camp.
the particular “academic hypothesis” spawned here is “That's false becuase it runs into the assumption that because the nazis were "nazis" then they would have commit genocide against all it's enemies. A lie. Why? Because if we see History the Germans were not keen to attack cities or target civilians in terror attacks as the allies did in a methodological way. “ and “But the allies attacked Germany in the most criminal deliberate way for five years with the sole purpose of killing old men, women and children. There is plain documentation to prove this point easily.” If debunking such revisionist NN twaddle with fact is witch-hunting, well call me Matthew Hopkins and pass the Swan Vestas.
Whilst the savagery of the attack on Pearl harbour and American interests in the Phillipines undoubtedly caused outrage and a thirst for righteous vengence, one can only speculate on the response of the United States had Allied bombing not mortally damaged German industrial capability. If the Amerika bomber or the V2 submarine barge projects had reached fruition, American civilians could have died in their thousands within sight of Times Square or the Capitol building. A different matter entirely.
The Allies used all the means at their disposal to defeat Nazi Germany as quickly as possible, to avoid these eventualities.
They sowed the wind, they reaped the whirlwind.
All the best