Were the Allies Justified in Bombing German Cities?

The sole purpose in the role of the country is to protect the citizens of the nation; that is exactly what Great Britain did for its nation and for the end of World War II. Great Britain had to do what was best for the country and should be justified as a result from the bombing of the German cities in account of the nation’s pride, a misinterpreted perception of morals and also due to being forced into a tight situation. Although the casualties and negative impact that Germany faced, Britain’s actions in bombing the German cities should be justified due to the position they were in.
Britain did not want to allow Germany to walk all over their nation that they had taken pride of and knew the consequences of the possible outcomes if they had not acted against Germany. People of Great Britain would be hurt and the country had just wanted to protect its citizens (Document 5). Britain saw that there would have been a larger negative effect if they had not bombed the German cities compared to if they did. They perceived the bombing to have been a last chance to end the war.
After the conflict between Russia and Germany, the Allies had seen Germany’s air force as a ‘Achilles heel’ which resulted in the bombing (Document 4). If they had not acted against Germany, Operation Sea Lion would have continued to commence and casualties would most likely have resulted the same towards the British (textbook p. 229). The product of Germany’s determination to take over Great Britain would have meant to enable Hitler to have full control over Europe. We would think that the countries would play along the rules implied in the war between the countries but that would be another sad misunderstood perception.

From the beginning of the war, there was no real perception to what was wrong or right; there were no morals once a country entered the war because they must do whatever precautions they would do for the best of their country. This is exactly what Great Britain did. Their actions should not even be justified compared to Hitler’s past decisions and false promises he had made with the Allies. The war itself had no limits because Hitler had already surpassed them all. The fault of Hitler’s decisions was taken upon the citizens of Poland when Hitler decided to backstab a nation and take over the country (Textbook).
Because of the false promises that were not lived up to, the trust between the Allies and Germany slowly slipped further away. Even though attacking them was not the best method, it was the only thing to do for the sake of the nation. They were merely giving Germany a taste of its own medicine due to the past decisions made by Hitler. “Don’t talk to me about morality in war, there is no such thing” is quoted from a soldier from the Bomber Command veterans in 1975. This represents how nobody considers what is right or wrong in war and how they would sacrifice anything to do what is best for the nation (Document 8).
Even if they did have a fair understanding of morals, they still had to consider the consequences if they had not shot for the opportunity. In any difficult circumstances, a country must look past the harsh side effects and do what is best for its nation despite of it. The Allies were put into a tight situation and could not just stand by and watch their country take the negative impact by Hitler’s actions. The one who had made the first move was Germany as they attacked Britain by sending plans to bomb London in order to seize control over the country.
Germany is to blame for the reasoning behind the initiation of Great Britain’s actions towards them (textbook p. 228). Britain could not just sit back and watch so naturally, they returned the favour that they given them; this would give them fair ground that they deserved in their stance. As a natural human reaction, they retaliated against the Germans and fought back which resulted into the bombing of the German cities (Document 6). Hitler should be at fault to put the civilians through the wrath of the British and should be the right to blame rather than the country that is merely defending itself (Document 7).