On Jul 28, 3:35 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

(Huge snip of top-notch research) The bombing of Rotterdam. The targeting was deliberate, and was meant
to help the German troops fighting in the city. A few days later leaflets
were dropped on Utrecht threatening them with the same fate unless they
surrendered.

One way to see what the Nazis were up to is to look at their own propaganda.
I have a book that reprints a number of articles from their propaganda
magazine "Signal".
This isn't a translation; this is the English language version of the
magazine, so this is in their own words.
In the article "The soldier with the camera - unexampled documents from
the Propaganda Companies" there is a page and a quarter wide spread of
an aerial photograph of bomb devastated Rotterdam.
Under it is this text:
'The spectacle of 'total' war.
After Warsaw, it was Rotterdam that, issuing a challenge, learned how
hopeless it was to resist the German Luftwaffe - and paid for the lesson
by the destruction of the centre of the city.
P.K. Carstensen"

You do seem to go of half cocked a bit as if you were involved in the
propaganda of the times on one specific side. Rotterdam was a
surrounded and besieged city, the Dutch Government had been issued an
ultimatum that Government buildings and the city center would be
bombed by a specific time and in a specific area unless they
conditionally surrendered. This should have given time for
evacuation of that part of the city. This is quite different from
bombing a populated part of an unknown non specific city which doesn't
give a realistic chance to seek safety. It didn't help that the
Dutch officers were prevaricating and considering their position at
leisure or that the the Dutch were operating on two time zones and the
Germans a third. In the end the deadline was extended but some
bombers were on their way and the abort flares were fired were not
seen by the first wave. The second wave turned back.

The bombing was a botch up, notable also for its tragic deaths but
also with the speed a it was used to abolish Britain's US encourage
policy of not bombing cities within 48 hours.

The exact reasons for the haste and reprehensible rashness aren't
understood as Richthofen's died a short time latter. Perhaps the fear
of a counter invasion. The Dutch didn't have much of an air force but
they did have an anti-aircraft artillery system that caused so many
casualties that it may have cost the Luftwaffe the battle of Britain

The problem with pointing the finger and "uping the ante" is that as
many fingers point back and the ante actually is upped; often on false
assumptions. Unfortunately cooler heads often do not prevail. I'm
not sure you would be a cooler head?

Just ask how many civilians were killed during the shock and awe
opperation. I've heard 4000 casualties?