Manny,
History records that the Germans advocated using Dresden as an excuse to throwing out the restrictions placed by the Geneva Convention ... many more of our parents and grandparents would've died had they done so. Ironically, they felt it best to hold the moral high ground and not stoop to our level. British and Americans who were unanimously in favor of stopping the 3rd Reich, only began to question our methods after Dresden. Churchill himself who authorized it, later distanced himself from it because he was morally ashamed by it and he suffered for it for the rest of his life.
As for Nagasaki, Hiroshima ... many in military service at that time were sickened by the death toll. Suicide, alcoholism surged, and reporting from medical and Chaplains of that time indicated a spike in questions about the morality of the war. This from men who volunteered after Pearl Harbor. Its been documented to death, and the military and political leaders who were behind the bombings suffered tremendously for the rest of their lives, professionally and personally, because of the stench of that action associated with their names. Suicides, divorce, mental breakdowns ... all over the place.
My job during the first Gulf war was to advise strategic bombing; we were given moral imperatives to minimize collateral damage as the targets were all military industrial, not personnel centers. We read, at length, the military history of Dresden, Nagasaki and Hiroshima; the internal reports, and how they had shaped all bombing plans after that. We still live in the moral shadow of those atrocities ... our word, a military word, for the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians by an otherwise honorable profession. Its a collective shame we bear today - don't think for a second drones were to save american lives. They're to save american souls, because it distances the bomber from the consequences of pulling the trigger. And we have enough guilt and moral duress in our ranks.
I realize for most "total war" is a topic of discussion with a few beers from the comfort of a chair and the anonymity of the internet. I however live it, have lived it, since the early 80s, from various perspectives. Presently, my role is to advise battlefield commanders how to keep their honor intact while waging war, regardless of the ROE, because that's important to them; their own souls matter to them. They want to be able to go home to their wife proud, not bearing the guilt of innocent blood on their hands. As do our sons and daughters (my son and daughter are both in service) who joined to represent something honorable and good. On this very board I have railed against the stupid ROE that cost my CO, and several other people their lives, and my SgtMaj his legs. But that doesn't mean I'd advocate abortive combat, killing enemies in their infancy before they could wield the sword against us. That's horrific, and conduct unbecoming a US service member.
The reason why we don't engage in total war is because we still like to think we're the good guys ... bad guys kill innocent people, unarmed people, noncombatants.
