<P> It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed . Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land...The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing . I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests than that of the enemy . </P> <P> The Foreign Secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle - zone, rather than on mere acts of terror and wanton destruction, however impressive . </P> <P> Having been given a paraphrased version of Churchill's memo by Bottomley, on 29 March, Air Chief Marshal Arthur Harris wrote to the Air Ministry: </P> <P> I...assume that the view under consideration is something like this: no doubt in the past we were justified in attacking German cities . But to do so was always repugnant and now that the Germans are beaten anyway we can properly abstain from proceeding with these attacks . This is a doctrine to which I could never subscribe . Attacks on cities like any other act of war are intolerable unless they are strategically justified . But they are strategically justified in so far as they tend to shorten the war and preserve the lives of Allied soldiers . To my mind we have absolutely no right to give them up unless it is certain that they will not have this effect . I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier . </P>

Where is dresden and why did britain bomb it