>>212777851I mean, shells cause much more damage than aerial bombardment and it’s way more cheaper and effective.
In order to neutralize a city, you need hundreds of long-range strategic bombers that were expensive af and months-long preparation.
Carrying bombs hundreds kilometers away with slow-speed bombers was also risky.
Besides, bombing civilian residents has militaristic meaning as proven in the Battle of Britain.
That is, the damage Americans inflicted on us was minor compared to that of Russian mass artillery fire to Germany, which were carried out 10 times more.
Even in Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo, the large part of the prefecture was intact.
You can’t even bomb a whole prefecture let alone a whole country.
The big wing tactics was basically a waste of money.