I set out to discuss whether or not it was ethical for the prime minister of Britain (Winston Churchill) to let the Luftwaffe attack Coventry, when he knew they would be attacked.
On the evening of 14 November 1940, 300 German bombers dropped 500 tons of explosives, 33,000 combustible bombs and several parachute mines on the industrial city of Coventry. Fire-fighters managed to put out the first fires but other hits trailed the first and rapidly new fires broke out causing a firestorm. Telephone networks were destroyed, hindering the fire service's command and control and making it tough to send fire-fighters to the most dangerous blazes. About 4,300 houses were destroyed and about two-thirds of the city's buildings were damaged. The raid was deeply fixated on the city Centre, which was mostly destroyed. Two churches, two hospitals and one police station were also damaged roughly one third of the city's factories …show more content…
In his book The Ultra Secret, ex World War II intelligence officer F.W Winterbotham recollected how he passed information on to Churchill that Coventry would be the destination of the bombing raid few hours before it took place. He further claimed Winston Churchill ordered that no defensive actions should be taken to defend Coventry, for fear that the Germans suspect that their cypher had been broken.
I believe it was ethically justifiable for Winston Churchill to let Coventry be raided, even though a staggering amount of people suffered from it, even though it sounds horrific that the prime minister would sacrifice Coventry to a German raid it may have been necessary to save many more lives in the long-term because the Germans might plan to hit a more populated area and if they found out their code was deciphered Britain would in the dark and vulnerable to