SHOULD ROME BE BOMBED?
Sfit,—I would like to express my disagreement with " Janus " when he talks about Rome. There may be excellent humane and even strategical reasons why we should not bomb Rome, but surely our reason could not be that "Rome does not belong to Mussolini "; that is just high falutin'. Rome belongs to Italy just as much as London and Canterbury belong to Great Britain. To an " elect " minority Rome may be their" holy city," but millions and millions of us experience more sorrow when St. Paul's, Westminster Abbey, Canter- bury Cathedral and the like are bombed than if we heard that the Forum in Rome had had a direct hit. Our biggest heartbreak, how- ever, is when we hear daily and nightly of valiant citizens, men, women and children, losing their lives through wanton enemy bomb- ing. Let " Janus " say that it would be wrong for us to bomb Rome's civilian population if he likes, but I do not think he should exempt Rome from bombing on any other score any more than London is exempt.
Artistic genius did not die in the ancient days of Rome's glory. If London is razed to the ground we shall build a better and more beautiful London. If some of Rome's treasures were destroyed we could be sorry about it, but to be honest we should have to admit that it would not mean anything to the great majority of the people in the world. If bombing Rome would help in any way to bring our victory nearer and so to put an end to Fascist (Roman) tyranny, then it would be a good thing to do. I think it would be wrong wantonly to attack the civilian population of Rome, and that, apart from the moral issue, it would be a waste of time in any case to bomb other than military objectives. But I would not exempt Rome from bomb- ing on any other score.—Yours truly,
INTERMITTENT ADMIRER OF " JANUS."
Previous page
