The strategic bombing by Britain and the U.S. was am effective strategy. Like Keegan, I think that this strategy helped in many ways, but not in many. Strategic bombing helped make the whole process easier for the military and air forces involved, yet made the citizens a lot more involved and a lot more at risk than any other tactic. Not until Arthur Harris took over did the bombing strategy become more useful. In the early 1940's Harris introduced the "Geo', 'Pathfinder Mosquito', and the 'Oboe' systems. This new technology helped Britain, and later America, be able to fight and win against Germany's own strategy. The strategic bombing strategy pursued by Britain and the U.S. was very effective in it's immediate and strategic level, but less effective in the destruction and starvation of essentials in caused.
As for ethics, there are no ethical limitations in war. Keegan says that strategic bombing is only fair when you win, and that is very true. Strategic bombing caused people to be exposed to hardships like: starvation, pillage, rapine, and destruction of both cities and lives. This strategy was not at all ethical, yet it was the most effective towards the immediate needs of Britain and the U.S.
