So was the treatment of Germany harsher after the end of WWI or WWII?

And if it was harsher after WWII, which did not lead to another world war, does it not seem to say that one must destroy an enemy entirely and not just partly, as was the case after WWI?

Maybe the allies were to lenient on Germany after WWI, and should have partitioned it then. Those idiots in Germany that led to WWII knew of the horrific scale of world war, and they started it. They had seen hell and again brought it to the world. That leaves me precious little sympathy for them. They just thought they could win this time, so it became necessary to more forcefully persuade them against ever thinking about it again. Bring back some of the hell they unleashed to their own doorstep.

And on air bombing, it seems Germany started that on Poland, then agreed not to bomb civilian targets with Britain and France, then proceeded to break that agreement by bombing Rotterdam.
To a certain extent, I can see your point. However, I'm not sure exactly how Germany triggered Dresden - it's a historical fact that German towns were bombed first. The German government asked the British to halt the bombings of German towns repeatedly, before German bombs fell on Britain.
Well, except for Poland and Rotterdam...

If you want to appeal to emotion, how many of your ancestors were tortured in Lubyanka? How many of your ancestors were shipped to Gulags? How many of your ancestors perished because of famine or fire? How many of your ancestors were conscripted into the Wehrmacht and sent to the hell that was the Russian steppes? Don't talk to me about death.
Again, I've little sympathy for when you dance with the devil and lose.

CR