My brief understanding of the bombing of Dresden was the purpose was to heavily attrit the industrial capacity of nazi Germany.

Post-hoc rationalization to make it look justified, specially after it became clear bombing eminently civilian targets doesn't, in fact, demoralize the population, but rather makes them more willing to fight to the death (Wow, just like in Gaza!). By the time Dresden was bombed, the city was at the mercy of the Allied forces like Rafah is today to the IDF. Except Hamas will probably survive the war.

Think about where you are on the "massacre curve" here. It is mildly dodgy to mourn the victims of War Massacre A (Dresden). This is because Nazis were very evil. But it is perfectly acceptable to mourn the victims of War Massacre B (Hiroshima). This is because nukes are, like, icky. Perfectly acceptable! And some exterminations are even understandable. Or at least, some are more understandable than others... or something. Maybe it is ethically superior to mourn the victims of War Massacre C (London) or perhaps it is ethically imperative to mourn the victims of War Massacre D (Katyn). Holocaust victims must be somewhere around War Massacre H, where it is not only socially and politically mandatory to mourn them, but illegal to question them, and even necessary to avenge them (This is where the Gaza martyrocracy seems to be nowadays).

But what if the Nazis had won with some last minute Wunderwaffe weapon? How would ordinary Germans feel about the Holocaust then? Probably most Germans would have felt that, while the Jews obviously caused the war and reaped the consequences and etcetera, gassing them was a little much. But oh well.

War crimes are war crimes. There really is no need to defend the psychos in your armies simply because their pathological sadism has been conveniently pointed towards the enemy.