Diana Baldwin

There is a small version of the Statue of Liberty in Paris. I was watching something called Second War Diary. In Season 1 Episode 3 at 0:10:17 is clip of WWII Paris in which you can see the statue during WWII. It is a wonder it wasn’t destroyed during the time the city was invaded and occupied.

I’ve seen the smaller French statue, it sits on the Seine River in the heart of Paris. I believe it was created as a model that would be copied in much larger scale as a gift to the US.
You raise a good point as I too, have wondered how so many European historic landmarks escaped harm. My theory is that neither Hitler and the Nazis nor the Allied forces saw no strategic value in targeting places that were of no military importance. Hitler had ample opportunity during the occupation of France and the bombings of London to reduce famous places to rubble, but he did not. Perhaps he valued art and history and believed that one day they might all belong to Germany.
The Allies wished to preserve European culture and restore the autonomy of its nations. With the exception of Germany itself the war was waged primarily in the countrysides where, indeed, symbols of history were lost to the ages. But, again, the primary focus was driving the enemy from its occupied territory.
I’m sure much was lost during that war, but fortunately Europe escaped the indiscriminate devastation that occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Europe did not escape indiscriminate bombing. Ask the residents of Dresden, Berlin, or Cologne. Germany was absolutely hammered with bombs.

On both sides, the bombing of civilian targets was considered fair game, and the purpose was to destroy the morale of the people by putting the constant fear of death in them.

If you read my post it clearly states “with the exception of Germany”. My point is that strategic bombing typically did not include significant historic landmarks among the targets. And I agree many civilians lost their lives.