| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Deamon
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 2302
Location: Germany
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Anonymous wrote: |
When I mentioned that the Brits were willing to play as mean as required to win, what I meant was that the British Government was that way. The British 'people' are themselves the very opposite. As a population they usually wanted to play things fair or at least believe that they were being fair and merciful. But the British government has always been willing to do just about anything it takes to win a war, and yet they always manage to stage-handle the whole show so that in the end they manage to retain their 'name' for being a nation led by Gentlemen who play by the prevailing rules of war. They also manage to always cast their enemies in the role of being war villains and barbaric.
Case in point, Britain itself turned the seas around Germany into an unrestricted war, and when Germany tried to do likewise the Brits made sure that the so-called guilt stuck to Germany, but slipped off themselves.
|
Thats a very clear view you have mate 
| Quote: | | Or another case - but in WWII - German u-boats tried to start off the war by helping the crews of the sinking merchants, but Britain - actually breaking internation convention - forced their ship captains to report the u-boat locations, or even try to ram them, and thus force the u-boats to break off attempts to help the merchant crews. |
Or attack from the air even if there are merchant survivors on the deck.
| Quote: | In the case of The Laconia Incident
the Americans were responsible. The US attacking u-boats trying save survivors of a ship, when they u-boats had radioed for help from all ships, including the allies, is actually a war crime. Both the Brits and the USA are good at using small acts of war-crimes in order to force their enemy to move away from following international laws. Then both the Brits and the USA are perhaps the most expert at rallying the world media to their side to condemn their enemy once it gives up on the accepted rules of war. |
WOW 
Couldn't agree more.
| Quote: | | Germany has always come in 2nd best in using these kinds of tricks. |
The germans would have never did that stuff with their enemies the enemies did with them. Do you know the baby incident in WWI ?
A german u-boat was about to sink a merchant after the crew and passangers left the ship in life boats, as suddenly a woman with aparently a baby appeared on the deck and seemed to be in panic. Of course a german crew would have never sunck a ship with a lady and her baby on board so they docked to the ship and told here to drop the baby down on the bridge. She did so and took cover, BOOM. The baby was actualy a hidden bomb :dead:
The german u-boats did always tried to save the crews. But the brits did it rather seldome. Maybe only the captain to get informtations from him whitch boat they sunck and whether there are more boats operating in this area. There rest of the crew couldn't expect mutch more than a mashingun round or like in one case i know about where the british destroyers drived though a crew floating in the water after their u-boat was sunk or beaten to death and kicked in the water after they climbed on the deck.
I must say that i realy admire the honesty and chivalry of the german u-boat sailors. This project is supposed to become a memorial for them.
But after all not the honest people do win a war but rather the most dirty one.
| Quote: | My point about WWI and America was really this: I know my fellow Americans, and know that at no time in their history have they been able to sustain a war more than a few years of hard fighting, that is, if the Initial provocation was unclear or very small. Pearl Harbor was a very clear and large provocation. But unrestricted u-boat attacks in the Atlantic in WWI would never have been enough to equal a provocation that could sustain the USA in trench warfare for more than 2 years. (actually as it was, WWI was NEVER popular in America even after it joined the war - the numbers who avoided the draft was always large. Most Americans felt like Wilson has betrayed them and the only way the war could be sold to them was with the silly notion of it being a war to end all wars). Since America at that time, besides its navy, had almost nothing worth calling an army or airforce, and since it would take over a year before Gen. Pershing could hope to field even one division, my thought was that it would be better to drag the USA into war early – seeing that it would not likely have affected the Western Front much, and would only have added American cadavers to the fields of Flanders and Verdun. I don’t think those American troops would have pushed the German line back 50 meters – adding them would count about as much as adding another million or Russia’s army. And by the time the allies finally go their heads out of their behinds – I think the US troops would have been just as exhausted as the Brit and French armies.
On the other hand a steady attack of unrestricted u-boat attacks would have increased the speed at which the exhaustion took place and by 1918 I think the US would have been torn apart by riots (Americans would never have put up with 4 years of trench warfare). I realize the Kaiser could not see any of this from his position.
In the scheme of reality the German military was more like the Greek Spartans and the allies more like Xerxes’ vast horde. Adding another layer of millions to the ancient Persian army would not have had much effect upon the Greeks and would not have saved given Xerxes victory. Likewise had the German’s pushed right into the Brit Grand Fleet (especially before they could redesign their heavy shells or figure out why their ships were always blowing up while the German ships didn’t), say at Jutland, then I believe the Brit Grand Fleet would have indeed have been swept off the map. You just can’t win if your shells explode before they penetrate the armor of the enemy ships! Also German gunnery was about 40% better than the Brits (most of their shells fell in the water).
|
A good point.
| Quote: |
But alas for the Kaiser, he never really took off his gloves and continued to pull his punches, except on land of course.
|
Again, i can only agree with you here as with the u-baot commanders who were of the same opinion. The Kaiser acted not determined enough, not agressive enough.
And this is the reason why many u-boat commanders joined Hitler as he emerged couse he seemed to embodied the determination they wished the german leadership in WWI would have had.
| Quote: | By the way when it comes to psychological warfare the USA is not much behind Britain (in many ways they are the same). After WWII the US made a big production of blowing up the Japanese fleet with the atomic test (Baker Test 1946) of a shallow burst at Bikini atoll. While no doubt it was a valid test, the main drive was to show that surface fleets were now obsolete – especially armored fleets. It never actually proved this, for what it did show was that with a bit better construction big ships could survive such an attack. But it was nevertheless used to prove that great fleets were a thing of the past. It wasn’t until I was much older that I finally got just who the message was being directed to.
In 1946 the USA had no plans to let any other nation get the secret. Russia had no fleet to speak of. Italy and France didn’t have much. Japan was finished, and Germany was kapute. The message was being directed to Britain with its large fleet. The message was, we are in charge now – its our world. |
I'm impressed of your very objective views
At all you seem to know what you are talking about. How comes that, you must have read a lot of books or what ?
BTW: Do you know "rides of the deep" ?
So ships can survive a nuclear attack ? Wouldn't all electronics be dead ?
Cheers,
Deamon |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
