Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2018, 08:06:28 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Hysterical History  |  Topic: 75 Years Ago Today...
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  All Print
Author Topic: 75 Years Ago Today...  (Read 12050 times)
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #60 on: December 13, 2016, 08:53:54 AM »

You can also add 1964 and LBJ's reelection campaign to your list. He wasn't going to send American boys half way around the world to do what Asian boys should be doing for themselves, which is what he claimed AuH2O would do. And we all know how that turned out.
Logged
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #61 on: December 13, 2016, 08:58:27 AM »

The Germans waging "Unrestricted Submarine Warfare" off our East Coast including sinking American vessels would have most likely had us in the war sometime in 1942.

Operation Drumbeat didn't start until after Pearl Harbor and was Hitler coming to the aid of his allies. The Germans did perform unrestricted submarine warfare at the beginning of WWI and they were right and the US government lied. The RMS Lusitania was carrying a lot of war material, which made her a valid target. Both the US and UK governments lied for years about the illegal cargo. And used the sinking as an excuse for the US to enter the war.
Logged
AirAux
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 743

« Reply #62 on: December 13, 2016, 10:13:21 AM »

"The casualty counts for those includes the enemy, the Confederates."  we in the South do not see it that way....

"The Germans waging "Unrestricted Submarine Warfare" off our East Coast including sinking American vessels would have most likely had us in the war sometime in 1942."  And just how long would the Germans kept up that foolishness with those little yellow airplanes harassing them? 

History seems to be a mystery...
Logged
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,853

« Reply #63 on: December 13, 2016, 10:41:21 AM »

The Germans waging "Unrestricted Submarine Warfare" off our East Coast including sinking American vessels would have most likely had us in the war sometime in 1942.

Operation Drumbeat didn't start until after Pearl Harbor and was Hitler coming to the aid of his allies. The Germans did perform unrestricted submarine warfare at the beginning of WWI and they were right and the US government lied. The RMS Lusitania was carrying a lot of war material, which made her a valid target. Both the US and UK governments lied for years about the illegal cargo. And used the sinking as an excuse for the US to enter the war.

Drumbeat aside, it wouldn't have even taken unrestricted sub warfare to draw the US into the war in Europe. Eventually, an American ship would have been sunk without warning and it'd be 1917 all over again. As it stood, with the US pushing its "Pan-American Security Zone" to the east, US flagged ships were being put at risk. There were a few cases of ships being sunk by the wolfpacks. That would have to be shut down eventually. Would it have drawn the US into the land war? Eventually. But there should would have been a lot of shooting in the Atlantic.
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #64 on: December 13, 2016, 08:36:54 PM »

"The casualty counts for those includes the enemy, the Confederates."  we in the South do not see it that way....

You may not see it that way but the US Army has the battle streamers to prove it. Nor is the south monolithic in its interpretation, too many Yankees have moved south (me included) to really speak of a "southern" interpretation. The Lost Cause is just that, a group of rebellious traitors (Lee, Jackson etc took oaths to support and defend the US Constitution) lost the war. The kindly north decided to mostly forgive the southern transgressions and the south then invented the Lost Cause myth to justify their treason.

To tie this back to the original post. The south and Japan faced the same problem - how to fight and win against a numerically superior (in population) and more industrial enemy. They both came up with the same losing solution - they had to strike a crippling blow and hope the enemy sued for peace very quickly. When that didn't happen they both went to Plan B - fight a battle of attrition and hope the allegedly weak-willed Yankees gave up before the allegedly more valorous enemy lost too much manpower and land. Second big failure.  Lucky for both Japan and the south, the Yankees were more forgiving after a time, then the former enemies had any right to expect.
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,061

« Reply #65 on: December 13, 2016, 09:54:45 PM »

The Germans waging "Unrestricted Submarine Warfare" off our East Coast including sinking American vessels would have most likely had us in the war sometime in 1942.

Operation Drumbeat didn't start until after Pearl Harbor and was Hitler coming to the aid of his allies. The Germans did perform unrestricted submarine warfare at the beginning of WWI and they were right and the US government lied. The RMS Lusitania was carrying a lot of war material, which made her a valid target. Both the US and UK governments lied for years about the illegal cargo. And used the sinking as an excuse for the US to enter the war.


Drumbeat aside, it wouldn't have even taken unrestricted sub warfare to draw the US into the war in Europe. Eventually, an American ship would have been sunk without warning and it'd be 1917 all over again. As it stood, with the US pushing its "Pan-American Security Zone" to the east, US flagged ships were being put at risk. There were a few cases of ships being sunk by the wolfpacks. That would have to be shut down eventually. Would it have drawn the US into the land war? Eventually. But there should would have been a lot of shooting in the Atlantic.


A number of American ships were sunk by the Germans before Pearl Harbor. That's why we had the "Neutrality Patrol" in the North Atlantic in 1940.
Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #66 on: December 13, 2016, 10:16:17 PM »

Some time ago for a high school class I was asked to do a power point presentation on the road to the second World War. Here is what I found on the ships attacked by U-boats in the Atlantic.

SS Robin Moor, cargo ship torpedoed and sunk by U-69 North Atlantic May 41. No loss of life but crew adrift in the Atlantic for days.

USS Kearny, destroyer, damaged by torpedo from U-568 17 October 1941. Eleven sailors lost.

USS Reuben James, destroyer, sunk by U-Boat torpedo in the North Atlantic 31 October 1941. A hundred sailors lost.

And let's not forget the USS Panay, a gunboat of the US Asiatic Fleet on the Yangtze river patrol in China. Sunk by a Japanese air attack 12 December 1937 with three sailors dead...
« Last Edit: December 13, 2016, 10:20:15 PM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #67 on: December 13, 2016, 10:20:47 PM »

This article mentions three encounters between the German and American navies prior to Pearl Harbor. In no case, could the US said to be acting as a neutral power.

Quote
The U.S. Navy’s first clash with the Kriegsmarine occurred in April of 1941 when the USS Niblack attacked a Nazi U-boat off the coast of Iceland. After departing its base in Newfoundland as part of a mission that would see American troops occupy the mid-Atlantic island nation, the Niblack broke from formation to respond to a distress call from a torpedoed Dutch cargo vessel. While bringing aboard survivors, sonar operators aboard the warship detected an unidentified submarine moving in for the kill. The Niblack attacked the sub with depth charges. Although the weapons failed to damage the U-boat, the encounter represented America’s first hostile action of the Second World War.

Germany was at war with Holland. So the "neutral" US ship attacks the German sub, while the German sub was engaged with its enemy.

Quote
On Oct. 17, the USS Kearny along with two other vessels left their anchorage to assist a squadron of Canadian warships struggling to defend a convoy from a concerted U-boat attack. In the ensuing action, the U-568 fired on the Kearny’s starboard side, damaging the vessel and killing 11 crewmen. The ship limped back to port for repairs.

Since Germany was at war with the UK and the Commonwealth, the Canadian ships were legitimate war targets for the Germans. And the "neutral" US intervened again.

Quote
Five weeks before Pearl Harbor and Washington’s subsequent declaration of war on Japan, the German U-boat U-522 torpedoed and sank the American destroyer USS Reuben James in the North Atlantic. The American vessel was steaming from Newfoundland towards Iceland on Oct. 31 1941 when the British convoy she was escorting came under attack by a pack of German subs. Just before dawn, the Reuben James was herself hit near the forward magazine by a torpedo. The ensuing blast tore the bow section right off the World War One vintage Clemson-class destroyer. She sunk in minutes, taking 115 of her crew down with her. Forty-four survived the attack.

What the heck is the supposed "neutral" US ship doing escorting (a military function) a belligerent convoy. Her presence and function made her a legitimate target.

Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #68 on: December 13, 2016, 10:29:53 PM »

Of the three incidents you mentioned, the USS Niblock was rescuing survivors of a torpedoed ship. The kill had been made already, and the sub was putting the US vessel, on humanitarian aid, in peril.

Or are you telling us the Niblock was supposed to standby while the sub fired torpedoes in its vicinity, which may well have damaged the Niblock?

How do you explain the SS Robin Moor, identified with a big US Flag in the middle?
Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #69 on: December 13, 2016, 11:10:56 PM »

The US Neutrality Patrol, of which the three US Navy ships mentioned were part of, was formed to escort ships around American waters. So that there would be no attacks of ships in American waters.

If a ship of the Russian Navy, or the Chinese Navy coming near the United States, do you think the USN is going to standby and cross their arms?

In fact, if the United States allowed a ship from the Ukraine be attacked and sunk by a ship from the Russian Navy in or near US waters, wouldn't / shouldn't Ukraine complain and sue the US?

Let's look at efforts of some neighborhoods.

Some citizens band together to escort neighbors in areas riddled with crime. Or is anyone going to accuse those patrolling and helping those neighbors?


« Last Edit: December 13, 2016, 11:14:13 PM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #70 on: December 13, 2016, 11:22:59 PM »

Or are you telling us the Niblock was supposed to standby while the sub fired torpedoes in its vicinity, which may well have damaged the Niblock?

A neutral ship is not supposed to interfere between two belligerents. It is very simple.

Quote
How do you explain the SS Robin Moor, identified with a big US Flag in the middle?

I didn't discuss the Moor since it was a merchant ship not a navy (military) ship. But you may find this tidbit from the Wikipedia article about it of interest:

Quote
In Congress, isolationist Senator Burton K. Wheeler (D-MT) claimed that 70% of the ship's cargo constituted the kind of materials meeting both German and British standards for contraband, defended the legality of Germany's right to destroy her, and characterised Roosevelt's message as an effort to bring the United States into the war.[

And what was her cargo? From the same article:

Quote
The ship held "items of every conceivable description that would go into a general cargo", including over 450 autos and trucks, steel rails, tools, agricultural chemicals, over 48,000 U.S. gallons (180,000 L) of lubricant in drums, cases of shotgun shells, and a few .22 caliber rifles destined for sporting goods stores.[

Cars and trucks are easily converted to military use, as is just about everything else on the list. The Oklahoma City Bombing showed how easily fertilizer is converted to a bomb. Given the chemical composition of most agricultural chemicals, they are also the feedstock for explosives.
Logged
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #71 on: December 13, 2016, 11:27:44 PM »

The US Neutrality Patrol, of which the three US Navy ships mentioned were part of, was formed to escort ships around American waters. So that there would be no attacks of ships in American waters.

The US government decided that about half the Atlantic Ocean was "American waters". That is a position that has no precedent in international law then or now. If you look at where the combat took place, there were not in American waters as classically defined - either the 3, 12 or 200 mile limit. The latter is just an economic exclusion zone. The American government was deliberately trying to provoke Germany into action - and it got it. Then it tried to claim it was the injured party.

A neutral party does not take sides in a fight between belligerents. Once the fight is over and one or both parties leave the scene, then the neutral party can rescue survivors.
Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #72 on: December 13, 2016, 11:55:40 PM »

Re-read the article you quoted.

The Reuben was already picking survivors. For what it may be, the conflict between those two ships was over. And the so-called conflict was between a cargo vessel and a warship. A big, powerful "conflict" the cargo vessel had no hope of winning.

You see a bully shoving an old man in the street... A bully that has pummeled a child... the child is bleeding. Do you let that poor child on the ground, and wait for the bully to leave? Wow!

It may be that the US was trying to provoke Germany, but how come that Germany knew that was the cargo of the Moor?

A nation can claim whatever it wants as their waters. That does not give another nation an excuse to attack their ships.

The US Navy fired the Captain of the ship in a recent incident where some Chinese airplanes flew near his ship. He did not even turn on his weapons. China and the US are not technically at war... Or you are saying that the USN brass are trying to provoke China into an armed conflict?

China claims that Taiwan is a rebellious part of them. Yet no one is stating that China can get them by force.
Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
AirAux
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 743

« Reply #73 on: December 14, 2016, 09:55:12 AM »

"Nor is the south monolithic in its interpretation, too many Yankees have moved south (me included) to really speak of a "southern" interpretation. The Lost Cause is just that, a group of rebellious traitors (Lee, Jackson etc took oaths to support and defend the US Constitution) lost the war. The kindly north decided to mostly forgive the southern transgressions and the south then invented the Lost Cause myth to justify their treason."

And that my friend is why we don't mind you visiting the South, but we sure hate to see you stay...
Logged
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #74 on: December 14, 2016, 10:32:59 AM »

Re-read the article you quoted.

The Reuben was already picking survivors. For what it may be, the conflict between those two ships was over. And the so-called conflict was between a cargo vessel and a warship. A big, powerful "conflict" the cargo vessel had no hope of winning.

I think you have two incidents confused. The Reuben was escorting a British convoy (not the action of a neutral party) from Newfoundland (Canada) toward Iceland. That path is far outside any internationally accepted definition of US waters. By escorting ships belonging to one belligerent power in international waters, the Reuben made herself a valid war target of the other belligerent party.

The Niblack was the ship that was picking up survivors. Nothing in the narrative suggests that the Niblack was in any danger herself. The German sub was within the rules of war to sink the Dutch ship. Ask yourself this, would the Niblack have done the same if it was a German merchant ship that was being attacked and it was a British sub doing the attacking? I think not.

Quote
You see a bully shoving an old man in the street... A bully that has pummeled a child... the child is bleeding. Do you let that poor child on the ground, and wait for the bully to leave? Wow!

What happens on a street is vastly different from what happens in international relations. If a nation claims neutrality, it means that it cannot take sides - no matter what. The Red Cross had its origins in the Civil War. The Red Cross didn't go out on the battle field when one side was obviously losing and stop the battle to tend the wounded. It had to wait until the battle was over.

Quote
It may be that the US was trying to provoke Germany, but how come that Germany knew that was the cargo of the Moor?

I believe the article mentions that a spy sent the info to the Germans. It isn't clear whether he just sent the sailing date or also the cargo contents. Even if the cargo contents weren't sent, it doesn't matter much. Just about anything sent to a belligerent party, in the modern era, can serve a dual purpose - which is why neutral parties aren't supposed to be trading with any belligerent. The US wanted it both ways - it wanted to stay out of the war (at least for the moment) and it wanted to keep its economy going by exporting goods to one side of a war.

Quote
The US Navy fired the Captain of the ship in a recent incident where some Chinese airplanes flew near his ship. He did not even turn on his weapons. China and the US are not technically at war... Or you are saying that the USN brass are trying to provoke China into an armed conflict?

Since the captain failed to take any action to safeguard his ship, the Navy was right. Having your defense ready is a lot different then taking offensive action, which is the case in the incidents we have been discussing.

Quote
China claims that Taiwan is a rebellious part of them. Yet no one is stating that China can get them by force.

Only because the US Navy is over there. Pull out the US Navy or let the Chinese think for one second that we will not defend Taiwan and Taiwan will be "Red" in a heart beat.

Taiwan presents an interesting problem. The Nationalist fleeing mainland China just took over Taiwan. At no point were the local Taiwanese consulted whether they wanted the Nationalist there or not - see what happens when you don't control your borders.
Logged
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 489

« Reply #75 on: December 14, 2016, 10:38:15 AM »

And that my friend is why we don't mind you visiting the South, but we sure hate to see you stay...

Well I've been here 18 years and I have no plan on leaving. FWIW - in 18 years I have met only 1 person over the age of 35 (a good friend) who was born and raised in Florida. When I moved here 18 years ago, the local paper ran an article that the majority of Florida's population either came from somewhere else or were the direct descendent of a transplant. I forget if it is Beck or Hannity who complain the same thing is happening in Texas. And which ever one it is, they are also a transplant. You can find similar situation developing in the Carolinas and Georgia.
Logged
AirAux
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 743

« Reply #76 on: December 14, 2016, 02:48:37 PM »

I stand by my statement.  I was born at MacDill AFB, Tampa Florida....  Florida has never been as Southern as other states.  We don't have an accent in Florida... 
Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #77 on: December 14, 2016, 04:59:51 PM »

No accents in Florida?

When it appears that more than half of Florida residents are Hispanic?

Maybe that is the reason why there is no southern accent....

UmmMMmmmmMMMMmm!
Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,602

« Reply #78 on: December 14, 2016, 05:23:54 PM »

I meant the Niblack.

The narrative states the Niblack was picking survivors, when the U-boat returned for the kill.

That states the U-Boat returned. That, to me, puts the Niblack in danger.

As to your question, whether the US would have done the same... We will never know. I do think like you, that probably it would not. However that is immaterial...

But remember that when the United States iterated on its neutrality it stated that it would sell materials of war it would do so if the buyer used its own ships. Great Britain for whatever reasons was able to do so. Germany again for whatever reasons was not able to do so. Tough!

The United States government had plenty of reasons to behave in the way it did regarding Germany.

1. The Government had shown it was not going to respect any treaty, and any agreement was not to be respected.
2. Again and again it reneged on treaties and agreements made with neighbors.
3. Remember the Ruhr valley?
4. Remember how it dissected Czechoslovakia?
5. How it went back on Chamberlain's pact?
6. How it went against Luxembourg, a neutral nation?
7. How it went against Belgium, another nation that had declared neutrality?
8. How it rearmed itself. It does not matter it was a result of an onerously harsh treaty.

If I am walking with a Red Cross flag, and state I am neutral, and you fire at me, don't get too upset if I fire at you. More so when I see you have done it several times before.

9. And during WW I it instigated an attack from Mexico.

It was felt in one generation, the same people behaved in a treacherous manner twice.

The United States government felt that these actions were necessary to defend the nation from an overly aggressive nation that would have stopped at nothing.

The US Armed forces were woefully inadequate to defend the nation against an attack. Germany was far, far superior to what the United States had. And far less in quantity.


Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
AirAux
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 743

« Reply #79 on: December 14, 2016, 06:16:52 PM »

Luis, most of the Hispanics were not born there and the ones that were speak good English..  And probably good Spanish also, but I am no judge having gotten a F- on my college Spanish final because I wrote no habla Espanol.  I thought I done good, but noooooo...  There is a story that goes with that, but living and going to College 15 miles from the border and most of my Spanish training was south of the border, so I guess... I can speak Tequila fairly good...
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Hysterical History  |  Topic: 75 Years Ago Today...
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.086 seconds with 20 queries.