CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7594
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:07 pm
 


jeff744 jeff744:
Find a source where it says we ran off to go fight in another glorious war in WWII, it is pretty well accepted that we did it out of duty not because the war would be fun.


Your "point" is what, the mood was different from WWI to WWII?!? And? King was faced with numerous, complex pressures, the first being avoiding the conscription issue that plagued Borden, and his reservations regarding commitment was often coloured by it and his desire to keep the nation unified. King was for the war and so was the nation - it was, this time, however, less about blind sentiments and naivete (the Great War made sure of that one).


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:09 pm
 


Thank God we did it out of duty, or better yet a sense of what's right, than because we thought war would be "fun." What kind of screwball nation goes to war for "fun?"


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:44 pm
 


BartSimpson BartSimpson:
bootlegga bootlegga:
And my point about the US Navy not being able to break the blockade of Germany had nothing to do with the US ability/inability to build ships - it had everything to to do with the fact that IF the US entered on Germany's side, one of its key missions would have been to break that blockade - which given the relative sizes (and concentration) of the Allied naval forces vs the Central naval forces was almost impossible.


Your view of strategy is...novel.

If the US Navy had been deployed in favor of Germany it would've been silly to waste it in a frontal assault trying to break the Royal Navy blockade. Far better an idea would have been to deploy the US Navy to blockade the United Kingdom and to force the Home Fleet into blue water to come play where US Naval gunnery would have the advantage.

The advantage the Royal Navy had was that they controlled the approaches to the Baltic and had the relative 'high ground' against the High Seas Fleet that was bottled up in their ports. Were the Home Fleet to have to disperse to counter a US blockade that would have allowed the Germans some wiggle room to navigate in the North Sea.

Which never happened so I hope you accept this as friendly speculation. [B-o]


nearly all of britains imports and exports were with the Unted states, so war between them was almost impossible. But the british fleet was 10x the size of the german fleet, and the Germans didn’t recover from jutland, so the british would have been able to move against the Americans in the atlantic and keep the german blockade going


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 2424
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:51 pm
 


Regina Regina:
jeff744 jeff744:
Find a source where it says we ran off to go fight in another glorious war in WWII, it is pretty well accepted that we did it out of duty not because the war would be fun.

Possibly accepted in your circle of friends but hardly what history shows. If we "had" to go to war, why did we wait so long for Parliament to decide?

The Second World War began on Sept. 1, 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Britain and France declared war on Germany on Sept. 3. In Canada, a special session of Parliament was called on Sept. 7. Canada remained neutral until Sept. 10, when Parliament approved the Prime Minister's request to go to war. King George VI announced declared war on Germany in the name of Canada the same day.
The day after Parliament's decision, the Globe and Mail described Canada's entry into the war as follows: "This peaceful country, 3,000 miles distant from the scene of the conflict, which desires to live on terms of amity with the whole world, has spoken in it own right for human justice and equity, prepared to defend with life and its full treasure principles more sacred than life or material welfare. The solemn decision reached was the echo of a nation's soul, the Globe and Mail continued, "torn by wholesale murder and brigandage on land and sea and tyranny which it could not in silence see imposed on others wishing to live undisturbed like itself."

We waited to emphasize the fact that we were not under Britains control, by waiting a week Canada displayed that we entered the war of our own choice.

I am tired of this, I have been effectively called an idiot and when I provide actual quotes I am called an idiot despite the utter lack of anything but "the accepted view" which just means you think it is but are too lazy to actually prove it is. I finally get a book sent to me but all I am told is the equivalent of 'sit down and shut up and read an entire book before you are entitled to a real response', thanks guys for the utter lack of anything useful.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7594
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:58 pm
 


jeff744 jeff744:
We waited to emphasize the fact that we were not under Britains control, by waiting a week Canada displayed that we entered the war of our own choice.

I am tired of this, I have been effectively called an idiot and when I provide actual quotes I am called an idiot despite the utter lack of anything but "the accepted view" which just means you think it is but are too lazy to actually prove it is. I finally get a book sent to me but all I am told is the equivalent of 'sit down and shut up and read an entire book before you are entitled to a real response', thanks guys for the utter lack of anything useful.


Actually, I posted this
$1:
"Your "point" is what, the mood was different from WWI to WWII?!? And? King was faced with numerous, complex pressures, the first being avoiding the conscription issue that plagued Borden, and his reservations regarding commitment was often coloured by it and his desire to keep the nation unified. King was for the war and so was the nation - it was, this time, however, less about blind sentiments and naivete (the Great War made sure of that one)."
and received no response.

What exactly is your point then?


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32460
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:04 pm
 


jeff744 jeff744:
We waited to emphasize the fact that we were not under Britains control, by waiting a week Canada displayed that we entered the war of our own choice.

Seriously?? :roll:
jeff744 jeff744:
I am tired of this, I have been effectively called an idiot

No one said that.............you painted yourself into that circle.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12349
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:14 pm
 


Canada didn't wait a week to emphasize anything. The delay was made to circumvent America's neutrality laws. We waited a week because we needed to place orders for tons of military supplies from the USA. The USA could not export those materials to Canada if we were at war because that would violate the USA's neutrality laws.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33691
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:15 pm
 


jeff744 jeff744:
blah blah blah nowiwhinecuzigotnuthin



Still nothing.. are you avoiding me ? :lol: :lol:


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:29 pm
 


jed7 jed7:
nearly all of britains imports and exports were with the Unted states, so war between them was almost impossible.


Trade does not preclude war. I've already established that in this topic. Do follow, eh? :wink:

jed7 jed7:
But the british fleet was 10x the size of the german fleet, and the Germans didn’t recover from jutland, so the british would have been able to move against the Americans in the atlantic and keep the german blockade going


The Royal Navy in World War One was thinly spread about the world with the one concentration of force being invested in the Home Fleet which was focused on the Germans. That the British Empire was vulnerable to the US Navy (or any other navy at the time) was amply illustrated by the difficulties the Germans imposed on the Brits with their highly successful raiders, like the Moewe. A relative handful of German cargo ships outfitted with guns posed a serious threat to the British Empire that was stretched quite thin at the time.

In the Pacific the Royal Navy was depending on the Japanese to assist them with operations against the Germans and the Japanese were not terribly helpful in that regard.

Now, as you correctly pointed out, the US was Britain's most important trading partner and that was with France and the continent just 22 miles away. A fracas involving the US would have had a greater effect on Britain than the US especially given as that the Brits bought much of their grains from the US. As the war progressed they bought much of their ammunition from the US, as well.

All of which would have ceased had the US merely imposed an embargo, let alone a blockade.

No, the Brits in their splendid isolation were also splendidly vulnerable because by 1914 almost everything of importance was shipped to the Home Islands.

Had the Germans simply managed to convince the US to cut off trade to the Brits the UK would've been facing some tough times. Too bad for the Kaiser his government was not nearly as clever as His Majesty's Government in manipulating us Americans.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:46 pm
 


jeff744 jeff744:
I finally get a book sent to me but all I am told is the equivalent of 'sit down and shut up and read an entire book before you are entitled to a real response', thanks guys for the utter lack of anything useful.


Just one book? They're slipping. Please excuse them. :wink:

I was going to suggest a reading list.

Start with the classic Dreadnought and then move on to the Castles of Steel. Both are magnificent and definitive works by Robert Massie. In these books you'll get the details of Home Island vulnerabilities plus you'll get a more realistic grasp of US Navy capabilities and US Navy innovations (that never came into play in WW1).

The Last Gentleman of War, if you can find it, is a wonderful read that details the celebrated exploits of the German cruiser Emden in WW1 and the story lays bare the vulnerabilities of the United Kingdom when it notes that the interruption of phosphates being shipped to the Home Islands had the potential to be more disastrous than a battlefield loss.

A free study of the German raider Wolf can be found here:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16690/16 ... 6690-h.htm


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:46 pm
 


BartSimpson BartSimpson:
jed7 jed7:
nearly all of britains imports and exports were with the Unted states, so war between them was almost impossible.


Trade does not preclude war. I've already established that in this topic. Do follow, eh? :wink:



it does within the context of the first world war, Britain could not possibly keep it's armies in Germany, if it went to war with it's most important trading partner, at the same time. And American feeling was anti-German from day 1, which makes war impossible


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:52 pm
 


"Impossible" is quite a stretch. Difficult, yes. Improbable, obviously.

Impossible? No, not at all.


Offline
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:53 pm
 


BartSimpson BartSimpson:
But the british fleet was 10x the size of the german fleet, and the Germans didn’t recover from jutland, so the british would have been able to move against the Americans in the atlantic and keep the german blockade going

The Royal Navy in World War One was thinly spread about the world with the one concentration of force being invested in the Home Fleet which was focused on the Germans. That the British Empire was vulnerable to the US Navy (or any other navy at the time) was amply illustrated by the difficulties the Germans imposed on the Brits with their highly successful raiders, like the Moewe. A relative handful of German cargo ships outfitted with guns posed a serious threat to the British Empire that was stretched quite thin at the time.

In the Pacific the Royal Navy was depending on the Japanese to assist them with operations against the Germans and the Japanese were not terribly helpful in that regard.

Now, as you correctly pointed out, the US was Britain's most important trading partner and that was with France and the continent just 22 miles away. A fracas involving the US would have had a greater effect on Britain than the US especially given as that the Brits bought much of their grains from the US. As the war progressed they bought much of their ammunition from the US, as well.

All of which would have ceased had the US merely imposed an embargo, let alone a blockade.

No, the Brits in their splendid isolation were also splendidly vulnerable because by 1914 almost everything of importance was shipped to the Home Islands.

Had the Germans simply managed to convince the US to cut off trade to the Brits the UK would've been facing some tough times. Too bad for the Kaiser his government was not nearly as clever as His Majesty's Government in manipulating us Americans.


The US had something like 5 or 6 Dreadnaughts at the start of the war, the Royal Navy had somewhere in the region of 40 just in the home fleet. if America was at war with Britain, the Atlantic would not have been as important anyway, the focus for British supplies would have shifted to India


Last edited by jed7 on Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:58 pm
 


BartSimpson BartSimpson:
"Impossible" is quite a stretch. Difficult, yes. Improbable, obviously.

Impossible? No, not at all.


if war was likely with America, military thinking would be totally different. which makes it a completely differet kind of war. The amount of logistics and supplies needed to keep the British army in France, would make the war impossible without american trade


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3967
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:15 pm
 


jed7 jed7:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
But the british fleet was 10x the size of the german fleet, and the Germans didn’t recover from jutland, so the british would have been able to move against the Americans in the atlantic and keep the german blockade going

The Royal Navy in World War One was thinly spread about the world with the one concentration of force being invested in the Home Fleet which was focused on the Germans. That the British Empire was vulnerable to the US Navy (or any other navy at the time) was amply illustrated by the difficulties the Germans imposed on the Brits with their highly successful raiders, like the Moewe. A relative handful of German cargo ships outfitted with guns posed a serious threat to the British Empire that was stretched quite thin at the time.

In the Pacific the Royal Navy was depending on the Japanese to assist them with operations against the Germans and the Japanese were not terribly helpful in that regard.

Now, as you correctly pointed out, the US was Britain's most important trading partner and that was with France and the continent just 22 miles away. A fracas involving the US would have had a greater effect on Britain than the US especially given as that the Brits bought much of their grains from the US. As the war progressed they bought much of their ammunition from the US, as well.

All of which would have ceased had the US merely imposed an embargo, let alone a blockade.

No, the Brits in their splendid isolation were also splendidly vulnerable because by 1914 almost everything of importance was shipped to the Home Islands.

Had the Germans simply managed to convince the US to cut off trade to the Brits the UK would've been facing some tough times. Too bad for the Kaiser his government was not nearly as clever as His Majesty's Government in manipulating us Americans.


The US had something like 5 or 6 Dreadnaughts at the start of the war, the Royal Navy had somewhere in the region of 40 just in the home fleet. if America was at war with Britain, the Atlantic would not have been as important anyway, the focus for British supplies would have shifted to India



At the start of the war Britain had 10 'Dreadnaught' class ships with 3 more completed during the war. At least according to World War I Naval Combat


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests



cron
 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.