Sorry Fuchs, I don't buy that. Strengthening of the Navy had a lot of causes but the need to possibly fight the RN wasn't one of them.
Sorry Fuchs, I don't buy that. Strengthening of the Navy had a lot of causes but the need to possibly fight the RN wasn't one of them.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
It wasn't abut fighting. It was about having a big stick in great power gaming.
Few navies have ever built beautiful and impressive battleships or aircraft carriers during peacetime for risking them in battle. Such ships are meant for impressing foreign leaders and for the occasional bullying of a small power, not for peer2peer slaughtering.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Who says the people who count (politicians) don't believe that capital ships would be risked in battle?
By the way; capital ship employment has often been very careful.
See WWI sea battles, WW2 Mediterranean battleship employment, Battle of Midway, Russian de facto non-use of its battleships in both World Wars.
You carefully employ all your power. It is foolish to do otherwise. It might be more helpful to look at how many of the ships that started the war were still afloat at the end.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Bookmarks