Saturday, July 5, 2014

On President Wilson's Outrage Over the Sinking of the Lusitania

It was ridiculous. a) The ship was sunk in a war-zone. b) It was a British vessel (the Brits being one of the main belligerents). c) The Germans repeatedly warned the Americans to stay off of British vessels even to the point that they were taking out advertisements in New York papers. d) The British blockade of Germany (in the North Sea, all of which the Brits had considered a war-zone) was every bit as brutal as the German treatment of England and in many cases it was worse in that it even precluded the shipment of food (a total violation if international law). And e) it was ultimately revealed that the Lusitania was actually carrying hundreds of tons of armaments that the Brits were obviously going to use in their, hello, WAR EFFORT. I don't know, folks, the way that I see this thing, it was just another excuse (a la the Gulf of Tonkin, a la the Maine, a la the "mushroom cloud", etc.) by yet another power-hungry politician whose goal it was to extend American power, period.............................................................................................P.S. And according to historian, Martin Gilbert, approximately 750,000 German civilians perished because of this British hunger blockade, the offspring of which (undoubtedly embittered by the experience, I would think), you really don't have to wonder all that much, now do you?

4 comments:

BB-Idaho said...

1100+ unarmed civilians: apparently the 911 of the era.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

But the people in the Twin Towers weren't in a war-zone and weren't warned ahead of time.......Though, yes, I totally embrace the Bush-Wilson analogy.

Rusty Shackelford said...



There have always been doubts about FDR and Pearl Harbor.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I wouldn't go as far as to say that FDR knew about Peal Harbor in advance but it certainly shouldn't have been a surprise to the fellow based upon our policies.