| Author |
Message |
    
Arun Vajpey
Member
Username: zekenwolf
Post Number: 45
Registered: 4-2009
| | Posted on Thursday, April 30, 2009 - 5:03 pm: | 
|
Although the Lusitania might not have been carrying any ammunitions as such, would not rifle shells, cartridges etc be considered as contributory to the British war effort in the eyes of the Germans irrespective of what Washington said? Those things could not be classified as supplies and the Lusitania was still listed as an Armed Merchant Cruiser, even though she never had any guns mounted like her sister ship. |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 26960
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, May 1, 2009 - 1:54 am: |
|
>>would not rifle shells, cartridges etc be considered as contributory to the British war effort in the eyes of the Germans irrespective of what Washington said?<<
If I recall correctly, they tried to make that case, and they really wouldn't have been wrong. You don't use rifle ammunition to plant flowers although anyone on the dirty end could well end up pushing up daisys!
The amount the Lusitania carried might have looked impressive on paper but it was actually quite trivial and wouldn't have lasted that long out on the front. The troops could burn through the rifle ammunition alone in less then an hour. Same with the unfilled artillary shells...one they had been filled with the bursting charge.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Arun Vajpey
Member
Username: zekenwolf
Post Number: 175
Registered: 4-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, May 23, 2009 - 7:41 am: |
|
>>>>>> The amount the Lusitania carried might have looked impressive on paper but it was actually quite trivial and wouldn't have lasted that long out on the front. The troops could burn through the rifle ammunition alone in less then an hour.<<<<<<<
Perhaps, but the fact that it was THERE would be sufficient excuse as far as the German High Command was concerned to justify the attack. |
Michael H. Standart
Moderator
Username: mstandart
Post Number: 27476
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, May 23, 2009 - 7:50 am: |
|
>>Perhaps, but the fact that it was THERE would be sufficient excuse as far as the German High Command was concerned to justify the attack.<<
Which of course, they attempted to do. It didn't go over very well in light of the casualties among civilians. Keep in mind that the skipper of the U-20 didn't really have any specific information on that and didn't need it. For him, it was enough that the vessel was flying the flag of a state with which his country was at war. That and the fact that the Lusitania was designed to be converted to an armed merchent cruiser was justification enough.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon
|
Arun Vajpey
Member
Username: zekenwolf
Post Number: 176
Registered: 4-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, May 23, 2009 - 2:55 pm: |
|
Agreed. If the situation had been reversed and a British ship or submarine was faced with a German passenger ship that was listed as an AMC and suspected to be aiding the Kaiser's war effort in some way, I am sure Churchill would have given explicit instructions to attack unless there was a diplomatic reason (eg American passengers) not to do so. |
