User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: The Lusitania - questions

  1. #1
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    26,271
    Thanks
    7,953
    Thanked: 26,409
    Rep Power
    21474868

    The Lusitania - questions

    In 1915 the passenger liner Lusitania bound from New York to England was torpedoed off the coast of Ireland with a loss of over 1100 passengers and crew. While it did not in and of itself cause Woodrow Wilson to enter the war it did begin a series of events that lead to our involvement. We actually finally entered the war when a message from Germany to the Ambassador of Germany in Mexico instructed him to tell the Mexican government they would support Mexico if they were to attack the United States, distracting them from entering the European War. Mexico did not take them up on that offer (at least not until recently!)

    This sinking, while viewed as particularly abhorrent because of the loss of civilian life lead to many questions and issues. The Germans had claimed the ship was actually acting in a military capacity because it had munitions on board, a claim England always denied. However in the early 1980's divers to the wreckage found over 4 million rounds of ammunition and cannon shells on board. Winston Churchill sent a message of a peer that it would be good if the Lusitania was sunk because it would bring the US into the war, something England needed sorely at the time. Therefore, neither the United States government, the captain of the ship nor Cunard Lines was informed that the British were well aware of a German submarine operating directly on the route of the ship and had sunk a large number of ships in the area. Cunard officials knew the ship was carrying war supplies and therefore subjected to attack by the Germans but said nothing to the passengers.

    Was the Lusitania allowed to be sunk deliberately by Churchill and the British war office in an effort to embroil the US in the war? Did Wilson know of this plot and allowed it to happen?
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Felix Birdbiter For This Useful Post:

    Brat (05-27-2019),Canadianeye (06-04-2019),darroll (06-04-2019),Lone Gunman (05-27-2019)

  3. #2
    death rides a pale horse Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entry1 year registered
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    jirqoadai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    6,496
    Thanks
    5,498
    Thanked: 3,571
    Rep Power
    7250169
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Felix Birdbiter View Post
    In 1915 the passenger liner Lusitania bound from New York to England was torpedoed off the coast of Ireland with a loss of over 1100 passengers and crew. While it did not in and of itself cause Woodrow Wilson to enter the war it did begin a series of events that lead to our involvement. We actually finally entered the war when a message from Germany to the Ambassador of Germany in Mexico instructed him to tell the Mexican government they would support Mexico if they were to attack the United States, distracting them from entering the European War. Mexico did not take them up on that offer (at least not until recently!)

    This sinking, while viewed as particularly abhorrent because of the loss of civilian life lead to many questions and issues. The Germans had claimed the ship was actually acting in a military capacity because it had munitions on board, a claim England always denied. However in the early 1980's divers to the wreckage found over 4 million rounds of ammunition and cannon shells on board. Winston Churchill sent a message of a peer that it would be good if the Lusitania was sunk because it would bring the US into the war, something England needed sorely at the time. Therefore, neither the United States government, the captain of the ship nor Cunard Lines was informed that the British were well aware of a German submarine operating directly on the route of the ship and had sunk a large number of ships in the area. Cunard officials knew the ship was carrying war supplies and therefore subjected to attack by the Germans but said nothing to the passengers.

    Was the Lusitania allowed to be sunk deliberately by Churchill and the British war office in an effort to embroil the US in the war? Did Wilson know of this plot and allowed it to happen?
    you know what zebra ships were, right?

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to jirqoadai For This Useful Post:

    Lone Gunman (05-27-2019)

  5. #3
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    26,271
    Thanks
    7,953
    Thanked: 26,409
    Rep Power
    21474868
    Quote Originally Posted by jirqoadai View Post
    you know what zebra ships were, right?
    Does that have anything to do with this topic? If not, I don't care what a zebra ship may have been.
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  6. #4
    Proud Boomer/V.I.P. Forum Donor
    V.I.P
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialTagger First Class1 year registered
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    Brat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Small Town USA
    Posts
    5,984
    Thanks
    49,260
    Thanked: 10,376
    Rep Power
    21474843
    Was the Lusitania allowed to be sunk deliberately by Churchill and the British war office in an effort to embroil the US in the war? Did Wilson know of this plot and allowed it to happen?
    Horrible if true.
    Unwavering support of my President, Donald J Trump

    ~Shower the people you love with love~

  7. #5
    death rides a pale horse Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entry1 year registered
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    jirqoadai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    6,496
    Thanks
    5,498
    Thanked: 3,571
    Rep Power
    7250169
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Felix Birdbiter View Post
    Does that have anything to do with this topic? If not, I don't care what a zebra ship may have been.
    the RMS Olympic started WWI as a zebra ship. no munitions of any kind. zero war goods. that was in 1915. they repainted it when they started using it for troop transport.
    a zebra ship could also be a coffee ship. some commodities were exempt from seizure.
    another zebra ship in WWI was the Zealandia. axis and allied powers were supposed to respect the nuetrality of the zebras.

  8. #6
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    26,271
    Thanks
    7,953
    Thanked: 26,409
    Rep Power
    21474868
    Quote Originally Posted by jirqoadai View Post
    the RMS Olympic started WWI as a zebra ship. no munitions of any kind. zero war goods. that was in 1915. they repainted it when they started using it for troop transport.
    a zebra ship could also be a coffee ship. some commodities were exempt from seizure.
    another zebra ship in WWI was the Zealandia. axis and allied powers were supposed to respect the nuetrality of the zebras.
    This has little or nothing to do with the the topic. We are speaking specifically of the Lusitania. Please, if you are going to bring in off topic remarks at the very least have the cutesy of tying them into the topic in some manner.

    The Lusitania was not a zebra ship, it was ostensibly a passenger liner that may or may not have been carrying war supplies. Regardless of the fact of its cargo was Germany within civilized behavior, knowing the ship to be carrying thousands of civilians, in sinking it? Keep in mind they had no idea if the ship was actually carrying munitions, only that some ships were alleged to have been.
    Last edited by Dr. Felix Birdbiter; 05-27-2019 at 09:20 PM.
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  9. #7
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    26,271
    Thanks
    7,953
    Thanked: 26,409
    Rep Power
    21474868
    Quote Originally Posted by Brat View Post
    Horrible if true.

    Maybe, maybe not. Another statement by Churchill after Wilson finally entered the war was while he was quite glad the US had joined in how many men, on both sides would have still been alive if the US had entered the war when the Lusitania had been sunk rather than 18 months later. Keep in mind the war ended in about a year after the US entered the battle. Yes, it was horrible to contemplate the deaths of so many innocents but weighed against the total destruction it would have been a worthy sacrifice.

    Something to think about.
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  10. #8
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteranRecommendation Second ClassTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 28.0%

    patrickt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico, for over twenty years. Born and raised in Memphis, TN, and worked in Colorado.
    Posts
    29,632
    Thanks
    3,738
    Thanked: 17,932
    Rep Power
    21474873
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Felix Birdbiter View Post
    In 1915 the passenger liner Lusitania bound from New York to England was torpedoed off the coast of Ireland with a loss of over 1100 passengers and crew. While it did not in and of itself cause Woodrow Wilson to enter the war it did begin a series of events that lead to our involvement. We actually finally entered the war when a message from Germany to the Ambassador of Germany in Mexico instructed him to tell the Mexican government they would support Mexico if they were to attack the United States, distracting them from entering the European War. Mexico did not take them up on that offer (at least not until recently!)

    This sinking, while viewed as particularly abhorrent because of the loss of civilian life lead to many questions and issues. The Germans had claimed the ship was actually acting in a military capacity because it had munitions on board, a claim England always denied. However in the early 1980's divers to the wreckage found over 4 million rounds of ammunition and cannon shells on board. Winston Churchill sent a message of a peer that it would be good if the Lusitania was sunk because it would bring the US into the war, something England needed sorely at the time. Therefore, neither the United States government, the captain of the ship nor Cunard Lines was informed that the British were well aware of a German submarine operating directly on the route of the ship and had sunk a large number of ships in the area. Cunard officials knew the ship was carrying war supplies and therefore subjected to attack by the Germans but said nothing to the passengers.

    Was the Lusitania allowed to be sunk deliberately by Churchill and the British war office in an effort to embroil the US in the war? Did Wilson know of this plot and allowed it to happen?
    I have absolutely no idea. I believe the Lusitania was carrying armaments. The rest of the conspiracy theory is beyond me and has no substantiation.

  11. #9
    death rides a pale horse Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entry1 year registered
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    jirqoadai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    6,496
    Thanks
    5,498
    Thanked: 3,571
    Rep Power
    7250169
    yeah. its sad when a democrat ( or Republican ) starts shit like this.
    every person on the Lusitania knew they were putting themselves in harms way by boarding a ship headed to england, that was not painted to alert warships that the ship was nuetral, therefore do not sink me before inspection of manifest and cargo hold.

  12. #10
    Alumni & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience Points1 year registeredRecommendation Second Class
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Traddles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    20 Miles SE of Facebook
    Posts
    10,424
    Thanks
    3,042
    Thanked: 13,647
    Rep Power
    21474849
    However in the early 1980's divers to the wreckage found over 4 million rounds of ammunition and cannon shells on board 1. Winston Churchill sent a message of a peer that it would be good if the Lusitania was sunk 2 because it would bring the US into the war, something England needed sorely at the time. Therefore, neither the United States government, the captain of the ship nor Cunard Lines was informed that the British were well aware of a German submarine operating directly on the route of the ship and had sunk a large number of ships in the area 3.
    1 The salvage company was warned by the UK Foreign Office of the presence of munitions that could be dangerous. I haven't seen a source stating that they found munitions, though that is obviously possible.

    2 Actually Churchill's letter said that it was desirable to attract neutral shipping as this could embroil the Germans with neutrals. No specific ship was named. And the RMS Lusitania was UK flagged, not neutral.

    3 That German submarines were operating in St. George's Channel and the Irish Sea was public knowledge, and had been for some time. More specifically, the Lusitania had received several warning messages relative to a submarine operating in the area around St. George's Channel. These were received the day before and on the day of (but well before) her sinking.

    On a previous voyage the Lusitania had been instructed to time its arrival so it could enter Liverpool at high tide so it would not have to wait for high tide outside the harbor, and thus be an easy target. Though not given that specific instruction during its final voyage the captain was adjusting his route and speed so as to again enter Liverpool with no wait outside the harbor.

    So, even if you ignore the fact that Churchill had no way to ensure that U-20 would attack the Lusitania and had no way to control how the US would react, basic facts contradict the CT. The Admiralty F'ed up, in multiple ways, and their attention was focused on the Dardanelles Campaign (another, bloody, F-up). Absent evidence, don't go CT when stupidity is an adequate explanation.
    Traddles

    SVPete

    PeteS in CA

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Traddles For This Useful Post:

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter (06-04-2019)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •