Regarding earlier posts a ship on the bottom that isnt on the beach
that has been sunk by submarine torpedo attack and is still a recoverable
ship. whether or not a total constructive loss is still a sunk from the
subs perspective. what im going for is that we should redefine sinking
not really go over JANAC's results.
I know theres no percentage in that.
but redefining sinking deals more with the future than the past.

I think ILL start a new debate now.

Have we seen our last Global Submarine Campaign............
.......HMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I wonder what side I should take.

HMS Exeter was effectively out of action for 14 months after the Battle of the River Plate but was not sunk in the engagement. I think it would be fair to call the temporarily sunken destroyer 'removed from action', like 'destroyed' except not permanent. This is as opposed to 'disabled' which I interpret to mean back in service within a few weeks or so.

I'm old enough to realize that what I'm about to write will be contraversial, before you all become unglued and dripping with praise for the dearly departed; but, it needs to be said, nonetheless:

Being retired military, I salute the honest exploits of Mush Morton and his crew, but, I thoroughly detest his war crimes--shooting survivors
in the water. (see pp.384-385, SILENT VICTORY, Clay Blair
Jr.)
...also;

The Baralong Incident was an unprosecuted war crime of World
War I.
On August 19, 1915, U-27, commanded by Kapitänleutnant
Wegener, was sunk by the Q-Ship HMS Baralong, commanded by
Lieutenant Godfrey Herbert. Herbert ordered that all German
survivors, including Wegener, should be executed on the spot.
Although the British Admiralty tried to keep this atrocity a
secret, news reached Germany and the "Baralong Incident" was
used to justify increased cruelty at sea both during World
War One and after.

April 13, 1940 The British navy sank the German ship the
Erich Giese. The captain Karl Smidt reported that while the
crew of 200 men were in the water, British destroyers opened
fire on them.

May 20,1941 A convoy of 21 German ships was attacked by
British warships off the coast of Crete during the night.
Witnesses said the British ships scanned the sea with
searchlights looking for the survivors, and opened fire on
them. One survivor, Corporal Walter Segel, said: "I saw at
least 20 groups of survivors who were illuminated by the
British and then sprayed with bullets."

...and finally,

Kapitanleutnant Heinz ECK, of the German Navy: Ex-Commander
of U-Boat 852. Tried by a mixed British and Greek war crimes
court at Hamburg 17-20.10.45 for killing survivors of the
crew of the steamship “ Peleus.” Found guilty and sentenced
to death 20.10.45; sentence confirmed. Executed 23.11.45.

I feel certain had, Morton, survived the war, he would have
faced the rocks and shoals of the UCMJ and/or court marshall for
Wahoo's January patrol.

No, it doesn´t need to be said. It´s totally off-topic and the war crimes aspect has been discussed several times already in other threads. Please don´t derail the thread. Thanks!

I have some thoughts of my own on war crimes that will remove
several of my heros
I will not defend Dudley Morton on this charge
Nor would I defend
arthur harris
curtis lemay
or winston churchill

strangely inspite of those blemishes winston and mush
still remain in my good books why I cant say I have a
great and vehemenent anethema for Lemay and Harris.
why is it we can call Osama a devil incarnate for
killing 2700 odd people but we will pin a CMH on lemay
for making a million non combatants homeless and killing
a quarter million of them at a stroke.

dont get me wrong Lemay was a great leader and made the
decisions he made on the info of the time and influence
of the time so did mush.
but what distinguishes mush from harris lemay and churchill
is that the latter had oppotunity to influence many with
their interpretations where mush only had to answer for
his own actions as a skipper. (albeit it was never taken up)

At the time the propaganda machine was manufacturing
hate. And painting the adversaries as totally ruthless
(this is not to say they werent ruthless) but the influence
of the propaganda machine and the seeming inescapability
of the war and how poorly it was going in the beginning
might have influenced you and me in similar circumstances

we have the benefit of retrospect
they made those choices rightly or wrongly
at the pointy end of the stick.

can we any of us say in complete confidence that given
the times and circumstances we might not have acted the same.

I like to think as a man of good conscience I wouldnt have made those
choices given the circumstances but I cant know for sure and would
be foolish to believe that I would know.

MM

let me guess
 

This is all just a drop in the bucket.

Meaning we are only scratching the surface on which?

war crimes or battle credits and marine law.

MM:hmm:

As they say, "but for the grace of g-d, there go I". Yes, I agree, MM. Good post. I'm disappointed that, Gizzmoe, misunderstood my intent ... and apoligize for any offense in that regard, but believe that all history is prolog.

all the best,

Let's not trot out some moral equivelency argument here as it just does not hold water. LeMay and Harris didn't develop their operational goals and habits overnight or in a vacuum. Before there was a Tokyo or a Dresden there was a Nanking, a Pearl Harbor, a Rotterdam and a London. Germany and Japan pointed the way toward total war and the rest of the world followed. What was unthinkable in 1940 was a matter of course by 1945. And, both Tokyo and Dresden were legitimate military targets; the former was the home to thousands of workers who assembled weapons in small dispersed workshops and the latter was a major transportation and communications hub that had not been heavily damaged up to that point.

As for OBL , he is a true terrorist who targets symbols of the "Great Satan" and other Western states; embassies, warships, financial centers, military quarters and HQs, transportation centers, etc. In choosing these targets he attempts to maximize the death toll as this underlines the message of vulnerability.

Barkhorn.

With all due respect, nor does yours.

The fact remains that atrocities were committed by both Axis and the Allies, and no amount of desperate justification will obsolve either from their war crimes, period.

No sorry, I disagree as context is important - and sometimes vital - as it is in these cases.

Barkhorn.

Well thats part of the point the machine held up that Rotterdam was on purpose and it was held up that acts like that made the germans monstorous I agree morality shouldnt be wishy washy but hypocrisy is the worst of it. (not you)
they held up that Rotterdam was monstrous and that Gernika was too
why is it monstorous when the other side does it and a "necessary job of work" when we do it. Should not we hold ourselves to the same standards under which we convict them.

( please lets not use this to open the debate on whether american troops should be held accountable for war crimes if you need to address that start a thread.)

We live in an imperfect world and we are but men also imperfect.
but does that mean we shouldnt work to improve our world or
ourselves. if old moralities from a middle eastern village of a few thousand
years ago cant describe an appropriate morality for genetics.
and that morality would say no genetics is the work of the devil or
unnatural. but in an ever evolving universe morality should be morality
for all the reasons it is needed among societies but morality should never be static in the presence of evolution.

OBL just wants to create conditions that will unite the arab superstate.
thats what the "Foundation" is for I think. and to fuse yourselves into a single economic and political union of states isnt a new idea.
the world didnt change on 911 its always been that way.
I certainly do not endorse his tactics or his self justified morality
however I feel that all of what OBL does has been done before,
in other places and times.

Begin and Arafat come to mind.

enuough back to subs.

MM

I did not misunderstand your intent.

When this thread started it was clear that someone would think "Graaaah, Mush Morton!!!!! :damn:" and would bring up the war crimes again. But like I said, that is off-topic and had been discussed several time already. Now this thread turns away from the original topic and we´ll soon have yet another thread about war crimes, something the original thread was not about.

No Gizz your right
 

Much as I love make an occasional outlandish statement to spark debate
and boil down an issue.
your right the issue of war crimes isnt where we started out.

Dudley W Mush Morton was a man for "His" times.
a lot of what Mush did has influenced how we play
sh3 today. its a shame that he attached a blemish.
its a shame that the context in which mush lived
is largely lost on us in the liberal passive world.

Hmmmmmmmmmm
 

Ooops Maybe I should just call you by your full forum name from now on.:rotfl: