Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Can Sailor
I beg to differ with the statement that the United States waited until it was attacked before it helped England. Tell that to the dead from the USS Kearny and the USS Reuben James. They were killed escorting convoys to England in October 1941 prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Both ships were torpedoed by German subs. The Kearny survived. The Reuben James was sunk. A Brit PBY (made in the USA) flown by an American pilot found the Bismarck. Other Americans risked and gave their lives flying and fighting with the RAF in the Battle of Britain. No mister, America didn't wait to be attacked to go to the aid of their friends the English.
|
They are good examples of American casualities prior to the USA's official entry into WWII, but it must also be remembered the financial aid the USA provided Great Britain before their entry into the war through lend lease etc.
Getting back to the original subject, a future global conflict like the two world wars is extremely unlikely and it must be considered does the UK need aircraft carriers, trident submarines and the hefty cost that goes with them in the modern world? OK the UK has the Falklands to protect, but strategically they are worthless, the days of the Empire are long gone. The UK is no longer the superpower it used to be prior to WWII and can it really be justified spending billions of pounds on such hardware when the biggest threat today seems to be terrorism? And most importantly, can the country really afford it?
Nemo
__________________
"I'm afraid there is no disguising the fact that King's obsession with the Pacific and the Battle of Washington cost us dear in the Battle of the Atlantic".
Sir John Slessor GCB, DSO, MC, DL
AOC-in-C Coastal Command RAF
___________________________________________
Last edited by Captain Nemo; 05-13-11 at 08:49 AM.
|