|
cheerfullydrab posted:Immediately though there were huge protests against Paul for signing the Pact and pretty speedily he was deposed in a coup largely orchestrated by British intelligence. Young King Peter was declared old enough and Prince Paul got dragged away to Kenya by British agents to live out the rest of the war in exiled imprisonment. Even after, he was not allowed to go back to Yugoslavia, or even the UK, and lived out the rest of his life pretty miserable in Paris. Churchill particularly hated the gently caress out of Prince Paul for his supposed betrayal. The UK seems to have a very bad record with coups.
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:56 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:I don't know about that, but I said 'commissioned', i.e. it's still officially in Royal Navy service with a captain and crew and all that. Thanks for that post, very informative. I knew the US Navy has the Constitution, didn't know the RN had something similar
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Tias posted:They had a bunch of governmental officials killed in show trials for crimes against soviet citizens, but that happened at the behest of the soviets and were likely kangaroo courts. Imprisoned, not executed, and for plotting to start the war rather than war crimes. This happened because Soviets demanded it, so new laws were drummed up despite the constitution saying something about retroactive punishment. The punished included war time president Risto Ryti, two war time prime ministers and other ministers and the Finnish ambassador to Germany. Ryti got 10 years in prison, others 2-6 years but eventually they were all pardoned in 1949. Meanwhile Mannerheim got off scot-free because after becoming the president he had severed ties with Germany and had symbolic value; despite this, after retiring he quickly packed his bags and fled to Switzerland in case the communists would come looking after him. For actual war crimes a special tribunal was established in October 1944. Most cases were about treatment of prisoners of war, about 600 people were sentenced to fines or imprisonment, the longest sentences being life in prison. In addition the Allied Control Commission (Soviets really - Brits were present in the ACC as a silent partner, USA was not included because Finland and United States hadn't been at war) also demanded war crime trials against some military administrators of the occupied Soviet Karelia and the internment camps there - ethnic Russian civilians living in the occupied areas had been put into concentration camps where the conditions weren't spectacular, especially in 1942 famine killed thousands of people. This so-called "List #1" posed a problem because the ACC didn't tell what crimes they had done if any, also some of the names were unclear and sometimes just a surname was given - the list was based on Soviet interrogations of Finnish prisoners of war and liberated Soviet citizens. Anyway 45 men were rounded up in 1944, although it was immediately realized that 5 of them were wrong people but they couldn't be released without ACC's permission. In the end one was sentenced fines and 14 men were given short prison sentences for "exceeding authority to punish" or "slight assault". All were released in 1947. There was also a couple dozen people, mostly Russian emigrants, that Soviets wanted to be given over "for war crimes". Actually most had only flimsy ties to anything at all and the most likely motive was that Soviets saw anti-communist emigrants as an existential threat. Finns thought that the ACC would just interrogate them and then hand them to Finnish officials, but in a twist move NKVD put them on a plane and flew them to Soviet Union where some where executed while others were sent to gulag. One of these dangerous war criminals was a 27 year old interpreter Vasili Maximov who was arrested due to mistaken identity - it was his uncle Vasili Maximov who was on the list. At least he returned to Finland 10 years later. Finally I'll just drop here that in 1941-44 about 400 Soviet citizens were executed for espionage, this includes all types - desantniks, civilians in occupied areas, partisans. Also 49 Finnish soldiers were executed for desertion. The last three executions in Finland happened on September 3rd 1944 when three Soviet spies were shot. The last Finnish execution of a Finnish citizen had happened the previous day, when a communist saboteur Olavi Laiho was shot. The timing here is interesting - that same day the parliament had voted to sever ties with Germany so the armistice would start two days later, September 4th - Laiho had been sentenced in 1943 but now there was no more time to waste.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
The RN can arguably lay claim to having the oldest ship in the world still kicking around, though I don't know if it's still in commission.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
I wanted to stay out of this conversation because I find it more interesting to hear what other people have to say on the topic, and my view is not exactly objective, but I'm going to have to react here: One, Alexander was assassinated alongside the French foreign minister over the whole "unifying the nations of Europe against Nazi expansionism" thingie by a fascist terrorist, and Paul did not continue with Alexander's policies. Not exactly something he can be lauded for or seen as a 'neutral' figure in. Speaking of the assassination, it was actually caught on camera. Two, it was less of a case of the Croats* being pissed, and more of a powerful group in Croatian politics being power-hungry assholes. When WW1 ended, the population of Serbia was massively reduced by Austro-Hungarian massacres, and the war in general took a heavy toll on the adult male population in addition to that, which greatly reduced Serbia's ability to administrate the transition of formerly imperial lands to a Yugoslav state in a way that wasn't a total shitshow. As a result, it was seen as a lesser evil to let assholes who owed their power to imperial politics remain in power after the war than to sack and replace the existing administration. In fact, Austro-Hungarian officers were given promotions after the war in an effort to placate them resulting in the paradox of Croats who fought for Yugoslavia ending up in a worse position after the war than those who sat on their fat high-ranked asses rounding up their people to be shipped off to die on the Italian front or doing the paperwork for "pacifying" Serbian population. It was people like these alongside the Catholic church who pushed for the more extreme nationalist policies regarding Croatia, it was these people who provided cushy conservative support to the Ustaše ideology without which it might not have taken hold nearly as much as it did, and it was these people who cheered the Nazi invasion and ordered the men under their command to lay down their arms instead of fighting, causing the complete collapse of the Yugoslav army as the Nazis exploited this. There's the whole clusterfuck about Alexander's policies I talked about in the previous thread, but regarding this particular topic, it's completely irrelevant, since those problems weren't what these people were solving, quite the opposite, in fact. When you say that the solution worked wonderfully for Croatia, you are implying that a Croatia ran by the people I described in the post above would be something good. In addition to that, it's implying that this Croatia was magically 'ethnically pure' enough to somehow magically start working. Let me give you a hint: it wasn't. My family didn't just appear there out of thin air for the Ustaše to kill. I don't doubt for a second that Churchill wouldn't mind seeing every single last one of us being thrown being thrown into a fascist death camp's crematorium if he saw it as something that is in some miniscule way improving Britain's position, and British support of the coup in Yugoslavia is an action that is very much along the lines of this. But your scenario assumes that Yugoslavia remains in some sort of stasis for the duration of the war. Do you expect the communists to do nothing after Hitler invaded USSR? Do you expect that fascists wouldn't leverage their position somehow within the country to improve their hold of power within it? The war was an absolute disaster for Yugoslavia, doubly so for Serbs and Romani (and triply so for Jews) and there's many ways in which that disaster could have been reduced, but one needs to pretty badly piecemeal decisions taken by the people involved to reach your conclusions. I'm just sick and tired of hearing people justify silent support of fascim (via doing nothing about it) as just going along with the flow. Yeah, there's a flow alright, of bullshit, and it reeks. *In general, every time I see a statement starting with "The Serbs" or "The Croats" or "The <insert group here>" in the context of a conversation like this one, I get a bad feeling about the followup, and am usually justified in that opinion my dad fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Libluini posted:
That sounds more insane than the typical Warhammer 40,000 siege. The latest If the Emperor had a Text-to-Speech Device - Episode 24: Of Khans and Cages talks about a historical siege, and it not as a bad as the one at Candia. Good Grief.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:29
|
|
Holy poo poo, the siege of Candia was brutal.
|
There is also the curious case of Jewish citizens of Finland serving in the Finnish Armed Forces during WW2. The Finnish Holocaust memorial society has an article written by Tapani Harviainen, professor of semic languages in Helsinki University. http://www.hum.fi/holokausti/mita-tapahtui-suomessa/ (article is in Finnish, but below is a part I translated) "The Winter War doesn't seem to have caused any more ideological problems for Jews than for other Finns. All men due for armed service, 260, (asevelvolliset) served in the army, 200 of them in frontline service. Fifteen Jews were killed in battle, which, percentually, means consiredable heavy lossess. Accoring to an often repeated approximation Winter War gave also Jews the feeling of being part of the Finnish people. With regards to the Continuation War (1941-44) the situation was different. Finland fought as a brother-in-arms with Germany, there were German troops in the country and while the fullest extend of the cruelty of the anti-Jewish purges was obfuscated the harsh anti-semitism of Nazi Germany was known. Despite this Finnish Jews served, during the Continuation War, in frontline service and as Lotta Svärd (female) volunteers without difference compared to other citizens; this applied to all minorities, the Romani, Russians and Tatars included. Several Jewish soldiers were awarded medals, a few reached the rank of captain and served as company commanders, Salomon Klass as a battalion commander. Jewish military doctors included doctors of the rank of major. The German attitude to Jewish soldiers has been described as being confused but correct. No instances are known where German soldiers would have refused co-operation with Finnish Jewish soldiers, nor cases where Jews would have refused to serve due to pacifism or Jewishness. In 1942 a cardboard Synagogue, "Scholkas shul" was set up at the Syväri front, where Jewish soldiers from the Uusimaa brigade and other nearby units served until 1944. A field synagogue, equipped with Torah scrolls, must have been an unique phenomenon among the equipment of the countries fighting on the side of the Germans."
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
^^^ three Finnish Jews were even offered the Iron Cross but refused quote:Three Jews serving in the Finnish army were awarded Iron Crosses by the German command for their bravery (Hannu Rautkallio, ‘Cast into the Lion’s Den’, Journal of Contemporary History 29, 1994). Major Leo Skurnik was a descendant of one of the oldest cantonist Jewish families. He served as a doctor, organized the evacuation of a German field hospital and thereby saved the lives of more than 600 German officers and soldiers. He refused to accept the decoration on the grounds of being a Jew. Captain Solomon Klass saved a German company that had been surrounded by Soviet forces. Two days later, German officers came to offer him the Iron Cross. He refused to stand up and told them contemptuously that he was Jewish and did not want their medal. The officers repeated their ‘Heil Hitler’ salute and left. A third Jew, a nurse, also refused the Iron Cross. Siivola posted:Basically all I've ever seen people say about Finland in WWII is some variation of "woo Simo Häyhä, rah rah, gently caress the Soviets". Some people even idolize Lauri "Larry Thorne" Törni without pausing to think about how he volunteered for the SS in the middle of the Lapland War. Törni was utterly nuts, he first volunteered to the Waffen SS after Winter War but returned to Finland when it turned out that he couldn't get that sweet officer's commission that he had wanted. But it's understandable that he fascinates people. He reminds you of some 17th century adventurer who goes to war in the ranks of the Swedish army, then joins the Habsburg side and finally finds himself fighting for the Spanish crown in some South American jungle. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Imprisoned, not executed, and for plotting to start the war rather than war crimes. This happened because Soviets demanded it, so new laws were drummed up despite the constitution saying something about retroactive punishment. The punished included war time president Risto Ryti, two war time prime ministers and other ministers and the Finnish ambassador to Germany. Ryti got 10 years in prison, others 2-6 years but eventually they were all pardoned in 1949. Meanwhile Mannerheim got off scot-free because after becoming the president he had severed ties with Germany and had symbolic value; despite this, after retiring he quickly packed his bags and fled to Switzerland in case the communists would come looking after him. Thanks, great stuff! Sorry I got the execution thing wrong, just wrote out from memory 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
I didn't intend to reach any conclusions, and I'd be quite interested to hear which ones they were. You need to understand that "stasis" was exactly what Prince Paul was going for. His job, as he saw it, was to take care of Yugoslavia till King Peter was old enough to rule. He intended to deliver a stable healthy Yugoslavia to the young King on the day, then go right back to England and take back up his chosen life of being rich and pointless and happy. Everything he did was towards that aim and needs to be seen in that light. Give the nationalist, conservative, clerical Croats almost everything they want? Hey, as long as it stops bloodshed and keeps the country together!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
It wasn't going to stop the bloodshed, and it had the side effect of pissing everyone else off, including a lot of Croats who weren't nationalist, conservative, and/or clerical.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
A guy who, again, went to school at Oxford, had King George VI as his best man, was a Knight of the Garter and a member of the Bullingdon Club, just sort of by the fortunes of war and fate becoming an Axis dictator and getting imprisoned by the Brits and taken to Kenya while his country gets thrown on the fire for nothing is definitely an interesting and sad story. I guess that is a conclusion after all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
my dad posted:It wasn't going to stop the bloodshed, and it had the side effect of pissing everyone else off, including a lot of Croats who weren't nationalist, conservative, and/or clerical. Do you at least see where it might have seemed like a good idea from the single mindset of "keep Yugoslavia together, keep everything in one piece and as stable as possible"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
For my part, I'm extremely ashamed for everything that RCC did in the relation to the matter 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Thanks for that post, very informative. I knew the US Navy has the Constitution, didn't know the RN had something similar Ours is older, predating your country by a few decades, and it would have blown the Constitution into matchwood if the Constitution had been dumb enough to fight it, but on the other hand yours still floats, which is awesome; Victory is in dry dock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Do you at least see where it might have seemed like a good idea from the single mindset of "keep Yugoslavia together, keep everything in one piece and as stable as possible"? Yes. And, as I said in my post about Alexander, what he intended, how he went about accomplishing it, and what he achieved in the end are very, very different things. And you're vastly overestimating my symphathy for members of the jolly good old oxbridge boys club. JcDent posted:For my part, I'm extremely ashamed for everything that RCC did in the relation to the matter Eh. I appreciate the sentiment, but it's not like you are to blame, despite your religion.  Should I go all j'accuse at, say, Libluini for being German? Or Trin for being English?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
RE the dude who was chewed out by a dick for pointing out that other nations were just as good or better when it came to the whole ship building, I guess your 'freind' never really put much thought into the whole reason behind the prize money system. Also, American Frigates during the early 19th century were amazing.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
my dad posted:Or Trin for being English? Well... Wikipedia posted:In the Royal Navy, the use of impressment to collect sailors resulted in the problem of preventing escape of the unwilling "recruits". The receiving ship was part of the solution; it was difficult to get off the ship without being detected, and most seamen of the era did not know how to swim Wait, didn't the ship construction/French ships sucking post mentioned impressment being a myth or something, and that sailors were as literate as anyone?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
On more warships being broken up rather than lost in combat makes sense, if you look at most of the Age of Sail naval battles, most ships aren't shot till they sink, but end up boarded captured and sent back to port either to be repurposed for the capturing navy. I think during the Napoleonic War the Royal Navy had alot of foreign built ships and the few age of sail books I read for the most part the French and Spanish built ships were superior to the English ones albeit with inferior crews and leadership.JcDent posted:Well... Yeah I should try to find my source, but if I recall the image of "impressment" only happened a few times and generally the only people being press ganged were sailors from merchantmen, grabbing up landsmen would have been considered stupid although they did come aboard assumedly as volunteers, in a sort of I am unemployed with no prospects, gently caress it join the military! type attitude. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Wait, didn't the ship construction/French ships sucking post mentioned impressment being a myth or something, and that sailors were as literate as anyone? Definitely in the sense of them being a decent cross-section and not some dumping ground for the least educated and so on. Overall it sounds miles better than the US Army in the run up to the Mexican American war, which is my gold standard for poor conditions outside nasty wartime situations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
WW2 Data We expand once more on the Italian inventory, and we're still stuck with projectiles for weapons that were obsolete. Some of them obsolete even by World War 1 standards! The first gun on the list is the Cannone da 120/21, with examples purchased in the 80's and built by Krupp. Next up is the Cannone da 120/25, otherwise known as 120 mm L Mle. 1878, a French gun . I'll let you guess how old the design was by World War 2. Then, we have the Cannone da 120/40, which are actually QF 4.7 in Mk. I-IV, which entered in service in the 80's as well. Finally, we have the Cannoni da 120/45, which are also British-made guns where the design was first built in 1918.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
I recently reconnected with the Real-Time Tweets from WW2 twitter account, it's been rather sad of late as this was the week of Operation Market-Garden. 72 years ago today the shattered remnants of the British 1st Airborne Division would have completed their withdrawal from the northern banks of the Rhine River - from an original strength of about 10 600 men, only about 2 400 would be rescued from the botched attempt to capture a highway into Germany.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Also, American Frigates during the early 19th century were amazing. I was reading the USS Constitution wikipedia article the other day and it mentions that the British ordered that only ships of the line were allowed to engage the American frigates 1v1. quote:Constitution's victory over Java, the third British warship in as many months to be captured by the United States, prompted the British Admiralty to order its frigates not to engage the heavier American frigates one-on-one; only British ships of the line or squadrons were permitted to come close enough to these ships to attack. As always I take this with a grain of salt. Is this true milhist goons? Also quote:Constitution had suffered little damage in the battle, though it was later discovered that she had twelve 32-pound British cannonballs embedded in her hull, none of which had penetrated through. Old ironsides indeed
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Ours is older, predating your country by a few decades, and it would have blown the Constitution into matchwood if the Constitution had been dumb enough to fight it, but on the other hand yours still floats, which is awesome; Victory is in dry dock. IIRC a lot of that is due to the fact that Constitution is made of much better wood that Victory, since good quality timber was much easier to come by in the USA in the 18th century compared to Europe, which had been deforested by centuries of shipbuilding. I've heard that the original ships of the US Navy were pound for pound some of the best ships due to the quality of their construction materials.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
^^^Southern Live Oak is a hard-rear end wood. Java was the third British 38 to be comprehensively beaten in a duel with an American 44 (if you're new to sailing warships, the number represents the theoretical gun complement, although ships frequently carried more). By 1812 the RN was a little rusty on the actual fighting thing, having largely succeeded in confining the French to harbor since Trafalgar. Earlier in the war, British frigates had been used to capturing larger, more heavily-armed French counterparts as a matter of routine. The American ships, however, were even larger and more powerfully armed than the French, as well as carrying larger, better crews (as much as half again as many men as the British 38s) and having good leadership.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
The US Navy also had the advantage of not being gutted of their best officers and seamen by an incredibly bloody revolution.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
The 44 gun frigates were BIG frigates...they were really halfway between frigates and smaller ships of the line and they probably would have been at least a challenge for a third rate. It wasn't because of some sort of heroic American engineering or great competence or anything, they were just made of quality wood and kind of accidentally found a very useful balance between size and firepower. It wasn't any accident other navies started building heavy frigates or cutting down light ships of the line at about the same time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
bewbies posted:The 44 gun frigates were BIG frigates...they were really halfway between frigates and smaller ships of the line and they probably would have been at least a challenge for a third rate. It wasn't because of some sort of heroic American engineering or great competence or anything, they were just made of quality wood and kind of accidentally found a very useful balance between size and firepower. It wasn't any accident other navies started building heavy frigates or cutting down light ships of the line at about the same time. How would they have fared against a razee, incidentally?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Comstar posted:That sounds more insane than the typical Warhammer 40,000 siege. I suspect that I now know what the inspiration for Cadia was, though....
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:I suspect that I now know what the inspiration for Cadia was, though.... I know, right? Another example of the well-known subtlety displayed by Games Workshop in their products
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:I was reading the USS Constitution wikipedia article the other day and it mentions that the British ordered that only ships of the line were allowed to engage the American frigates 1v1. Well, Chesapeake v Shannon indicates that wasn't always true. But US frigates were bigger than British frigates so yeah, I'm sure taking them on one on one was officially discouraged, especially given how
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:28
|
|
feedmegin posted:Well, Chesapeake v Shannon indicates that wasn't always true. But US frigates were bigger than British frigates so yeah, I'm sure taking them on one on one was officially discouraged, especially given how THINK OF THE PRIZE MONEY
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:THINK OF THE PRIZE MONEY THE SPIRIT OF NELSON LIVES ON.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Also, I was unaware, but we do have a floating frigate from that period ourselves! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Trincomalee Sister ship of HMS Shannon, in fact. Better not let Constitution too close to her!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
I was busy so I just caught up with 200+ posts. Two thoughts on stuff from a while back: The cont bird use of bolt action rifles wasn't really about existing ww1 surplus stockpiles. Every country that used bolt actions as a primary arm in WW2 used a redesigned version as new production. The k98k only started in production in 1934 for example. The m91/30 was a redesign of the ww1 m91, the enfield mk iv was a new iteration, etc. really the only country I can think of that straight repurposed guns on an army wide level was Austria cutting the m95 down, and that was an odd situation arising from being the rump state remanent of an empire. Yes some ww1 surplus was used but this was generally in rear area formations or out of desperation. Bolt actions stayed current mostly because of reliability concerns and (unfounded) worries that tapping a barrel for gas would result in unacceptably poor accuracy. A lot of the earliest designs used lined cartridges whic are a poor idea under battlefield conditions. Plus they require a lot more machining and are therefore more expensive. That said a lot of countries were developing them. Many have already been mentioned but the FN49 was drat near production ready in 1949 and would have armed a lot of countries. The Belgians were among the most prolific arms dealers of the time. The Brits had a project too. All that got derailed by the war and everyone needed to make as many proven rifles as they could ASAP. Germany is a bit of an odd case but there were big political considerations behind not developing an autoloaders until the early 40s. Also re: wehraboos and the myth of superior equipment: remember that a lot of that was caused by post war generals memoirs that were studied as the how to on fighting the commie menace. You really have to look st that through the lens of the early Cold War.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:How would they have fared against a razee, incidentally? Well, they were largely the same thing; most razees carried heavier guns but the heavy frigates (especially the American ones) were better constructed and had better handling qualities (I'm heavily summarizing, forgive me). There wasn't much between them in any case.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:38
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Also re: wehraboos and the myth of superior equipment: remember that a lot of that was caused by post war generals memoirs that were studied as the how to on fighting the commie menace. You really have to look st that through the lens of the early Cold War. Compounded by lack of access to or willingness to listen to Soviet sources.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
If you really want to get a window into the Wehrmacht myth making and that general mindset look at the mythologizing around the 9th army attempting to break out of Berlin in 1945. It's got it all. Valiant soldiers fighting to get west instead of for the hosed cause, the implication that the soviets are mindless beasts, gently caress Sabaton even wrote a song about it. Google that up its pretty much Wehrmacht worship put to music.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
sabaton wrote a song about gustavus adolphus, it's difficult to lower that bar
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:56 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:Well, Chesapeake v Shannon indicates that wasn't always true. But US frigates were bigger than British frigates so yeah, I'm sure taking them on one on one was officially discouraged, especially given how Not all American frigates were created equal. Chesapeake and Shannon were both 38-gun frigates of similar displacement, complement, and armament. Constitution and the other 44-gun Americans were much bigger and better-armed, with much larger crews. Those were the ones that the British frigates were ordered not to engage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:24
|
|
