4 ms·

Navies have always been crucial for traditional wars. That’s not going to change so long as war with China or Russia is still (a distant) possibility.

paganel 3y ago
They haven't been crucial vs. Germany during WW2, which arguably was where all the big powers were concentrated on. And I'd say that even during for WW1, the naval battles didn't have that much of an effect on how the war ended, in fact after the Battle of Jutland (summer of 1916) both the British and the German navies were de facto fleets in being. Later edit: I could make a point, and a very valid one, for the strategic importance of subs (the WW2 Japanese merchant fleet was mostly sunk by US subs, for example), but unfortunately for the US subs fleet people are not thinking about them first and foremost when the US Navy is mentioned. Of course, all this talk ignores the nuclear thing, this discussion is entirely made while focusing on the conventional way of waging war. If nuclear were to be a real option then all prior assumptions about the next big war would dramatically change.
- thehappypm 3y ago
  Navies were certainly crucial in the European theater of WW2. Britain was supplied by sea, and that was only possible with navies and merchant marines protecting the shipping lanes and hunting U-boats. It might not have been as dramatic as the Pacific theater with their big battles at sea, but the resilience of the Allied navies to keeping those shipping lanes limping along allowed them to eventually win the war. War is hugely about logistics. Probably the most notable naval moment in the European war (D-Day) was also only possible because the German navies couldn't dominate the channel. If the Germans had dominated the channel, D-Day would have been impossible. So, a lack of naval strength there was a critical factor for the Axis losing.
  - paganel 3y ago
    The most notable moment on the European front took place somewhere on the Eastern Front (choose your pick between Moscow December 1941, Stalingrad ‘42-‘43, Kursk in July of ‘43, Operation Bragaton the following summer), in fact it was on the Eastern Front where the Germans lost 80% of their men and hence where they were defeated for good. For comparison, the Omaha beach operation only had beteeen 2000 and 5000 losses for the US, which, while tragic for the people involved, is dwarfed by almost any big serious battle that had taken place further East.
tehjoker 3y ago
there is no point to a war with russia or china, it's just imperialism

paganel 3y ago

They haven't been crucial vs. Germany during WW2, which arguably was where all the big powers were concentrated on. And I'd say that even during for WW1, the naval battles didn't have that much of an effect on how the war ended, in fact after the Battle of Jutland (summer of 1916) both the British and the German navies were de facto fleets in being. Later edit: I could make a point, and a very valid one, for the strategic importance of subs (the WW2 Japanese merchant fleet was mostly sunk by US subs, for example), but unfortunately for the US subs fleet people are not thinking about them first and foremost when the US Navy is mentioned. Of course, all this talk ignores the nuclear thing, this discussion is entirely made while focusing on the conventional way of waging war. If nuclear were to be a real option then all prior assumptions about the next big war would dramatically change.

thehappypm 3y ago
Navies were certainly crucial in the European theater of WW2. Britain was supplied by sea, and that was only possible with navies and merchant marines protecting the shipping lanes and hunting U-boats. It might not have been as dramatic as the Pacific theater with their big battles at sea, but the resilience of the Allied navies to keeping those shipping lanes limping along allowed them to eventually win the war. War is hugely about logistics. Probably the most notable naval moment in the European war (D-Day) was also only possible because the German navies couldn't dominate the channel. If the Germans had dominated the channel, D-Day would have been impossible. So, a lack of naval strength there was a critical factor for the Axis losing.
- paganel 3y ago
  The most notable moment on the European front took place somewhere on the Eastern Front (choose your pick between Moscow December 1941, Stalingrad ‘42-‘43, Kursk in July of ‘43, Operation Bragaton the following summer), in fact it was on the Eastern Front where the Germans lost 80% of their men and hence where they were defeated for good. For comparison, the Omaha beach operation only had beteeen 2000 and 5000 losses for the US, which, while tragic for the people involved, is dwarfed by almost any big serious battle that had taken place further East.

tehjoker 3y ago

there is no point to a war with russia or china, it's just imperialism