Talk:Unrestricted submarine warfare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"It was obsolete from the start" lacks neutrality as much as "half-hearted attempt". Get-back-world-respect 16:47, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Kriegsmarine the only Navy not to engage in unrestricted from the start?
Can we please see some documentation for that claim? Preferably in the form of British Admiralty orders from 3 September 1939 or shortly after outlining the rules of the game for their subs. Until such evidence is forthcoming, I have changed it to a more neutral wording. Thanks. Andreas 06:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Half-hearted?
I don't think that is correct. I did some research yesterday, and it seems they were quite serious about it. But I am as always willing to be swayed by some documentation. Until then I have changed it to a more neutral wording. Andreas 06:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV - no longer needed?
I think this page can be considered neutral now. Andreas 16:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Judgement on Doenitz
- "Doenitz is charged with waging unrestricted submarine warfare contrary to the Naval Protocol of 1936 to which Germany acceded, and which reaffirmed the rules of submarine warfare laid down in the London Naval Agreement of 1930.Doenitz is charged with waging unrestricted submarine warfare contrary to the Naval Protocol of 1936 to which Germany acceded, and which reaffirmed the rules of submarine warfare laid down in the London Naval Agreement of 1930. ... The order of Doenitz to sink neutral ships without warning when found within these zones was, therefore, in the opinion of the Tribunal, violation of the Protocol. ... the sentence of Doenitz is not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare."
So he was found guilty, but no sentence was passed for this war crime:
- "In view of all the facts proved and in particular of an order of the British Admiralty announced on the 8th May, 1940, according to which all vessels should be sunk at sight in the Skagerrak, and the answers to interrogatories by Admiral Nimitz stating that unrestricted submarine warfare was carried on in the Pacific Ocean by the United States from the first day that nation entered the war".
--Philip Baird Shearer 23:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 2 Articles?
Most of this article seems to better fit under the heading "Naval Treaties and Rules of Engagement." Just a thought... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.216.41.145 (talk • contribs). pschemp | talk 21:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- I do not think it needs moving. What I think it needs is a big expansion, because at the moment it only looks at the law and little else. --Philip Baird Shearer 16:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)