Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: US, British warships help distribute relief goods [View all]hack89
(39,181 posts)83. No they did not
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was officially neutral throughout the American Civil War, 186165. Elite opinion tended to favour the Confederacy, while public opinion tended to favour the United States. Large scale trade continued in both directions with the United States, with the Americans shipping grain to Britain while Britain sent manufactured items and munitions. Immigration continued into the United States. British trade with the Confederacy was limited, with a little cotton going to Britain and some munitions slipped in by numerous small blockade runners. The Confederate strategy for securing independence was largely based on the hope of military intervention by Britain and France, which didn't happen; intervention would have meant war with the United States. A serious diplomatic dispute with the United States erupted over the "Trent Affair" in 1861; it was resolved peacefully in a few months. A long-term issue was the British shipyard (John Laird and Sons) building two warships for the Confederacy, including the CSS Alabama,[1] over vehement protests from the United States. The controversy was resolved after the Civil War in the form of the Alabama Claims, in which the United States finally was given $15.5 million in arbitration by an international tribunal for damages caused by British-built warships. The British built and operated most of the blockade runners, spending hundreds of millions of pounds on them; but that was legal and not the cause of serious tension. In the end, these instances of British involvement neither shifted the outcome of the war nor provoked the United States into declaring war against Britain. The U.S. diplomatic mission headed by Minister Charles Francis Adams, Sr. proved much more successful than the Confederate missions, which were never officially recognized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_American_Civil_War
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
91 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's so heartwarming that the imperial war machine can have this propaganda opportunity.
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#2
What are the specific steps the British military is doing which leads you to believe this is merely
LanternWaste
Nov 2013
#22
Hence, lacking any substantive citations to support your premise, it's merely editorial on your part
LanternWaste
Nov 2013
#24
You'd expect better sourcing for the fact that the relief effort is a propaganda opportunity?
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#25
I imagine that may be the best rationalization we receive regarding your allegation...
LanternWaste
Nov 2013
#26
I'm not angry about disagreement. I am angry about the glorification of that criminal enterprise,
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#27
yeah all twenty or so of the royal navys frigates, destroyers and landing ships.
loli phabay
Nov 2013
#46
The Spanish Navy can't help in the Philippines if all the Spanish ships are in Spanish ports. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#50
Not really, no, the USA, UK, and France have pretty much the only blue-water navies on earth
Spider Jerusalem
Nov 2013
#81
Ooh, scary! That ship is 50 years old and was bought from France for $12 million--
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#90
You can't read, that's pretty obvious. But congratulate yourself--you have shown yourself to be
MADem
Nov 2013
#63
I didn't say that. I just object to the portrayal of the imperial navy as "there to help".
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#7
I didn't say the humanitarian aid was an "assertion of naked aggressive power."
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#12
This is exactly the spot and your emotionalism shows I've scored a direct hit. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#16
Criminal enterprises don't get convicted. They do plea bargains, and sacrifice patsies.
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#19
Complicity in acts of aggressive war and murder of civilians by the US military. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#21
The Navy is not a dishwasher. Get real. The Navy provides material support. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#60
No, I'll tell you - the Singapore and Malaysian goverments invited the Royal Navy ship
muriel_volestrangler
Nov 2013
#78
Ships go places for reasons. Our ships go places to engage in intimidation and global domination.
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#79
They outlawed the external trade, but internally the trade went on many years. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#17
If the south had won, I suspect they wouldn't have felt so squeamish about subjugating their fellow
MADem
Nov 2013
#32
Officially neutral. In practice, Brits ran Union blockades to supply munitions to the Rebs. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#84