Dead Wake: The Last Crossing of the Lusitania

[JRHawk2003]

Just finished. Got hooked and read most of it in about 3 days. Very very good book. Sad on many levels but very informative. I think most people believe the US got into WWI over the sinking, but it fact did not get in for 2 more years and several other German sinkings. Germany really did it to themselves by sinking about everything they could by late 1916. The detail of the sinking and the people involved was sad.

One thing I came away with is a disdain for Winston Churchill and the Brits to some extent. They were happy to let the ship get sunk if it meant getting the US in the war on their side.

I would rate the book as better than the one on Marconi, but not quiet the Devil in the White City.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

It certainly didn't help US/German relations at that point and probably put people more behind the allied powers in a war they where previously ambivalent about.

But the Zimmerman Telegraph is what secured US entry into the war. I don't think the US was going to get into the war over a sunken ship.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

 

[h-hawk]

I liked the book too. His other book that I have read, In the Garden of Beasts, is my favorite so far. WWII buffs will particularly enjoy it. Actually inspired me to finally read Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and Berlin Diaries which I also heartily recommend.

 

[JRHawk2003]

It certainly didn't help US/German relations at that point and probably put people more behind the allied powers in a war they where previously ambivalent about.

But the Zimmerman Telegraph is what secured US entry into the war. I don't think the US was going to get into the war over a sunken ship.

Yes, that was the thing that finally did it. It was amazing to me how Germany basically drew us in. Why would they want the US to enter with GBR and France? How could that have possibly helped them? It was like they didn't think it would matter at all. Their own Hubris cost them that war big time.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Yes, that was the thing that finally did it. It was amazing to me how Germany basically drew us in. Why would they want the US to enter with GBR and France? How could that have possibly helped them? It was like they didn't think it would matter at all. Their own Hubris cost them that war big time.

Seems similar to WW2. Hitler was under no obligation to declare war on the US after Japan attacked but for some reason decided that he wanted to fight the US too.

I think in both cases but especially WW1 they quite simply mis-read the politics and believed that the US joining was only a matter of time and decided that they needed to get the jump on the situation.

If you are utterly convinced that the US is going to join the war against you eventually anyways then the Zimmerman telegraph makes sense. . . However it's a big gamble and I think one that was foolish because I don't think that the US joining that war was a given up until then.

 

[JRHawk2003]

It was very clear in the book that Wilson favored neutrality. Secretary of State Bryan did for sure.

Its pretty amazing because if Germany had won WWI, there would be no Hitler Germany. Their submarine strategy likely would have worked over time and GB would have to have surrendered.

 

[Titus Andronicus]

I recently signed up for a MOOC, or rather a short online course on the Lusitania. It was on Udemy and was free.

In any case, the instructor recommended 5-6 books including the one you suggest.

He also guided me to an interesting clip of the Lusitania leaving New York Harbor. Real footage from May 1, 1915.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

It was very clear in the book that Wilson favored neutrality. Secretary of State Bryan did for sure.

Its pretty amazing because if Germany had won WWI, there would be no Hitler Germany. Their submarine strategy likely would have worked over time and GB would have to have surrendered.

I don't know. . . Germany was already on the ropes when we came in anyways.

The peace terms might not have been as harsh but I don't think they would have been anything close to a German victory.

It might have been a status quo ante bellum treaty. . . This would have also likely prevented the rise of Hitler though. But I don't think there would have been a German victory. By the time we came in I think Germany was just trying to hold out for a draw.

 

[Lone Clone]

I liked the book too. His other book that I have read, In the Garden of Beasts, is my favorite so far. WWII buffs will particularly enjoy it. Actually inspired me to finally read Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and Berlin Diaries which I also heartily recommend.

I have this book on my Kindle but haven't gotten to it yet. Have read his others and enjoyed them -- especially "Devil," which is really an exceptional read.

 

[jscott78]

I've been to The Old Head in Ireland and it's quite a dramatic view out to where the ship was sunk.

Just finished. Got hooked and read most of it in about 3 days. Very very good book. Sad on many levels but very informative. I think most people believe the US got into WWI over the sinking, but it fact did not get in for 2 more years and several other German sinkings. Germany really did it to themselves by sinking about everything they could by late 1916. The detail of the sinking and the people involved was sad.

One thing I came away with is a disdain for Winston Churchill and the Brits to some extent. They were happy to let the ship get sunk if it meant getting the US in the war on their side.

I would rate the book as better than the one on Marconi, but not quiet the Devil in the White City.

 

[JRHawk2003]

I don't know. . . Germany was already on the ropes when we came in anyways.

The peace terms might not have been as harsh but I don't think they would have been anything close to a German victory.

It might have been a status quo ante bellum treaty. . . This would have also likely prevented the rise of Hitler though. But I don't think there would have been a German victory. By the time we came in I think Germany was just trying to hold out for a draw.

The book makes the point that the submarine strategy was working. It does not paint the picture that Germany was on the ropes at that point. In fact it stated the GBR was in trouble. Hence the strong desire by Churchill and other leading Brits to draw the USA in to the war.

Thanks for that footage. Awesome.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

The book makes the point that the submarine strategy was working. It does not paint the picture that Germany was on the ropes at that point. In fact it stated the GBR was in trouble. Hence the strong desire by Churchill and other leading Brits to draw the USA in to the war.

Thanks for that footage. Awesome.

It wouldn't have worked for that long once the Great Britain went to the convoy system.

Remember Britain was the unchallenged power in the oceans by this time and didn't have really any German Capital ships worth fighting. So when submarine warfare goes unrestricted again Britain within 6 months is dealing with the problem with the might of it's navy and the subs can't hope to win.

I just don't think they could have won. We're talking the beginning of 1917 and just a year and a half later their entire government is being overthrown from within. Maybe they can annoy the allies long enough to get a draw, but I think by 1917, there arn't any realistic hopes of victory.

Obviously I'd have to read the book but from what I know I disagree. The German empire was too battered and bruised to be able to compel all of the allies to surrender.

 

[JRHawk2003]

The convoy system came later in WWII.

The book goes into detail about how the big battleships stayed in harbor for the most part on both sides. England took heavy losses from the U-Boats and in 1916 they expanded the Uboat fleet with newer bigger UBoats.

It talks about the ill fated attempt by GBR in the Black Sea.

England is very dependent on shipping.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

I don't know. . . Germany was already on the ropes when we came in anyways.

The peace terms might not have been as harsh but I don't think they would have been anything close to a German victory.

It might have been a status quo ante bellum treaty. . . This would have also likely prevented the rise of Hitler though. But I don't think there would have been a German victory. By the time we came in I think Germany was just trying to hold out for a draw.

Germany was certainly exhausted but so were Britain and especially France. Germany certainly could have at least gotten a draw after Russia exited the war in 1917 (freed up about 800,000 troops). The US entering made their defeat inevitable....

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

The convoy system came later in WWII.

The book goes into detail about how the big battleships stayed in harbor for the most part on both sides. England took heavy losses from the U-Boats and in 1916 they expanded the Uboat fleet with newer bigger UBoats.

It talks about the ill fated attempt by GBR in the Black Sea.

England is very dependent on shipping.

No it was started in late World War 1 about the time the US was declaring war and mobilizing.

Germany took the gloves off and went back to unrestricted submarine warfare. They believed that this would push the US into the war (since American Merchant ships might be sunk).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoys_in_World_War_I

http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/atlantic/convoy.aspx

"It took the looming U-boat crisis following the entry of the USA into the war in April 1917 to bring about a re-think. With sinkings of merchant ships reaching a level which threatened to force Britain out of the war within months, the Admiralty looked again at the statistics. It was found that most losses fell on ocean-going trade, less than 10% of total shipping, a sufficiently small number to make convoy escorts feasible. The result was a gradual introduction of a convoy system and the construction of growing numbers of dedicated escort vessels to supplement fleet destroyers. Where the convoy was introduced, sinkings were reduced to 1.1% of their previous figure. In the nick of time, the U-boat threat had been countered."

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/british-naval-convoy-system-introduced

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/firstworldwar/military_conflict/p_convoy.htm