US NAVY Between WWII and the Korean War

[lordroel]

The US NAVY Between WWII and the Korean War: Intro Episode

A Forgotten Part of History, Follow as we trace the collapse of US Naval Strength in the five year period after WWII. The US Navy was a shadow of itself at the beginning of the Korean War. This episode introduces this series on the US Navy Between WWII and the Korean War.

[lordroel]

The US NAVY in 1945

An Animated Timeline of the United States Navy in the year 1945

[lordroel]

The US NAVY in 1946

An Animated Timeline of the United States Navy in the year 1946.

[lordroel]

The US NAVY in 1947

An Animated Timeline of the United States Navy in the year 1947.

[lordroel]

The US NAVY in 1948

An Animated Timeline of the United States Navy in the year 1948.

[stevep]

Nov 5, 2022 10:07:42 GMT lordroel said:

The US NAVY Between WWII and the Korean War: Intro Episode

A Forgotten Part of History, Follow as we trace the collapse of US Naval Strength in the five year period after WWII. The US Navy was a shadow of itself at the beginning of the Korean War. This episode introduces this series on the US Navy Between WWII and the Korean War.

  Well that makes perfect sense given how large the USN was in 1945 and the total lack of any opponents of any size.

[lordroel]

Nov 5, 2022 10:20:54 GMT stevep said:

Nov 5, 2022 10:07:42 GMT lordroel said:

The US NAVY Between WWII and the Korean War: Intro Episode

A Forgotten Part of History, Follow as we trace the collapse of US Naval Strength in the five year period after WWII. The US Navy was a shadow of itself at the beginning of the Korean War. This episode introduces this series on the US Navy Between WWII and the Korean War.

  Well that makes perfect sense given how large the USN was in 1945 and the total lack of any opponents of any size.

Can you compare it to the US Navy between the end of the Great War and the start of World War II.

[stevep]

Nov 5, 2022 10:22:12 GMT lordroel said:

Nov 5, 2022 10:20:54 GMT stevep said:

  Well that makes perfect sense given how large the USN was in 1945 and the total lack of any opponents of any size.

Can you compare it to the US Navy between the end of the Great War and the start of World War II.

  Well in 1918 the US navy was markedly smaller and still had tension with Japan while there were theoretical opponents on Europe.  Plus there were political and industrial interests in favour of a new naval race in the US so there was some attempt to update their 1916 programme.  It ran out of steam due to lack of public support in the aftermath of the "war to end all wars".  Unfortunately it did enable them to fool other nations into the disastrous Washington Naval Treaty.

[miletus12]

Nov 5, 2022 10:22:12 GMT lordroel said:

Nov 5, 2022 10:20:54 GMT stevep said:

  Well that makes perfect sense given how large the USN was in 1945 and the total lack of any opponents of any size.

Can you compare it to the US Navy between the end of the Great War and the start of World War II.

Yes. Give me a day to figure out what I have to write about it. You may not know exactly what actually happened. I think you will be quite surprised. Post WWII and Between the Wars are not at all comparable at all. 

Nov 5, 2022 10:26:44 GMT stevep said:

Well in 1918 the US navy was markedly smaller and still had tension with Japan while there were theoretical opponents on Europe.

That is wrong.  You can see a lot of what the USG and USN thought from their construction programs, the budgets and the kind of weapon system they sent to sea. The referent enemy can also be seen from how that fleet was deployed. 

[stevep]

Nov 6, 2022 5:41:35 GMT miletus12 said:

Nov 5, 2022 10:22:12 GMT lordroel said:

Can you compare it to the US Navy between the end of the Great War and the start of World War II.

Yes. Give me a day to figure out what I have to write about it. You may not know exactly what actually happened. I think you will be quite surprised. Post WWII and Between the Wars are not at all comparable at all. 

Nov 5, 2022 10:26:44 GMT stevep said:

Well in 1918 the US navy was markedly smaller and still had tension with Japan while there were theoretical opponents on Europe.

That is wrong.  You can see a lot of what the USG and USN thought from their construction programs, the budgets and the kind of weapon system they sent to sea. The referent enemy can also be seen from how that fleet was deployed. 

  Oh your referring to their primary enemies, Congress and the army.

[miletus12]

Nov 6, 2022 16:12:56 GMT stevep said:

Nov 6, 2022 5:41:35 GMT miletus12 said:

Yes. Give me a day to figure out what I have to write about it. You may not know exactly what actually happened. I think you will be quite surprised. Post WWII and Between the Wars are not at all comparable at all. 

That is wrong.  You can see a lot of what the USG and USN thought from their construction programs, the budgets and the kind of weapon system they sent to sea. The referent enemy can also be seen from how that fleet was deployed. 

  Oh your referring to their primary enemies, Congress and the army.

The WWI lineup. And the UK; actually. The General Board had its "pacing threats" in those days, too. You can see it in the Fleet Problems. 

[stevep]

Nov 6, 2022 17:23:55 GMT miletus12 said:

Nov 6, 2022 16:12:56 GMT stevep said:

  Oh your referring to their primary enemies, Congress and the army.

The WWI lineup. And the UK; actually. The General Board had its "pacing threats" in those days, too. You can see it in the Fleet Problems. 

  I know the navy presented the RN as a threat in its problems simply because they were the only ones that could stand against the USN after WWII and the navy of course wanted the maximum amount of money so it was in its interests - as well as that of some industrialist - to push that view hard but as I said most people in Congress saw through that as the fake it was.

[miletus12]

Nov 6, 2022 18:51:49 GMT stevep said:

Nov 6, 2022 17:23:55 GMT miletus12 said:

The WWI lineup. And the UK; actually. The General Board had its "pacing threats" in those days, too. You can see it in the Fleet Problems. 

  I know the navy presented the RN as a threat in its problems simply because they were the only ones that could stand against the USN after WWII and the navy of course wanted the maximum amount of money so it was in its interests - as well as that of some industrialist - to push that view hard but as I said most people in Congress saw through that as the fake it was.

Referent threat is shaped by an assessment of:

a. who is out there who can hurt us the most as in. Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK.    
b. possible conflicts of interests. Coimmercial rivalries in China, East Asia, and SOUTH AMERICA.   
c. proven capability to interfere with American goals, which means a NAVY that could attack our trade;
--the Germans were obvious. They tried in the Spanish American and Great Wars to interfere with American goals and interests and planned and did attack us directly. 
--Italy was a stretch, but they had a navy and an increased interest in South American markets. So plan for the possibility and build for it.
--Japan was obvious and was set up to be our rival in the Pacific with a LOT of British help. See next.
--historically Great Britain and that was painfully obvious and quite emphatically so. Name a war up until 1900, in which the United States was involved, where the British did not manipulate events to try to weaken or destroy the United States?

And post WWI, WE were the Royal Navy's pacing threat, not Japan, who was a British ALLY until the Washington Naval Treaty. We knew that fact which was an added incentive to plan for the contingency of a USN and RN war.       
 

[stevep]

Nov 6, 2022 19:27:28 GMT miletus12 said:

Nov 6, 2022 18:51:49 GMT stevep said:

  I know the navy presented the RN as a threat in its problems simply because they were the only ones that could stand against the USN after WWII and the navy of course wanted the maximum amount of money so it was in its interests - as well as that of some industrialist - to push that view hard but as I said most people in Congress saw through that as the fake it was.

Referent threat is shaped by an assessment of:

a. who is out there who can hurt us the most as in. Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK.    
b. possible conflicts of interests. Coimmercial rivalries in China, East Asia, and SOUTH AMERICA.   
c. proven capability to interfere with American goals, which means a NAVY that could attack our trade;
--the Germans were obvious. They tried in the Spanish American and Great Wars to interfere with American goals and interests and planned and did attack us directly. 
--Italy was a stretch, but they had a navy and an increased interest in South American markets. So plan for the possibility and build for it.
--Japan was obvious and was set up to be our rival in the Pacific with a LOT of British help. See next.
--historically Great Britain and that was painfully obvious and quite emphatically so. Name a war up until 1900, in which the United States was involved, where the British did not manipulate events to try to weaken or destroy the United States?

And post WWI, WE were the Royal Navy's pacing threat, not Japan, who was a British ALLY until the Washington Naval Treaty. We knew that fact which was an added incentive to plan for the contingency of a USN and RN war.       
 

c)  Just about every war the US was involved in.  Other than 1812 when Britain was attacked by the US so obviously had aims in stopping its imperial expansion at the expense of our people.  Any claim to the opposite is the sort of standard rants of the American exceptionalists.

   This last point is untrue.  Britain didn't seek to pace the USN in anything like the same way the USN used the RN as a political target for its massed expansion aims.  Also since Britain had a defensive alliance with Japan it would be odd for Britain to seriously plan for a war against Japan.  Albeit that some such plans were made post WWI.

  This is doubly obvious from the simple fact that when the US 1st announced its massive 1916 programme, with Tirpitz like navalists calling for follow on programmes of similar size and then sought to revive it in 1918 Japan, understandably threatened by the many openly hostile elements in the US responded but Britain didn't.

[lordroel]

A reminder, the thread is called, US NAVY Between WWII and the Korean War, lets not make this something else.