world war ii: axis powers

the-blue-butterfly-effect  asked:

Xylion is definitely not ready to hear about nuclear warfare

He most definitely is not.


Xylion was sitting in the break room, drowning out the cries of the humans as they played that sickly game known as Grand Theft Auto V. The occasional explosions and screams from pedestrians was terrifying.

However, after thirty minutes, the sound seemed to stop. Xylion was confused, so he took a glance at the Humans, only to see them playing a different game.

Fallout 4.

 Xylion carefully made his way over to the TV and sat down next to Human Jenny, who was carefully watching Human Fredrick as he navigated the world around him. Xylion was confused about the way it was put together. It was mostly destroyed, and was clearly not the Earth he had seen the one time he went down there. “What is this place?”

“Diamond City.” Human Fredrick said, absentmindedly.

“And what happened to it?”

“The world got nuked.”

“’Nuked’?”

Human Fredrick sighed as he paused the game. He turned around to face him. “I’m going to assume you’ve never heard of a Nuclear Bomb before, huh?”

“What is a ‘Nuclear Bomb’? I know what a bomb is, but those aren’t typically used nowadays.”

Human Isaac held back laughter after hearing that. Xylion looked towards him, but Human Jenny was the one who refocused his attention. He nodded, apologizing to Human Fredrick for losing focus.

“It’s alright. We humans do it all the time. Anyways, a Nuclear bomb is similar to a normal bomb, except way worse.”

Xylion was confused. A bomb was already terrible. When activated, it could kill hundreds to thousands of people. How worse could a Nuclear bomb be?

Before he could ask it, Human Jenny stood up. “Let me go get my textbook.”

He watched her run off. Xylion sighed, and began to knot his tentacles together. Human Isaac seemed transfixed on it. “Woah, now that’s some cool shit.”

“Thanks?”

Human Jenny came back moments later, carrying a few textbooks. She dropped them on the ground before grabbing one. “This one talks all about World War II.”

Xylion attempted to throw his tentacles in the air, but he only tightened the knot, and ended up crying out in pain. “World War II?” He managed to squeak out as Human mason helped him untie his tentacles.

“Yep.”

“More than one?”

“Yep.”

Xylion looked down as Human Fredrick grabbed the textbook from Human Jenny. He flipped through the book before showing a page to Xylion. There were models of some weird shaped objects labeled ‘Little Boy’ and ‘Fat Man’. “These are the two nuclear bombs used at the end of World War II. Little Boy was dropped on a city called Hiroshima in Japan, and Fat Man on Nagasaki.”

“Why? What was the point?”

“Well, see, in World War II, there were the Axis powers and the Allies. The Axis was built up of Germany, known as the Nazis at the time and led by Adolf Hitler, Italy led by Benito Mussolini, and Japan led by Emperor Hirohito. The Allies were the opposing team that is considered the good side now. The three main ones, while there were others, is the United Kingdom led by William Churchill, the Soviet Union led by Josef Stalin, and the United States led by President Franklin Roosevelt, at least for a good chunk of the war.”

Xylion rubbed his tentacles together. “And why were the bombs used?”

“I’m getting to that. So, Germany and Italy were eventually defeated, but Japan had different beliefs when it came to war. It was essentially, surrender is never an option and death is more worthy than surrender. So, surrendering was not an option for them. The United States, worried the war would drag on for even longer, turned to president Harry Truman. Truman had to either decide to continue fighting as they had, or threaten them with Project Manhattan. No one really knew what it was, but all he said as a threat was that they would drop a bomb on one of their heavily populated cities.”

“And why would they do that? They could kill everyone!”

“That was kind of the point, Xylion.” Human Isaac said, rolling his eyes.

Xylion sighed, ignoring him. “Anyways…” Human Fredrick said, narrowing his eyes at his crewmate. “Japan refused to surrender, either not believing America or just out of their principle, I can’t exactly remember. So, America sent Little Boy off to Hiroshima. And they dropped the first nuke.”

“A nuke is essentially a large scale bomb. They not only have huge explosions, but they also release a ton of radiation, which is highly poisonous to humans. In large amounts, of course. It can cause different deformities and cancer, which can be incurable in some cases. 70,000 to 80,000 people were killed by the blast, and another 70,000 injured. About 20,000 military personnel were killed and/or injured.”

Xylion couldn’t believe what he was hearing. With that many dead, surely they would’ve changed their principle, right? Accepted defeat?

“So they stopped fighting?”

“No. They refused to surrender, so we were forced to drop another bomb on them. Fat Man. We dropped it on Nagasaki, another Japanese city. The death toll, in it’s entirety, grew to 129,000 to 240,000, though some believe the total death toll could be higher. Japan soon surrendered.”

Xylion felt his body begin to get covered in mucus. He grimaced. “Surely you don’t use them anymore, right?”

“Of course. Nuclear weapons are strictly banned in military wars. Now, it’s used as energy and fuel.”

“At least Japan has moved back into those cities, correct? Rebuilt everything?”

“Well…”

“Well what?”

Human Fredrick scratched the back of his head. “The cities are still uninhabitable.”

“What.”

“See, the radiation is still sticking around, and it will stay there for a few decades, I believe. No one can set foot in there without getting sick or dying.”

“So no one can live there?”

“Unless they want to grow a third eye or die of cancer, nah.” Human Isaac said, grinning at Xylion.

Human Fredrick sighed. “Essentially, yes.”

Xylion shook his head.

Humans were terrible, especially to themselves.

He stood up and carefully made his way back to his cabin. Once he got into his room, he sat on his bed, the horrors of what he heard still replaying in his mind.

Xylion didn’t think he could ever be the same, knowing just what humans did to one another.


I hope you enjoyed that.

I’m a huge history nerd, and I especially love learning and talking about WWII, mainly because of how it showed what humans are capable of, etcetera. I just think it was an interesting time period, because it helped dictate everything that has happened thus far. The Vietnam War, the Cold War, The Korean War, and so on.

Anyways, I especially know a lot about nuclear bombs and energy because we had to do a whole project on it in Chemistry last year. Me and my partner did the Yucca Mountain Power Plant in Nevada, but I still paid attention to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

So yeah, I hope you enjoyed the-blue-butterfly-effect!

2

The Chinese contract Canadian Inglis Mark I Hi-Power,

The Browning Hi-Power pistol is perhaps one of the most famous semi-automatic pistols of the 20th century, which is still in common use with many military’s today.  It is especially unique in the fact that during World War II, both Allied and Axis powers used the pistol extensively.  

In Toronto, Canada the John Inglis Company manufactured a copy of of the Browning Hi-Power called the Mark I for Allied forces.  Two models were produced.  One was a standard pistol with fixed sights made for British and Canadian paratroopers, however another model was made under contract by the Chinese government.  At the time the Republic of China was in desperate need of arms due to its life and death struggle with Japan.  The Chinese contract Mark I was unique in that it came with a detachable buttstock (which also doubled as a holster), turning the pistol into a handy carbine or personal defense weapon.  Unlike other Hi-Powers, the Chinese contract had an adjustable rear sight which could be adjusted to a maximum distance of 500 meters.  Like other Browning Hi-Powers, it used a detachable magazine which held 13 rounds, and was chambered for 9mm Para.  All markings were in Chinese rather than English Roman alphabet.  They were produced between fall of 1944 up to the end of World War II.

3

The Worst Hyperinflation in History and the Death of the Hungarian Pengo,

Inflation is when money loses value over time causing prices to rise. Money is just like any other commodity; it’s value is derived from it’s rarity.  When it comes to fiat currency (paper money that is backed by nothing but trust), money tends to lose value when governments print more of it, the price of goods rises, and thus inflation sets in. When governments print a lot of it at once and money loses value very quickly, hyperinflation sets in.

For most of World War II, Hungary was a member of the Axis Powers.  After suffering severe defeats on the Eastern Front, the Hungarian Government quickly went broke, and being an Axis Power, there weren’t many countries it could burrow money from.  In order to fund the war, the Hungarian Government desperately began to print money to pay for expenses.  In 1944 the largest denomination bill was the 1,000 Pengo note. As the war came to a close, expenses only grew as the Hungarian Government had to fund projects to repair and rebuild the war torn country, provide employment for returning soldiers, and fund many new social programs. Government printing accelerated in order to meet the demand for cash.  As a result, the largest denomination bill at the end of 1945 was the 10,000,000 Pengo bill.

By this point, hyperinflation was seriously disrupting the Hungarian economy. People saw their life savings instantly made worthless. In order to buy basic supplies like food and groceries, people had to go to stores with wheelbarrows full of bricks of cash. Prices doubled on a weekly basis. By July 1946, Hungarian hyperinflation had reached it’s worst. By then the price of goods doubled every 15 hours and the daily rate of inflation was 195%, making an annual rate of inflation of 41.9 quadrillion percent. During this month, the Hungarian government began printing the largest banknote in history, the 100 million billion Pengo bill, or the 100 Quintilian pengo bill (100,000,000,000,000,000,000 (10^20).

In August of 1946, the Pengo had become so worthless that the entire Hungarian money supply of 400 quadrilliard Pengo ( 4×1029 ) had the buying power of 1/100th of an American dollar. On August 1st, the Pengo was declared defunct by the Hungarian government and replaced by the Forint, which was to be exchanged at the rate of 400 octillion Pengo. By then the Pengo had become so worthless that government workers had to be hired to sweep up piles of money from the streets.

“It’s Oliver, but it’s not Oliver. It’s Oliver in the High Castle…”

Felicity Smoak | Crisis on Earth X

The Man in the High Castle (1962) is an alternative history novel by American writer Philip K. Dick. Set in 1962, fifteen years after an alternative ending to World War II, the novel concerns intrigues between the victorious Axis Powers—primarily, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany—as they rule over the former United States, as well as daily life under the resulting totalitarian rule. This novel was recently adapted to television by Amazon Studios.


Originally posted by joexjuliana

Source -  Pinterest

Battleship

A battleship is a large armored warship with a main battery consisting of large caliber guns. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries the battleship was the most powerful type of warship, and a fleet of battleships was vital for any nation that desired to maintain command of the sea.

The word battleship was coined around 1794 and is a contraction of the phrase line-of-battle ship, the dominant wooden warship during the Age of Sail.[1] The term came into formal use in the late 1880s to describe a type of ironclad warship,[2] now referred to by historians as pre-dreadnought battleships. In 1906, the commissioning of HMS Dreadnought heralded a revolution in battleship design. Subsequent battleship designs, influenced by HMS Dreadnought, were referred to as “dreadnoughts”.

Battleships were a symbol of naval dominance and national might, and for decades the battleship was a major factor in both diplomacy and military strategy.[3] A global arms race in battleship construction began in Europe in the 1890s and culminated at the decisive Battle of Tsushima in 1905;[4][5][6] the outcome of which significantly influenced the design of HMS Dreadnought.[7][8] The launch of Dreadnought in 1906 commenced a new naval arms race. Three major fleet actionbetween steel battleships took place: the decisive battles of the Yellow Sea (1904) and Tsushima (1905) during the Russo-Japanese War, and the Battle of Jutland(1916) during the First World War. Jutland was the largest naval battle and the only full-scale clash of battleships in the war, and it was the last major battle fought primarily by battleships in world history.[9]

The Naval Treaties of the 1920s and 1930s limited the number of battleships, though technical innovation in battleship design continued. Both the Allied and Axis powers built battleships during World War II, though the increasing importance of the aircraft carrier meant that the battleship played a less important role than had been expected.

The value of the battleship has been questioned, even during their heyday.[10] There were few of the decisive fleet battles that battleship proponents expected, and used to justify the vast resources spent on building battlefleets. Even in spite of their huge firepower and protection, battleships were increasingly vulnerable to much smaller, cheaper weapons: initially the torpedo and the naval mine, and later aircraft and the guided missile.[11] The growing range of naval engagements led to the aircraft carrier replacing the battleship as the leading capital ship during World War II, with the last battleship to be launched being HMS Vanguard in 1944. Battleships were retained by the United States Navy into the Cold War for fire support purposes before being stricken from the U.S. Naval Vessel Register in the 2000s.

Ships of the line

A ship of the line was a large, unarmored wooden sailing ship which mounted a battery of up to 120 smoothbore guns and carronades. The ship of the line developed gradually over centuries and, apart from growing in size, it changed little between the adoption of line of battle tactics in the early 17th century and the end of the sailing battleship’s heyday in the 1830s. From 1794, the alternative term ‘line of battle ship’ was contracted (informally at first) to 'battle ship’ or 'battleship’.[1]

The sheer number of guns fired broadside meant a sail battleship could wreck any wooden enemy, holing her hull, knocking down masts, wrecking her rigging, and killing her crew. However, the effective range of the guns was as little as a few hundred yards, so the battle tactics of sailing ships depended in part on the wind.

The first major change to the ship of the line concept was the introduction of steam power as an auxiliary propulsion system. Steam power was gradually introduced to the navy in the first half of the 19th century, initially for small craft and later for frigates. The French Navy introduced steam to the line of battle with the 90-gun Napoléon in 1850[12]—the first true steam battleship.[13]Napoléon was armed as a conventional ship-of-the-line, but her steam engines could give her a speed of 12 knots (22 km/h), regardless of the wind condition. This was a potentially decisive advantage in a naval engagement. The introduction of steam accelerated the growth in size of battleships. France and the United Kingdom were the only countries to develop fleets of wooden steam screw battleships although several other navies operated small numbers of screw battleships, including Russia (9), Turkey (3), Sweden (2), Naples (1), Denmark (1) and Austria (1).[14][3]

Ironclads

The adoption of steam power was only one of a number of technological advances which revolutionized warship design in the 19th century. The ship of the line was overtaken by the ironclad: powered by steam, protected by metal armor, and armed with guns firing high-explosive shells.

Explosive shells

Guns that fired explosive or incendiary shells were a major threat to wooden ships, and these weapons quickly became widespread after the introduction of 8 inch shell guns as part of the standard armament of French and American line-of-battle ships in 1841.[15] In the Crimean War, six line-of-battle ships and two frigates of the Russian Black Sea Fleet destroyed seven Turkish frigates and three corvettes with explosive shells at the Battle of Sinop in 1853.[16] Later in the war, French ironclad floating batteries used similar weapons against the defenses at the Battle of Kinburn.[17]

Nevertheless, wooden-hulled ships stood up comparatively well to shells, as shown in the 1866 Battle of Lissa, where the modern Austrian steam two-decker SMS Kaiser ranged across a confused battlefield, rammed an Italian ironclad and took 80 hits from Italian ironclads,[18] many of which were shells,[19] but including at least one 300 pound shot at point blank range. Despite losing her bowsprit and her foremast, and being set on fire, she was ready for action again the very next day.[20]

Iron armor and construction

The development of high-explosive shells made the use of iron armor plate on warships necessary. In 1859 France launched Gloire, the first ocean-going ironclad warship. She had the profile of a ship of the line, cut to one deck due to weight considerations. Although made of wood and reliant on sail for most journeys, Gloire was fitted with a propeller, and her wooden hull was protected by a layer of thick iron armor.[21]Gloire prompted further innovation from the Royal Navy, anxious to prevent France from gaining a technological lead.

The superior armored frigate Warrior followed Gloire by only 14 months, and both nations embarked on a program of building new ironclads and converting existing screw ships of the line to armored frigates.[22] Within two years, Italy, Austria, Spain and Russia had all ordered ironclad warships, and by the time of the famous clash of the USS Monitor and the CSS Virginia at the Battle of Hampton Roads at least eight navies possessed ironclad ships.[3]

Navies experimented with the positioning of guns, in turrets (like the USS Monitor), central-batteries or barbettes, or with the ram as the principal weapon. As steam technology developed, masts were gradually removed from battleship designs. By the mid-1870s steel was used as a construction material alongside iron and wood. The French Navy’s Redoutable, laid down in 1873 and launched in 1876, was a central battery and barbette warship which became the first battleship in the world to use steel as the principal building material.[24]

Pre-dreadnought battleship

The term “battleship” was officially adopted by the Royal Navy in the re-classification of 1892. By the 1890s, there was an increasing similarity between battleship designs, and the type that later became known as the 'pre-dreadnought battleship’ emerged. These were heavily armored ships, mounting a mixed battery of guns in turrets, and without sails. The typical first-class battleship of the pre-dreadnought era displaced 15,000 to 17,000 tons, had a speed of 16 knots (30 km/h), and an armament of four 12-inch (305 mm) guns in two turrets fore and aft with a mixed-caliber secondary battery amidships around the superstructure.[2] An early design with superficial similarity to the pre-dreadnought is the British Devastation class of 1871.[25][26]

The slow-firing 12-inch (305 mm) main guns were the principal weapons for battleship-to-battleship combat. The intermediate and secondary batteries had two roles. Against major ships, it was thought a 'hail of fire’ from quick-firing secondary weapons could distract enemy gun crews by inflicting damage to the superstructure, and they would be more effective against smaller ships such as cruisers. Smaller guns (12-pounders and smaller) were reserved for protecting the battleship against the threat of torpedo attack from destroyers and torpedo boats.[27]

The beginning of the pre-dreadnought era coincided with Britain reasserting her naval dominance. For many years previously, Britain had taken naval supremacy for granted. Expensive naval projects were criticised by political leaders of all inclinations.[3] However, in 1888 a war scare with France and the build-up of the Russian navy gave added impetus to naval construction, and the British Naval Defence Act of 1889 laid down a new fleet including eight new battleships. The principle that Britain’s navy should be more powerful than the two next most powerful fleets combined was established. This policy was designed to deter France and Russia from building more battleships, but both nations nevertheless expanded their fleets with more and better pre-dreadnoughts in the 1890s.[3]

In the last years of the 19th century and the first years of the 20th, the escalation in the building of battleships became an arms race between Britain and Germany. The German naval laws of 1890 and 1898 authorised a fleet of 38 battleships, a vital threat to the balance of naval power.[3] Britain answered with further shipbuilding, but by the end of the pre-dreadnought era, British supremacy at sea had markedly weakened. In 1883, the United Kingdom had 38 battleships, twice as many as France and almost as many as the rest of the world put together. By 1897, Britain’s lead was far smaller due to competition from France, Germany, and Russia, as well as the development of pre-dreadnought fleets in Italy, the United States and Japan.[28] Turkey, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Chile and Brazil all had second-rate fleets led by armored cruisers, coastal defence ships or monitors.[29]

Pre-dreadnoughts continued the technical innovations of the ironclad. Turrets, armor plate, and steam engines were all improved over the years, and torpedo tubes were introduced. A small number of designs, including the American Kearsarge and Virginia classes, experimented with all or part of the 8-inch intermediate battery superimposed over the 12-inch primary. Results were poor: recoil factors and blast effects resulted in the 8-inch battery being completely unusable, and the inability to train the primary and intermediate armaments on different targets led to significant tactical limitations. Even though such innovative designs saved weight (a key reason for their inception), they proved too cumbersome in practice.[30]

Dreadnought era

In 1906, the British Royal Navy launched the revolutionary HMS Dreadnought. Created as a result of pressure from Admiral Sir John (“Jackie”) Fisher, HMS Dreadnought made existing battleships obsolete. Combining an “all-big-gun” armament of ten 12-inch (305 mm) guns with unprecedented speed (from steam turbine engines) and protection, she prompted navies worldwide to re-evaluate their battleship building programs. While the Japanese had laid down an all-big-gun battleship, Satsuma, in 1904[31] and the concept of an all-big-gun ship had been in circulation for several years, it had yet to be validated in combat. Dreadnought sparked a new arms race, principally between Britain and Germany but reflected worldwide, as the new class of warships became a crucial element of national power.[32]

Technical development continued rapidly through the dreadnought era, with steep changes in armament, armor and propulsion. Ten years after Dreadnought’s commissioning, much more powerful ships, the super-dreadnoughts, were being built.

Origin

In the first years of the 20th century, several navies worldwide experimented with the idea of a new type of battleship with a uniform armament of very heavy guns.

Admiral Vittorio Cuniberti, the Italian Navy’s chief naval architect, articulated the concept of an all-big-gun battleship in 1903. When the Regia Marina did not pursue his ideas, Cuniberti wrote an article in Jane’s proposing an “ideal” future British battleship, a large armored warship of 17,000 tons, armed solely with a single calibre main battery (twelve 12-inch {305 mm} guns), carrying 300-millimetre (12 in) belt armor, and capable of 24 knots (44 km/h).[33]

The Russo-Japanese War provided operational experience to validate the 'all-big-gun’ concept. At the Yellow Sea and Tsushima, pre-dreadnoughts exchanged volleys at ranges of 7,600–12,000 yd (7 to 11 km), beyond the range of the secondary batteries. It is often held that these engagements demonstrated the importance of the 12-inch (305 mm) gun over its smaller counterparts, though some historians take the view that secondary batteries were just as important as the larger weapons.[3]

In Japan, the two battleships of the 1903-4 Programme were the first to be laid down as all-big-gun designs, with eight 12-inch guns. However, the design had armor which was considered too thin, demanding a substantial redesign.[34] The financial pressures of the Russo-Japanese War and the short supply of 12-inch guns which had to be imported from Britain meant these ships were completed with a mixed 10- and 12-inch armament. The 1903-4 design also retained traditional triple-expansion steam engines.[35]

As early as 1904, Jackie Fisher had been convinced of the need for fast, powerful ships with an all-big-gun armament. If Tsushima influenced his thinking, it was to persuade him of the need to standardise on 12-inch (305 mm) guns.[3] Fisher’s concerns were submarines and destroyers equipped with torpedoes, then threatening to outrange battleship guns, making speed imperative for capital ships.[3] Fisher’s preferred option was his brainchild, the battlecruiser: lightly armored but heavily armed with eight 12-inch guns and propelled to 25 knots (46 km/h) by steam turbines.[36]

It was to prove this revolutionary technology that Dreadnought was designed in January 1905, laid down in October 1905 and sped to completion by 1906. She carried ten 12-inch guns, had an 11-inch armor belt, and was the first large ship powered by turbines. She mounted her guns in five turrets; three on the centerline (one forward, two aft) and two on the wings, giving her at her launch twice the broadside of any other warship. She retained a number of 12-pound (3-inch, 76 mm) quick-firing guns for use against destroyers and torpedo-boats. Her armor was heavy enough for her to go head-to-head with any other ship in a gun battle, and conceivably win.[37]

Dreadnought was to have been followed by three Invincible-class battlecruisers, their construction delayed to allow lessons from Dreadnought to be used in their design. While Fisher may have intended Dreadnought to be the last Royal Navy battleship,[3] the design was so successful he found little support for his plan to switch to a battlecruiser navy. Although there were some problems with the ship (the wing turrets had limited arcs of fire and strained the hull when firing a full broadside, and the top of the thickest armor belt lay below the waterline at full load), the Royal Navy promptly commissioned another six ships to a similar design in the Bellerophon and St. Vincent classes.

An American design, South Carolina, authorized in 1905 and laid down in December 1906, was another of the first dreadnoughts, but she and her sister, Michigan, were not launched until 1908. Both used triple-expansion engines and had a superior layout of the main battery, dispensing with Dreadnought’s wing turrets. They thus retained the same broadside, despite having two fewer guns.

Arms race

In 1897, before the revolution in design brought about by HMS Dreadnought, the Royal Navy had 62 battleships in commission or building, a lead of 26 over France and 50 over Germany.[28] In 1906, the Royal Navy owned the field with Dreadnought. The new class of ship prompted an arms race with major strategic consequences. Major naval powers raced to build their own dreadnoughts. Possession of modern battleships was not only vital to naval power, but also, as with nuclear weapons today, represented a nation’s standing in the world.[3] Germany, France, Japan,[38] Italy, Austria, and the United States all began dreadnought programmes; while Ottoman Turkey, Argentina, Russia,[38] Brazil, and Chile commissioned dreadnoughts to be built in British and American yards.

World War I

The battleship, particularly the dreadnought, was the dominant naval weapon of the World War I era. There were few serious challenges at that time. The most significant naval battles of World War I, such as Jutland (May 31, 1916 – June 1, 1916), were fought by battleships and their battlecruiser cousins.[39]

By virtue of geography, the Royal Navy was able to use her imposing battleship and battlecruiser fleet to impose a strict and successful naval blockade of Germany and kept Germany’s smaller battleship fleet bottled up in the North Sea: only narrow channels led to the Atlantic Ocean and these were guarded by British forces.[40] Both sides were aware that, because of the greater number of British dreadnoughts, a full fleet engagement would be likely to result in a British victory. The German strategy was therefore to try to provoke an engagement on their terms: either to induce a part of the Grand Fleet to enter battle alone, or to fight a pitched battle near the German coastline, where friendly minefields, torpedo-boats and submarines could be used to even the odds.[41] Germany’s submarines were able to break out and raid commerce, but even though they sank many merchant ships, they could not successfully blockade Great Britain – in contrast to Britain’s successful battleship blockade of Germany, which was a major cause of Germany’s economic collapse in 1918. The Royal Navy on the other hand, successfully adopted convoy tactics to combat Germany’s submarine blockade and eventually defeated it.[39]

The first two years of war saw the Royal Navy’s battleships and battlecruisers regularly “sweep” the North Sea making sure that no German ships could get in or out. Only a few German surface ships that were already at sea, such as the famous light cruiser SMS Emden, were able to raid commerce. Even some of those that did manage to get out were hunted down by battlecruisers, as in the Battle of the Falklands, December 7, 1914. The results of sweeping actions in the North Sea were battles such as the Heligoland Bight and Dogger Bank and German raids on the English coast, all of which were attempts by the Germans to lure out portions of the Grand Fleet in an attempt to defeat the Royal Navy in detail. On May 31, 1916, a further attempt to draw British ships into battle on German terms resulted in a clash of the battlefleets in the Battle of Jutland.[42] The German fleet withdrew to port after two short encounters with the British fleet. Less than two months later, the Germans once again attempted to draw portions of the Grand Fleet into battle. The resulting Action of 19 August 1916 proved inconclusive. This reinforced German determination not to engage in a fleet to fleet battle.[43]

In the other naval theatres there were no decisive pitched battles. In the Black Sea, engagement between Russian and Turkish battleships was restricted to skirmishes. In the Baltic Sea, action was largely limited to the raiding of convoys, and the laying of defensive minefields; the only significant clash of battleship squadrons there was the Battle of Moon Sound at which one Russian pre-dreadnought was lost. The Adriatic was in a sense the mirror of the North Sea: the Austro-Hungarian dreadnought fleet remained bottled up by the British and French blockade. And in the Mediterranean, the most important use of battleships was in support of the amphibious assault on Gallipoli.[44]

In September 1914, the threat posed to surface ships by German U-boats was confirmed by successful attacks on British cruisers, including the sinking of three British armored cruisers by the German submarine SM U-9 in less than an hour. The British Super-dreadnought HMS Audacious soon followed suit as she struck a mine laid by a German U-boat in October 1914 and sank. The threat that German U-boats posed to British dreadnoughts was enough to cause the Royal Navy to change their strategy and tactics in the North Sea to reduce the risk of U-boat attack.[45] Further near-misses from submarine attacks on battleships and casualties amongst cruisers led to growing concern in the Royal Navy about the vulnerability of battleships.

As the war wore on however, it turned out that whilst submarines did prove to be an incredibly dangerous threat to older pre-dreadnought battleships, as shown by examples such as the sinking of the Mesûdiye, which was caught in the Dardanelles by a British submarine[46] and the HMS Majestic and HMS Triumph were torpedoed by U-21 as well as HMS Formidable, HMS Cornwallis, HMS Britanniaetc., the threat posed to dreadnought battleships proved to have been largely a false alarm. HMS Audacious turned out to have been the only dreadnought sunk by a submarine in World War I.[39] While battleships were never intended for anti-submarine warfare, there was one instance of a submarine being sunk by a dreadnought battleship. HMS Dreadnought rammed and sank the German U-29 on March 18, 1915 off Moray Firth.[39]

Whilst the escape of the German fleet from the superior British firepower at Jutland was effected by the German cruisers and destroyers successfully turning away the British battleships, the German attempt to rely on U-boat attacks on the British fleet failed.[47]

Torpedo boats did have some successes against battleships in World War I, as demonstrated by the sinking of the British pre-dreadnought HMS Goliath by Muâvenet-i Millîye during the Dardanelles Campaign and the destruction of the Austro-Hungarian dreadnought SMS Szent István by Italian motor torpedo boats in June 1918. In large fleet actions, however, destroyers and torpedo boats were usually unable to get close enough to the battleships to damage them. The only battleship sunk in a fleet action by either torpedo boats or destroyers was the obsolescent German pre-dreadnought SMS Pommern. She was sunk by destroyers during the night phase of the Battle of Jutland.

The German High Seas Fleet, for their part, were determined not to engage the British without the assistance of submarines; and since the submarines were needed more for raiding commercial traffic, the fleet stayed in port for much of the war.[48]

Inter-war period

For many years, Germany simply had no battleships. The Armistice with Germany required that most of the High Seas Fleet be disarmed and interned in a neutral port; largely because no neutral port could be found, the ships remained in British custody in Scapa Flow, Scotland. The Treaty of Versailles specified that the ships should be handed over to the British. Instead, most of them were scuttledby their German crews on June 21, 1919 just before the signature of the peace treaty. The treaty also limited the German Navy, and prevented Germany from building or possessing any capital ships.[49]

The inter-war period saw the battleship subjected to strict international limitations to prevent a costly arms race breaking out.[50]

While the victors were not limited by the Treaty of Versailles, many of the major naval powers were crippled after the war. Faced with the prospect of a naval arms race against the United Kingdom and Japan, which would in turn have led to a possible Pacific war, the United States was keen to conclude the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922. This treaty limited the number and size of battleships that each major nation could possess, and required Britain to accept parity with the U.S. and to abandon the British alliance with Japan.[51] The Washington treaty was followed by a series of other naval treaties, including the First Geneva Naval Conference (1927), the First London Naval Treaty (1930), the Second Geneva Naval Conference (1932), and finally the Second London Naval Treaty (1936), which all set limits on major warships. These treaties became effectively obsolete on September 1, 1939 at the beginning of World War II, but the ship classifications that had been agreed upon still apply.[52] The treaty limitations meant that fewer new battleships were launched in 1919–39 than in 1905–14. The treaties also inhibited development by putting maximum limits on the weights of ships. Designs like the projected British N3-class battleship, the first American South Dakota class, and the Japanese Kii class—all of which continued the trend to larger ships with bigger guns and thicker armor—never got off the drawing board. Those designs which were commissioned during this period were referred to as treaty battleships.[53]

Rise of air power

As early as 1914, the British Admiral Percy Scott predicted that battleships would soon be made irrelevant by aircraft.[54] By the end of World War I, aircraft had successfully adopted the torpedo as a weapon.[55] In 1921 the Italian general and air theorist Giulio Douhet completed a hugely influential treatise on strategic bombing titled The Command of the Air, which foresaw the dominance of air power over naval units.

In the 1920s, General Billy Mitchell of the United States Army Air Corps, believing that air forces had rendered navies around the world obsolete, testified in front of Congress that “1,000 bombardment airplanes can be built and operated for about the price of one battleship” and that a squadron of these bombers could sink a battleship, making for more efficient use of government funds.[56] This infuriated the U.S. Navy, but Mitchell was nevertheless allowed to conduct a careful series of bombing tests alongside Navy and Marine bombers. In 1921, he bombed and sank numerous ships, including the “unsinkable” German World War I battleship SMS Ostfriesland and the American pre-dreadnought Alabama.[57]

Although Mitchell had required “war-time conditions”, the ships sunk were obsolete, stationary, defenseless and had no damage control. The sinking of Ostfrieslandwas accomplished by violating an agreement that would have allowed Navy engineers to examine the effects of various munitions: Mitchell’s airmen disregarded the rules, and sank the ship within minutes in a coordinated attack. The stunt made headlines, and Mitchell declared, “No surface vessels can exist wherever air forces acting from land bases are able to attack them.” While far from conclusive, Mitchell’s test was significant because it put proponents of the battleship against naval aviation on the back foot.[3] Rear Admiral William A. Moffett used public relations against Mitchell to make headway toward expansion of the U.S. Navy’s nascent aircraft carrier program.[58]

Rearmament

The Royal Navy, United States Navy, and Imperial Japanese Navy extensively upgraded and modernized their World War I–era battleships during the 1930s. Among the new features were an increased tower height and stability for the optical rangefinder equipment (for gunnery control), more armor (especially around turrets) to protect against plunging fire and aerial bombing, and additional anti-aircraft weapons. Some British ships received a large block superstructure nicknamed the “Queen Anne’s castle”, such as in the Queen Elizabeth and Warspite, which would be used in the new conning towers of the King George V-class fast battleships. External bulges were added to improve both buoyancy to counteract weight increase and provide underwater protection against mines and torpedoes. The Japanese rebuilt all of their battleships, plus their battlecruisers, with distinctive “pagoda” structures, though the Hiei received a more modern bridge tower that would influence the new Yamato-classbattleships. Bulges were fitted, including steel tube arrays to improve both underwater and vertical protection along the waterline. The U.S. experimented with cage masts and later tripod masts, though after Pearl Harbor some of the most severely damaged ships such as West Virginia and California were rebuilt to a similar appearance to their Iowa-class contemporaries (called tower masts). Radar, which was effective beyond visual contact and was effective in complete darkness or adverse weather conditions, was introduced to supplement optical fire control.[59]

Even when war threatened again in the late 1930s, battleship construction did not regain the level of importance which it had held in the years before World War I. The “building holiday” imposed by the naval treaties meant that the building capacity of dockyards worldwide was relatively reduced, and the strategic position had changed.[60]

In Germany, the ambitious Plan Z for naval rearmament was abandoned in favor of a strategy of submarine warfare supplemented by the use of battlecruisers and Bismarck-class battleships as commerce raiders. In Britain, the most pressing need was for air defenses and convoy escorts to safeguard the civilian population from bombing or starvation, and re-armament construction plans consisted of five ships of the King George V class. It was in the Mediterranean that navies remained most committed to battleship warfare. France intended to build six battleships of the Dunkerque and Richelieu classes, and the Italians four Littorio-class ships. Neither navy built significant aircraft carriers. The U.S. preferred to spend limited funds on aircraft carriers until the South Dakota class. Japan, also prioritising aircraft carriers, nevertheless began work on three mammoth Yamato-class ships (although the third, Shinano, was later completed as a carrier) and a planned fourth was cancelled.[11]

At the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War, the Spanish navy consisted of only two small dreadnought battleships, España and Jaime I. España (originally named Alfonso XIII), by then in reserve at the northwestern naval base of El Ferrol, fell into Nationalist hands in July 1936. The crew aboard Jaime I remained loyal to the Republic, killed their officers, who apparently supported Franco’s attempted coup, and joined the Republican Navy. Thus each side had one battleship; however, the Republican Navy generally lacked experienced officers. The Spanish battleships mainly restricted themselves to mutual blockades, convoy escort duties, and shore bombardment, rarely in direct fighting against other surface units.[61] In April 1937, España ran into a mine laid by friendly forces, and sank with little loss of life. In May 1937, Jaime I was damaged by Nationalist air attacks and a grounding incident. The ship was forced to go back to port to be repaired. There she was again hit by several aerial bombs. It was then decided to tow the battleship to a more secure port, but during the transport she suffered an internal explosion that caused 300 deaths and her total loss. Several Italian and German capital ships participated in the non-intervention blockade. On May 29, 1937, two Republican aircraft managed to bomb the German pocket battleship Deutschland outside Ibiza, causing severe damage and loss of life. Admiral Scheer retaliated two days later by bombarding Almería, causing much destruction, and the resulting Deutschland incident meant the end of German and Italian support for non-intervention.[62]

World War II

The German battleship Schleswig-Holstein—an obsolete pre-dreadnought—fired the first shots of World War II with the bombardment of the Polish garrison at Westerplatte;[63] and the final surrender of the Japanese Empire took place aboard a United States Navy battleship, USS Missouri. Between those two events, it had become clear that aircraft carriers were the new principal ships of the fleet and that battleships now performed a secondary role.

Battleships played a part in major engagements in Atlantic, Pacific and Mediterranean theaters; in the Atlantic, the Germans used their battleships as independent commerce raiders. However, clashes between battleships were of little strategic importance. The Battle of the Atlantic was fought between destroyers and submarines, and most of the decisive fleet clashes of the Pacific war were determined by aircraft carriers.

In the first year of the war, armored warships defied predictions that aircraft would dominate naval warfare. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau surprised and sank the aircraft carrier Glorious off western Norway in June 1940.[64] This engagement marked the last time a fleet carrier was sunk by surface gunnery. In the attack on Mers-el-Kébir, British battleships opened fire on the French battleships in the harbor near Oran in Algeria with their heavy guns, and later pursued fleeing French ships with planes from aircraft carriers.

The subsequent years of the war saw many demonstrations of the maturity of the aircraft carrier as a strategic naval weapon and its potential against battleships. The British air attack on the Italian naval base at Taranto sank one Italian battleship and damaged two more. The same Swordfish torpedo bombers played a crucial role in sinking the German commerce-raider Bismarck.

On December 7, 1941, the Japanese launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. Within a short time five of eight U.S. battleships were sunk or sinking, with the rest damaged. The American aircraft carriers were out to sea, however, and evaded detection. They took up the fight, and eventually turned the tide of the war in the Pacific. The sinking of the British battleship Prince of Wales and her escort, the battlecruiser Repulse, demonstrated the vulnerability of a battleship to air attack while at sea without sufficient air cover, settling the argument begun by Mitchell in 1921. Both warships were under way and en route to attack the Japanese amphibious force that had invaded Malaya when they were caught by Japanese land-based bombers and torpedo bombers on December 10, 1941.[65]

At many of the early crucial battles of the Pacific, for instance Coral Sea and Midway, battleships were either absent or overshadowed as carriers launched wave after wave of planes into the attack at a range of hundreds of miles. In later battles in the Pacific, battleships primarily performed shore bombardment in support of amphibious landings and provided anti-aircraft defense as escort for the carriers. Even the largest battleships ever constructed, Japan’s Yamato class, which carried a main battery of nine 18-inch (46 cm) guns and were designed as a principal strategic weapon, were never given a chance to show their potential in the decisive battleship action that figured in Japanese pre-war planning.[66]

The last battleship confrontation in history was the Battle of Surigao Strait, on October 25, 1944, in which a numerically and technically superior American battleship group destroyed a lesser Japanese battleship group by gunfire after it had already been devastated by destroyer torpedo attacks. All but one of the American battleships in this confrontation had previously been sunk by the attack on Pearl Harbor and subsequently raised and repaired. When Mississippi fired the last salvo of this battle, the last salvo fired by a battleship against another heavy ship, she was “firing a funeral salute to a finished era of naval warfare.”[67] In April 1945, during the battle for Okinawa, the world’s most powerful battleship,[68] the Yamato, was sent out against a massive U.S. force on a suicide mission and sunk by overwhelming pressure from carrier aircraft with nearly all hands lost.

Cold War

After World War II, several navies retained their existing battleships, but they were no longer strategically dominant military assets. Indeed, it soon became apparent that they were no longer worth the considerable cost of construction and maintenance and only one new battleship was commissioned after the war, HMS Vanguard. During the war it had been demonstrated that battleship-on-battleship engagements like Leyte Gulf or the sinking of HMS Hood were the exception and not the rule, and with the growing role of aircraft engagement ranges were becoming longer and longer, making heavy gun armament irrelevant. The armor of a battleship was equally irrelevant in the face of a nuclear attack as tactical missiles with a range of 100 kilometres (60 mi) or more could be mounted on the Soviet Kildin-class destroyer and Whiskey-class submarines. By the end of the 1950s, smaller vessel classes such as destroyers, which formerly offered no noteworthy opposition to battleships, now were capable of eliminating battleships from outside the range of the ship’s heavy guns.

The remaining battleships met a variety of ends. USS Arkansas and Nagato were sunk during the testing of nuclear weapons in Operation Crossroadsin 1946. Both battleships proved resistant to nuclear air burst but vulnerable to underwater nuclear explosions.[69] The Italian battleship Giulio Cesarewas taken by the Soviets as reparations and renamed Novorossiysk; she was sunk by a leftover German mine in the Black Sea on October 29, 1955. The two Andrea Doria-class ships were scrapped in 1956.[70] The French Lorraine was scrapped in 1954, Richelieu in 1968,[71] and Jean Bart in 1970.[72]

The United Kingdom’s four surviving King George V-class ships were scrapped in 1957,[73] and Vanguard followed in 1960.[74] All other surviving British battleships had been sold or broken up by 1949.[75] The Soviet Union’s Marat was scrapped in 1953, Parizhskaya Kommuna in 1957 and Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya (back under her original name, Gangut, since 1942)[76] in 1956-7.[76] Brazil’s Minas Geraes was scrapped in Genoa in 1953,[77] and her sister ship São Paulo sank during a storm in the Atlantic en route to the breakers in Italy in 1951.[77]

Argentina kept its two Rivadavia-class ships until 1956 and Chile kept Almirante Latorre (formerly HMS Canada) until 1959.[78] The Turkish battlecruiser Yavûz (formerly SMS Goeben, launched in 1911) was scrapped in 1976 after an offer to sell her back to Germany was refused. Sweden had several small coastal-defense battleships, one of which, HSwMS Gustav V, survived until 1970.[79] The Soviets scrapped four large incomplete cruisers in the late 1950s, whilst plans to build a number of new Stalingrad-class battlecruisers were abandoned following the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953.[80] The three old German battleships Schleswig-Holstein, Schlesien, and Hessen all met similar ends. Hessen was taken over by the Soviet Union and renamed Tsel. She was scrapped in 1960. Schleswig-Holsteinwas renamed Borodino, and was used as a target ship until 1960. Schlesien, too, was used as a target ship. She was broken up between 1952 and 1957.[81]

The Iowa-class battleships gained a new lease of life in the U.S. Navy as fire support ships. Radar and computer-controlled gunfire could be aimed with pinpoint accuracy to target. The U.S. recommissioned all four Iowa-class battleships for the Korean War and the New Jersey for the Vietnam War. These were primarily used for shore bombardment, New Jersey firing nearly 6,000 rounds of 16 inch shells and over 14,000 rounds of 5 inch projectiles during her tour on the gunline,[82] seven times more rounds against shore targets in Vietnam than she had fired in the Second World War.[83]

As part of Navy Secretary John F. Lehman’s effort to build a 600-ship Navy in the 1980s, and in response to the commissioning of Kirov by the Soviet Union, the United States recommissioned all four Iowa-class battleships. On several occasions, battleships were support ships in carrier battle groups, or led their own battleship battle group. These were modernized to carry Tomahawk missiles, with New Jersey seeing action bombarding Lebanon in 1983 and 1984, while Missouriand Wisconsin fired their 16-inch (406 mm) guns at land targets and launched missiles during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Wisconsin served as the TLAMstrike commander for the Persian Gulf, directing the sequence of launches that marked the opening of Desert Storm, firing a total of 24 TLAMs during the first two days of the campaign. The primary threat to the battleships were Iraqi shore based surface-to-surface missiles; Missouri was targeted by two Iraqi Silkworm missiles, with one missing and another being intercepted by the British destroyer HMS Gloucester.[84]

Modern times

All four Iowa ships were decommissioned in the early 1990s, making them the last battleships to see active service. USS Iowa and USS Wisconsin were maintained to a standard where they could be rapidly returned to service as fire support vessels, pending the development of a superior fire support vessel. These last two battleships were finally stricken from the U.S. Naval Vessel Register in 2006.[85][86][87] The Military Balance and Russian Foreign Military Review states the U.S. Navy listed one battleship in the reserve (Naval Inactive Fleet/Reserve 2nd Turn) in 2010.[88][89] The Military Balance states the U.S. Navy listed no battleships in the reserve in 2014.[90] The U.S. Marine Corps believes that the current naval surface fire support gun and missile programs will not be able to provide adequate fire support for an amphibious assault or onshore operations.[91][92]

With the decommissioning of the last Iowa-class ships, no battleships remain in service or in reserve with any navy worldwide. A number are preserved as museum ships, either afloat or in drydock. The U.S. has eight battleships on display: Massachusetts, North Carolina, Alabama, Iowa, New Jersey, Missouri, Wisconsin and Texas. Missouri and New Jersey are museums at Pearl Harbor and Camden, New Jersey, respectively. Iowa is on display as an educational attraction at the Los Angeles Waterfront in San Pedro, California. Wisconsin now serves as a museum ship in Norfolk, Virginia.[93]Massachusetts, which has the distinction of never having lost a man during service, is on display at the Battleship Cove naval museum in Fall River, Massachusetts.[94]Texas, the first battleship turned into a museum, is on display at the San Jacinto Battleground State Historic Site, near Houston. North Carolina is on display in Wilmington, North Carolina. Alabama is on display in Mobile, Alabama. The wreck of the Arizona, sunk during the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, is designated a historical landmark and national gravesite.

The only other 20th-century battleship on display is the Japanese pre-dreadnought Mikasa. A replica of the Chinese ironclad Dingyuan was built by the Weihai Port Bureau in 2003 and is on display in Weihai, China.

Strategy and doctrine

Doctrine

Battleships were the embodiment of sea power. For Alfred Thayer Mahan and his followers, a strong navy was vital to the success of a nation, and control of the seas was vital for the projection of force on land and overseas. Mahan’s theory, proposed in The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660–1783 of 1890, dictated the role of the battleship was to sweep the enemy from the seas.[95] While the work of escorting, blockading, and raiding might be done by cruisers or smaller vessels, the presence of the battleship was a potential threat to any convoy escorted by any vessels other than capital ships. This concept of “potential threat” can be further generalized to the mere existence (as opposed to presence) of a powerful fleet tying the opposing fleet down. This concept came to be known as a “fleet in being” – an idle yet mighty fleet forcing others to spend time, resource and effort to actively guard against it.

Mahan went on to say victory could only be achieved by engagements between battleships, which came to be known as the decisive battle doctrine in some navies, while targeting merchant ships (commerce raiding or guerre de course, as posited by the Jeune École) could never succeed.[96]

Mahan was highly influential in naval and political circles throughout the age of the battleship,[3][97] calling for a large fleet of the most powerful battleships possible. Mahan’s work developed in the late 1880s, and by the end of the 1890s it had a massive[clarification needed] international impact,[3] in the end adopted by many major navies (notably the British, American, German, and Japanese). The strength of Mahanian opinion was important in the development of the battleships arms races, and equally important in the agreement of the Powers to limit battleship numbers in the interwar era.

The “fleet in being” suggested battleships could simply by their existence tie down superior enemy resources. This in turn was believed to be able to tip the balance of a conflict even without a battle. This suggested even for inferior naval powers a battleship fleet could have important strategic impact.[98]

Tactics

While the role of battleships in both World Wars reflected Mahanian doctrine, the details of battleship deployment were more complex. Unlike the ship of the line, the battleships of the late 19th and early 20th centuries had significant vulnerability to torpedoes and mines,[clarification needed] which could be used by relatively small and inexpensive craft. The Jeune École doctrine of the 1870s and 1880s recommended placing torpedo boats alongside battleships; these would hide behind the larger ships until gun-smoke obscured visibility enough for them to dart out and fire their torpedoes.[3] While this tactic was vitiated by the development of smokeless propellant, the threat from more capable torpedo craft (later including submarines) remained. By the 1890s, the Royal Navy had developed the first destroyers, which were initially designed to intercept and drive off any attacking torpedo boats. During the First World War and subsequently, battleships were rarely deployed without a protective screen of destroyers.[99]

Battleship doctrine emphasised the concentration of the battlegroup. In order for this concentrated force to be able to bring its power to bear on a reluctant opponent (or to avoid an encounter with a stronger enemy fleet), battlefleets needed some means of locating enemy ships beyond horizon range. This was provided by scouting forces; at various stages battlecruisers, cruisers, destroyers, airships, submarines and aircraft were all used. (With the development of radio, direction finding and traffic analysis would come into play, as well, so even shore stations, broadly speaking, joined the battlegroup.[100]) So for most of their history, battleships operated surrounded by squadrons of destroyers and cruisers. The North Sea campaign of the First World War illustrates how, despite this support, the threat of mine and torpedo attack, and the failure to integrate or appreciate the capabilities of new techniques,[101] seriously inhibited the operations of the Royal Navy Grand Fleet, the greatest battleship fleet of its time.

Strategic and diplomatic impact

The presence of battleships had a great psychological and diplomatic impact. Similar to possessing nuclear weapons today, the ownership of battleships served to enhance a nation’s force projection.[3]

Even during the Cold War, the psychological impact of a battleship was significant. In 1946, USS Missouri was dispatched to deliver the remains of the ambassador from Turkey, and her presence in Turkish and Greek waters staved off a possible Soviet thrust into the Balkan region.[102] In September 1983, when Druze militia in Lebanon’s Shouf Mountains fired upon U.S. Marine peacekeepers, the arrival of USS New Jersey stopped the firing. Gunfire from New Jersey later killed militia leaders.[103]

Value for money

Battleships were the largest and most complex, and hence the most expensive warships of their time; as a result, the value of investment in battleships has always been contested. As the French politician Etienne Lamy wrote in 1879, “The construction of battleships is so costly, their effectiveness so uncertain and of such short duration, that the enterprise of creating an armored fleet seems to leave fruitless the perseverance of a people”.[104] The Jeune École school of thought of the 1870s and 1880s sought alternatives to the crippling expense and debatable utility of a conventional battlefleet. It proposed what would nowadays be termed a sea denial strategy, based on fast, long-ranged cruisers for commerce raiding and torpedo boat flotillas to attack enemy ships attempting to blockade French ports. The ideas of the Jeune Ecole were ahead of their time; it was not until the 20th century that efficient mines, torpedoes, submarines, and aircraft were available that allowed similar ideas to be effectively implemented.[104] The determination of powers such as Germany to build battlefleets with which to confront much stronger rivals has been criticised by historians, who emphasise the futility of investment in a battlefleet that has no chance of matching its opponent in an actual battle.[3]

Source - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship

4

The Hungarian Danuvia 35M/43M Submachine Gun,

One of the lesser known and unique submachine guns of the World War II was the Danuvia series created by Hungary in the 1930’s.  At the beginning of World War II, Hungary was an Axis power allied with Germany and Italy. As a result, the original first model, the 35M, was designed after the Italian Beretta Model 38/42.  However the 35M differed in two main ways.  First, the 35M was exceptionally large for a submachine gun.  This was because unlike many German and Italian submachine guns of the time, the 35M was not chambered for the (mm Luger (9X19mm) cartridge, but instead chambered for the large and powerful 9mm Mauser Export (9X25mm) cartridge.  Thus the 35M was closer in function to a carbine or light rifle than a submachine gun.  Utilizing a 40 round detachable magazine, the 35M could fire a heavy spray of powerful lead at a rate of 750 rounds per minute.  

The 35M was equipped with a traditional solid wooden stock much like Beretta’s submachine guns.  In 1943, the design was updated with a metal folding stock and wooden pistol grip inspired by the German MP-40 design.  The new design was designated the Danuvia 43M.  Another model, with a folding wooden stock was also produced called the 35M/A.

During World War II, the Danuvia design was very popular among Hungarian soldiers.  Perhaps its strongest attribute was its toughness, being able to fire despite being caked in mud and exposed to subzero temperatures.  This was fortunate since Hungarian forces would play a major role in the Eastern Front against the Soviet Union, often suffering heavy casualties.  One downside of the Danuvia design was its ammunition, which was rare and only produced by a few factories in Germany.

By the final weeks of the war, Hungary was almost completely occupied by the Soviet Red Army.  After the war, the Kingdom of Hungary was reorganized into a communist state, and forced to become a Soviet satellite during the Cold War.  The Danuvia 35M and 43M continued to be used by the Hungarian Army up to the 1950’s, but was eventually phased and replaced with the Russian PPPSh-41.  Between 1935 and 1945, 8,000 - 10,000 Danuvia model submachine guns were produced.

5 Ways Growing Up in North Korea Is Crazier Than You Think

Of all the Koreas in the world, North Korea has the most murderous dictators per capita. We’ve had a lot of fun riffing on the craziest facets of the Hermit Kingdom, but beyond all the hilarious propaganda and somewhat less hilarious threats of nuclear war, North Korea is a nation of 25 million people living very weird, awful lives.

We wanted to know what life was really like for those people, so we sat down with an escaped North Korean refugee, an American journalist who spent time exploring Pyongyang, and the grandson of an anonymous Asian nation’s ambassador to North Korea. They told us …

#5. It’s Wall-to-Wall Propaganda – and People Know It’s Bullshit

North Korea’s number one export to the world is unintentionally hilarious propaganda, but when you’re living there, those bombastic pro-Kim messages are the background noise of your entire life, and it’s a whole lot less funny. For Mr. Lee (the refugee we spoke to), each morning of his childhood started the same way: A loudspeaker blared the accomplishments of the Kim family and their regime. Sun up? “Kim Jong Il invented the hamburger!” Sun down? “Kim Jong Il is the world’s greatest golfer!” Combine that with radios that don’t turn off, and you’ve got a whole nation’s worth of captive audience.

So the next question the average Westerner asks is “Do the people there actually believe Kim Jong Un has magic powers?” Not all of them – Mr. Lee grew up with a great-aunt who had zero time in her life to take shit from the government. When the loudspeakers started up, she’d say, “Oh there they go again, spreading their lies.” Mr. Lee’s family had never been counted among the party faithful, and by his teen years he realized that his national government ran on bullshit. He felt like most of his countrymen bought into most of the propaganda, but Michael Malice (an American journalist who spent time in Pyongyang) had another suggestion: Most North Koreans know the propaganda is ridiculous, but they’re too scared to say anything. “When you are in the public space you’d better sound like a true believer. An actor immersed in a role is going to be better at it.”

And that training starts early – overall, Mr. Lee says about 30 percent of his education was useless because it only pertained to the Kim family. There were classes when he was younger on the lives of Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung, but when he got older, the teacher would spend 10 minutes talking about the Kim of the day and his accomplishments and then sprinkle more stories during other classes. Imagine if your algebra teacher had to link every lesson back to George Washington, and also George Washington was a living, ridiculous-looking little man.

North Korean schools treat world history as an afterthought, the way American schools treat art classes. He learned about World War I and II and the Allied and Axis powers, but not the Italian Renaissance. He’s aware of things like Sputnik, but he wasn’t aware that an American was the first man on the moon (he was aware that someone landed on the moon, but they never specified whether it was an American or a Russian). You’re also forced to participate in mass games, from middle school on.

Well, ever wonder how those kids get so precise with their movements? It’s because they start training for it at a young age (including on weekends), and North Korean teachers don’t hesitate to use corporal punishment.

And the parents know to do their part. Another of our sources, who lived in North Korea for several years as the grandson of an ambassador, relayed this story:

“All over Pyongyang are pictures of the Great Leader surrounded by flowers, and regular flocks of adoring citizenry … they would go to these little kiosks to buy flowers, and then set those flowers out at the shrines. Later in the day people with push carts come, pick up the flowers, and bring them back to the kiosks to resell to more people.”

And the great circle of foliage goes on. “One time I saw this little girl, maybe 4 or 5, she trundled up with a pretty big bouquet – almost as big as her, but she carried it to the shrine one-handed. Her parents rushed in, screaming at her. Dad slapped her full on the face. The crime? Not using two hands to lay down those flowers. So they bought her a bigger bouquet, this one was even bigger than the little girl, and she laid that down with both hands.”

That’s what happens when the punishment for a public fuck-up is prison camp. For you see …

#4. Resistance Is Mild, and the Punishments Are Dire


People in North Korea are taught from childhood to inform on anyone they see being the least bit dissident. So forget about staging a mass protest or sit-in – you don’t even dare raise objections in private conversation. As Mr. Lee explained, “It is something you never talk about in public places, maybe to your closest friend you might mention you aren’t happy with the Kim regime, and even then only after a drink or two. Even with your wife you want to be careful.” Booze: Subverting totalitarianism since forever.

Before Mr. Lee escaped, he witnessed several of his neighbors get deported to camps. North Korea isn’t a big fan of the whole “disappearing people in the night” thing popular with so many repressive regimes. No, soldiers just take away whole families at a time, in full view of everyone. They all get to watch while the newly doomed deportees load their stuff onto government vans.

The locals are aware that this isn’t business as usual everywhere in the world. But what can you do? If you’re imagining yourself going Braveheart on the evil king, keep in mind that crimes like “treason” and (more commonly) “looking like you might be about to commit treason” are punishable by life imprisonment or execution … for both the accused and three freaking generations of his or her family. You’re not just dooming yourself. You don’t just watch your words, but your inflection.

“Upturned lips can mean sarcasm. Send her family to the famine mines.”

Our source in the [anonymous nation’s] embassy recalls the time a high-ranking North Korean officer took him aside and – in English – came shockingly close to criticizing the regime:

“He said, ‘It’s a shame, what’s happening … but our leader will take us to the right path.’ He left a pause in the middle, and I think the first half was to share his opinion with me and the second is what he had to say … I saw his assistant look at him during the pause, and I kind of worry about him today. I never saw that guy at another event.”

#3. The People Get Glimpses of the Outside World.


The weirdest thing about North Korea, aside from, well, all of the other things about North Korea, is the sheer concept of an isolated country in the 21st century. When Ukrainian protesters are live-tweeting their revolution and half of us have personal Internet friends who live on the other side of the planet, it’s bizarre to think about this quarantined population that’s totally in the dark about anything outside their own border.

The truth is, some material does leak in. The North Koreans that our diplomatic source met at Kim Il Sung University would share their contraband:

“One guy in particular told me he’d read '20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.’ I was surprised, 'Is that book allowed?’ 'No!’ He’d smuggled it in. And he asked if me if people had built underwater settlements yet. I told him there were underwater hotels in the world now, and man, the smile on his face was great. It was like seeing my little brother on Christmas.”

But in general, subversive devices like cellphones, DVD players, and modern movies aren’t readily available to locals. Possession of any of those things is punishable by death for you and anyone who happens to be standing nearby when you’re caught. You might expect North Korean citizens to do without. If so, you’re drastically underestimating the human need to watch badly dubbed bootlegs of the latest Iron Man movie. “Tony Stark is a capitalist pig, but I like how he drinks while operating military-grade hardware.”

Mr. Lee told us that foreign movies and gadgets are smuggled into North Korea regularly, but not out in the open. Dealers will spot a likely buyer and approach them in the market. “They’ll start with Chinese movies, and then maybe if you’re receptive move on to the American stuff.” In other words, Hollywood films are the heroin of North Korea’s black market (along with actual heroin, of course).

All this adds up to a hermit kingdom that’s much less isolated than you might expect based solely on the news. Mr. Lee was able to speak with family members in South Korea, including a sister who escaped several years before he did. North Koreans are quite aware that famine isn’t an everyday fact of life in America, or even South Korea. And rather than just shooting everyone who figured this out, the North Korean government has adapted their propaganda.

Michael Malice, Kim Jong Il’s unofficial biographer and one of the rare Americans to visit Pyongyang, explained, “The propaganda used to be 'We have nothing to envy.’ Now that the outside is creeping in, they claim they’re "Maintaining the idea of Korea while South Korea is being raped by America.”

Once Mr. Lee’s sister made it to South Korea and confirmed that this “rape” by America was more of a “friends with benefits” sort of thing, he began to plan his own escape. That’s when he found …

#2. Getting Out Is a Long Series of Terrifying Escapes

Any North Korean who escapes does so accepting the risk that their whole family might wind up in a labor camp if the government catches on. Mr. Lee (who used a fake name and would only Skype us with his face obscured by shadows) had to craft an elaborate web of lies before he fled the country. Our translator described it as essentially the same thing as telling your parents you’re “staying the night with a friend” so you can go out and party. Only instead of getting grounded, your entire family is worked to death in a labor camp if someone finds out.

Mr. Lee made his escape two years ago. Fortunately, smuggling refugees out of the Kim family’s own personal murderous Disney World isn’t just something that happens from time to time – it’s a bona fide international industry. Lee’s sister set him up with the man-smugglers and paid for everything, because people actually living in North Korea don’t tend to have the kind of money anyone else might care to use. And if you think it’s just a matter of someone sneaking you across the border to South Korea, think again. Even if that’s your destination, you have to take the long way if you don’t want to get shot several thousand times before you even see the fence.

Mr. Lee was smuggled out through a network of brokers, via a journey consisting of hiking, buses, and cars from North Korea into China, then to Vietnam, and then to South Korea. Each portion of the trip had a different broker who specialized in smuggling North Koreans along a set route. Mr. Lee followed each broker’s instructions and had to trust that none of them would deliver him right back to the Thought Police. At various points along the trip, he’d call home to say “I’m safe in Beijing” or “I’m safe in Saigon.” Once his sister heard from him, she’d wire the next portion of cash, and on it went.

Obviously, the business of smuggling North Koreans is illegal in North Korea, but it’s also illegal in every single country along that route. If you can make it to South Korea, you’re safe, but the broker networks are illegal there, too, so it’s not like there’s any quality control or ability to complain if they, say, abduct you into slavery. As the backer in South Korea, you risk paying thousands and thousands of dollars for the privilege of having a loved one betrayed or murdered.

But that didn’t happen. Mr. Lee was delivered into a part of the world with soap operas instead of mass games, Internet gaming cafes instead of labor camps, and the sport of competitive eating instead of regular famine. That’s when he found …

#1. To Someone Who Escaped, the Outside World Is a Shock


“It was just a completely different reality,” said Mr. Lee. In North Korea, you’re taught that countries with capitalism are filled with people dying in the streets. Even though he was skeptical of this (he’d seen plenty of American cities on DVD, and the car chases usually didn’t have to steer around piles of starving vagrants), he still had the feeling that capitalism was “a bad school of thought.” He was shocked to see that South Koreans get to live pretty much as they please and quickly experienced the new concept of actually getting paid for his work. It turns out most people prefer not being literal slaves of their government.

Likewise, Mr. Lee arrived with a pretty negative attitude toward South Korean women, after decades of seeing them portrayed as sex-obsessed airheads. He’d been led to believe the women of South Korea would be made up like “clowns or prostitutes” – basically, state propaganda had him convinced that the girls of Seoul look exactly like rich people in The Hunger Games.

He was also surprised about human rights. Like, the very concept that humans have rights, and that they can assert them to their government. The North Korean government’s solution to the problem of “human rights” was just not telling their people the subject existed. You can’t demand something that you didn’t know was a thing. “Wait, you mean not doing this is an option?”

Keep in mind, Mr. Lee had grown up being taught that mere curiosity about his leaders was a moral failing. That’s why arriving in South Korea also brought some shocking realizations about the Kim family. He hadn’t believed all the crazy propaganda about Kim Jong Il’s accomplishments, but the real facts of the Glorious Leader’s life were far different from what he imagined. “During famines, the state propaganda said Kim Jong Il was suffering through the worst of it with us, subsisting on only a bowl of rice a day.” The reality is that while it’s impossible to say how much rice Kim ate during the famine, we do know he spent $600,000 a year on his personal brandy stash.

If this were a movie, the evil iron-fisted dictator would get his comeuppance before the closing credits. In real life, the Kim family has been oppressing their starving little country for 65 goddamned years, with no end in sight, and getting steadily crazier with each passing day.

Maknae line in history class ~

Teacher : Today, we are going to learn about World War I and II . Does anyone here know anything about these wars?

Taehyung : *quickly stands up* In World War II, the two main sides were the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) and the Allied Forces (Russia, China, France, England, and America). Canada was also a part of the Allied Forces, but they were invisible to the rest of the world and often not credited. Italy was the weakest of the Axis Powers, basically calling Germany for help constantly ‘GERMANY, GERMANY! FRANCE IS KICKING MY ASS! AND SOUTHERN ITALY IS BEATING ME UP!!’

Jungkook : *smirks* The war ended after the Normandy Landings in Europe and the bombings of Japan, with the official dissolution of the Kingdom of Prussia following not too soon afterwards.

Teacher : *blinks*

Jimin : *quietly whispers* I ship Germany and Italy.

Breaking News: The Axis Powers Won World War II.

What!?! You can’t change history, can you? Well, no, you can’t. History is a narrative driven by facts. It is the story of What Happened. What Happened doesn’t change to suit convenience, or whim, or even agenda. Not even if you are William Shatner.
William Shatner has now given out two very different versions of What Happened during the events that took place around the time of his charity horse show. These two versions are so different that they in fact contradict each other. They both can’t be true- so which one is false?
It is not uncommon in the study of history, particularly ancient history, to read varying versions of events as many different authors in successive generations wrote about the same circumstances- sometimes even writing centuries after the events. When contradictions occur it is generally accepted that the more accurate versions are the ones written closer in time to the actual events, and out of those the most trusted sources are those who were either physically present when the events took place, or had access to someone who was.
So with this in mind let’s look at these two “versions” of What Happened:

In the first “version”, gleaned from the Twitter feeds of the participants in the beginning of May Sam sends Shatner signed copies of two of Diana’s books and later a signed workout tee shirt from the MPC for his silent auction connected with the horse show. Shatner sends out multiple tweets suggesting that Sam may make an appearance at the show on 4 June- but Sam does not attend. Actually, Sam, after a short stay in LA beginning Easter weekend had left LA for Scotland in the last half of April to finish up post production on Outlander and then stays in Rome (for Jibland) and London (for the Audi polo challenge) and he does not arrive in LA until the day after the show and the two finally met in person when a visit to watch Shatner and his wife ride their horses was arranged and put up as a live feed on Periscope on 5 June. On 6 June Shatner tweets about a lunch he and Sam had on the 5th where Shatner’s wish for Sam to be selected as the next James Bond was apparently discussed. There was no mention of any companions at this meal beyond Sam and Shatner. Sam also gave Mr. Shatner two tickets for the Paley panel on 6 June and Mr. Shatner sent his assistant and his publicist to the event.

In the more recent version Shatner states: “I liked the show and then I heard about this tall handsome guy whom everyone was talking about as the next 007, and I got to tweeting about him a little, and he picked up on it finally because I think he had seen some of my work.” “I met him and took him to lunch, he was great, he brought his girlfriend along, we had lunch, laughed, and I run a charity here called Hollywood Charity Horseshow and he sent me some stuff to auction, including a sweatshirt which had his sweat on it.”
There are multiple discrepancies here:

-The first is that he did not come into the fandom with those 007 tweets in May. He had already been active for months by that time and contrary to his statement here had been quite vocal of his dislike of the show since his earliest arrival in the fandom. Both Sam and Cait had tweeted with him in an attempt to reconcile Shatner and the fans angered by his tweets making sport of the show.

-Also, all of Shatner’s tweets suggest that he and Sam’s first face to face meeting was the day Sam went to watch Shatner and his wife ride on 5 June. So their second, (and last to date, since neither the beers and steak dinner, or the horse riding date that Shatner tweeted about ever came to pass), meeting would have been the lunch tweeted about on 6 June where the 007 role was discussed. But this lunch could not also have been used to solicit silent auction items for an auction that had already happened days before on 4 June.

-The garment that Sam donated was a tee shirt- not a sweatshirt- (and it appears to have been offered in leu of an item from the Outlander set that Mr. Shatner tweeted out would also be donated by Sam.)

- A girlfriend in tow? On 5 June when this lunch meeting took place the girl that some were claiming was supposed to be Sam’s “girlfriend” was 2500 miles away in North Carolina visiting her family. But Cait was in town, having arrived in LA when Sam did.

So it seems that nothing about this second “version” of What Happened can be reconciled with the Twitter timeline version. So which “version” is the more reliable? I would go with the Twitter one. The tweets were mostly sent in real time either when the events they describe were happening,or shortly after. That gives little time for memory to fade. Or agenda to creep in. Fading memories of a past event, or the wish to use the same old facts to support a new political or social agenda are the most common reasons for “revisions” of history. Either one of these reasons could be operating here. A wish to stir up the Outlander fandom after these past few peaceful months seems a bit more likely than him simply forgetting the happenings around the time of the horseshow and making mistakes recalling them during the interview- but either scenario is certainly possible. And Mr. Shatner certainly knows that the mere mention of the word girlfriend is bound to set the fandom into a frenzy. Perhaps the return of a certain internet troll has something to do with it? After all, her interactions with Mr. Shatner preceded her rather abrupt first departure from the fandom.
Or maybe the entire quote that is causing so much angst was cobbled together from several different answers and pieced together in this way by the tabloid journalist who wrote it-either out of complete ignorance of the facts, or for an agenda of his own or of his employer. It would certainly not be the first time that such a thing has happened.
But whatever the reason for the “revision” of What Happened, it appears that there are so many discrepancies in the new “version” that the out of nowhere mention of a girlfriend can be just as safely discounted as the rest of that implausible quote. And as for the rest of it on Twitter; just the fact that he is discussing it so openly makes me sure that he is not discussing anything private that he may, or may not, know about Sam. He’s an old blowhard to be sure and he is currently busy using that quote, however and whyever it came to be, to rile up the fandom but he’s not a total idiot and he certainly doesn’t want to be sued. He’s not saying anything real!.


-

So Rose totally 100% shattered Pink diamond no questions about it. 

 "But Spooner!“ You scream loudly "Rose was so against Shattering! Look at Bismuth!" 

Well, let’s look at the timeline shall we? Bismuth was bubbled 5,300 years ago, at which time we can presume rose had her current disposition against shattering gems. 

Sapphire and her Ruby guards were sent to earth in response to a "Small, persistent group of rebels” 5,700 years ago. Mind you, Blue Diamond was there. On earth. What could possibly draw one of the four god-like rulers of Homeworld out to one slowly rising colony? 

 The answer is simple. The death of another ruler, sent to oversee the construction of a new gem planet

I don’t need to remind anyone of earth’s “potential” of course. In fact, Garnet even said earth was “Promising.”

Anyways, point is 400 years passed between when we saw rose and Pearl taking on Blue Diamond’s forces and when Pearl and Garnet stopped seeing Bismuth. That’s a whole 400 years to change ideals. 

“But spoooooner!” You cry, unsettled. “Why would she doooooooo that??? It’s not like she’s evil!!!

She isn’t?

She bubbled Bismuth for being nothing more than overzealous and never told anyone what happened to her to keep her forces under her command. Seems to me like she’s got something to hide. 

Why would she shatter a Diamond you ask? It’s simple. At one time she wasn’t the gem we all know now. She was ruthless. Unforgiving. Unmerciful. That speech she gives Garnet in The Answer? Do you hear any hints of “I find beauty in everything and love all life regardless of how rigid and strict it is” in it? 

Bear in mind she and Pearl destroyed the physical forms of a dozen gems without a second thought that same episode. 

“BUUUUT SPPOOOOOOOONNER!!!!!” You scream, set off now, “IF SHE’S SO EVIL WHY DIDN’T SHE SHATTER THOSE GEMS?” 

It’s really simple: Killing a Ruby? Three Rubies? Not much weight to it. Three expendable soldiers. Plus you gotta go the extra mile to break their gem. That takes time and energy. Poofing them so you can get what you need and get out? Easy. But. Let’s go back in time for a minute. You want to send a message to the Axis powers of World War II. You can only kill one person though. So who do you kill? Not a soldier, not a General. You kill the National Leader. Hirohito and Mussolini and Hitler and the like. That sends a message to the other leaders and everyone beneath them: you mean fucking business. 

And from a strategic standpoint, it works like magic. Blue Diamond came to Earth directly following something happening to Pink Diamond. Blue Diamond may have set up a trap for Rose, but in the end her plan still worked. She offed one diamond and came close to killing a second. 

from a tactical perspective, Rose is a fucking monster and she scares me. 

4

Japan in World War I — The Siege of Tsingtao,

While Japan is notorious among World War II historians and buffs for being one of the Axis Powers, many don’t know that Japan was one of the Allied Powers during the earlier World War I.  Unlike most European powers who joined the war either due to ethnic/nationalistic feelings or entangling political alliances, Japan joined the war against Germany for a very specific, practical reason.  During the late 19th and early 20th century Germany had acquired numerous territories throughout Asia and the Pacific.  Japan, which was quickly growing into an expansionist imperial power wanted those territories.  Throughout much of the war Japanese naval forces clashed with the German military, overruning island outposts and colonies throughout the Pacfic which would form the foundation of Japan’s Pacific island empire.  Such territories included Marianas, Caroline, and Marshall Islands as well as several port cities along the coast of China.  

One of the most important colonies for Germany in the Far East was the port of Tsingtao (now Qingdao), in Shandong Province, China, which served as the German military and commerical headquarters in the Far East and Pacific.  On the 27th of August, 1914 the Japanese Navy blockaded the port, and on October 31st a force of 23,000 Japanese soldiers laid siege to the city.  They were joined by a token British force numbering around 1,500 sent by the British government to keep tabs on what the Japanese were up to.  The German garrison of the city numbered only 4,000, however the Germans had dug in, surrounding the city with two formidable defensive lines of trenches and bunkers.  The Japanese commander, Gen. Kamio Mitsuomi, had heard of the incredible bloodshed which had occurred on the Western Front, and sought to use new tactics to avoid needless slaughter.  Rather than conducting massive frontal assaults, he ordered surprise night attacks and raids against the German trenches.  Equipped with 144 field and siege guns Mitsuomi also developed brilliant artillery tactics such as suppression fire and creeping artillery, something European forces would adopt a little later in the war.  Finally his artillery fired random bursts all along the trenches 24/7, throughout the siege very few German soldiers got a good nights sleep.

By November 6th the Japanese had taken most of Tsingtao’s strong points while the Germans were running dangerously short of food and ammunition.  The next day the German’s surrendered, handing over the port three days later.  During the siege, the Japanese had suffered 727 killed, most of which occurred when a Japanese warship struck a mine in the harbor.  The Germans lost 200.  Incredibly in the victory parade following the German surrender, the British demanded that they be the first to march into the city.  Such an act was pretty offensive and arrogant considering that the Japanese had done most of the legwork of capturing the city.  Unlike in World War II were the Japanese treated prisoners with extreme cruelty, the German POWS of World War I were treated exceptional generosity and kindness.  Most were sent to the Bando prisoner of war camp, which had a reputation for being more like a vacation resort than a prison. Most of the 4,000 German POWs were returned to Germany in January of 1920, 63 of the prisoners chose to remain in Japan.

4

History with Hetalia
Tripartite Pact (September 27, 1940)

The Tripartite Pact established the Axis Powers of World War II. The three nations agreed that for the next ten years they would “stand by and co-operate with one another in… their prime purpose to establish and maintain a new order of things… to promote the mutual prosperity and welfare of the peoples concerned.” They recognized each other's spheres of interest and undertook “to assist one another with all political, economic and military means when one of the three contracting powers is attacked” by a country not already involved in the war.