World

‘Real History:’ The Sinking of The Lusitania

The latest addition of “Real History” tells the story of The Lusitania. In 1915 a German U-boat sank a British passenger ship off the coast of Ireland in what many people see as one of the triggers for America’s entry into World War I, as well as a turning point in modern warfare.

The Germans had spies at the cruise line – they knew that the people on the ship were not military combatants, but families; men, women and children. They sank the ship to send a deliberate message that civilians could not be used as a shield (the Lusitania was shipping munitions in its cargo hold).  Hundreds died. The message behind the attack brings to mind the news out of Syria where Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the UN have all declared the regime to be guilty of the systematic torture and execution of civilians. Watch a clip from the documentary on “Real News” below:

 

Comments (24)

  • 700P
    Posted on June 16, 2012 at 5:13pm

    I think the reference to the Lusitania is the fact it was a rallying cry for those advocating overseas entanglements and not a direct/immediate impact (as has already been explained). One must wonder since WWI was an extension of earlier Franco-Prussian wars (going as far back or even farther than when my Palantine ancestors were evicted by the hated frogs during the 9 Years War and accepted endentured servitude from the hated limeys to arrive here in 1709) what things would have been like if the US had never gotten involved?

    It is possible that a devasted Germany would have not seen rise to the Nazis and therefore a far greater evil than the Kaiser. Isn’t it interesting that there might be a good analogy between WWI and the Arab Spring where a supposed victory over a ruthless dictator results in something worse (Sharia Law based Anti-Israel psuedo-Caliphate?)?

    Report Post » 700P  
  • Leader233
    Posted on June 16, 2012 at 2:35pm

    The Uboat Commander was in process of returning back to Germany, he had only one torpedo left when he attacked the Lusitania. He did not now what cargo the Lusitania held but did see that she was listed in Jane’s Fighting Ships (1914 edition) as a reserve auxillary cruiser. This was his justification for his not warning before sinking. The Royal Navy had helped Cunard fund the construction of the Lusitania and Mauretania so then could be used as reserve naval vessals in wartime. The Royal Navy would have installed six inch naval guns on both ships, but this had not been done at the time the Lusitania was torpedoed. Her appearance in Jane’s Fighting Ships was justification enough for U-boat Commander Scweiger.

    Report Post »  
    • RayOne
      Posted on June 16, 2012 at 3:19pm

      It seems as thought the psychology of war has not changed since the species, learn to walk on two legs. The bank of military actions have moved dramatically when the professional soldier class became available.
      In concert with a lifelong political elite class,brings us to today.
      Think Rome & Homer.

      Report Post » RayOne  
  • abunchofbullshit
    Posted on June 16, 2012 at 10:10am

    A debated subject for 100 years. Some say that gun turrets had been installed on the ship, though no guns put in place, but carrying ammo was the case and the wisdom of such debatable. I undertand that the Germans took out that ad in multiple newspapers, including all the majors, but only this little paper in Iowa would print it; guess our press hasn’t changed much! The hottest contested point was that the Lusitania had a small naval escort for much of the trip, as was customery for the time, but it was pulled off just before entering what was known as the most dangerous U-boat infested waters! If this is true, why? Many think the British government was in serious financial straights and used this as a way to drag the already mighty US into the war, which the US had bucked entering. Seems pretty ‘far-fetched’!? Jump to yesterday, when our Hitler in Chief ‘dictated’ an Immigration policy and tighter coal rules…who would have invisioned this type of dictatorial rule in the US even 10 years ago. How about what happened on Sept. 11th? There is no ‘consiracy theory’ that I will ever turn my back on again without investigating myself, as things have happened in the last 3.5 years I would have never thought would happen here!! The Lusitania is history, but I think we need to apply ALL thoughts and theories from that era to our present times. Thank you ‘go-tee’ man, and your GREAT staff, for all the man hours of research you put into your jounalism…u are second

    Report Post » abunchofbullshit  
  • RayOne
    Posted on June 16, 2012 at 9:17am

    This is where we are, the m.Brotherhood sends tests and signals.

    Report Post » RayOne  
  • discus02
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 10:58pm

    They found armaments on the sunken ship. The Germans warned the US and we still continued it. The sister ship was torpedoed to but didn’t sink. I wonder why? Maybe it idn’t have armaments in the cargo area.

    Report Post »  
  • phrogdriver
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 9:34pm

    I am VERY disappointed that the Blaze would give the “Real History” of the Lusitania and perpetuate the MYTH that it “percipitated” U.S. involvement in WWI.

    Here is the timeline:

    May, 1915 – Lusitania is sunk
    January 1916 – Woodrow Wilson begins his campaign for his second term. His primary campaign promise is that he will keep the US out of the war.
    Nov, 1916 – Wilson is re-elected based on his his promise to keep us out of the war.
    Jan, 1917 – Wilson inagurated to his second term.
    March, 1917 – Wilson gets us into WWI

    Did the country have colletive amnesia for 18 months, and simply forgot about the Lusitania? Was the sinking covered up somehow, and people didn’t find out about it for 18 months?

    The “Real History” of the Lusitania is that, when historians were searching desperately for a way to cover up Wilson’s lies, they hit upon the Lusitania as a way to do so.

    Report Post » phrogdriver  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on June 15, 2012 at 10:22pm

      The matter was covered up by the Wilson Administration; my grandfather was in his teens during WW1 and explained to me how the truth was covered up, and he heard the real tales from sailors and navy forces on the docksides.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • 700P
      Posted on June 16, 2012 at 5:28pm

      Another good point….elect Democrats and get more wars! Everyone wants to bash Bush on OEF and OIF but by my count (not including the Spanish American War and Philippine Insurection although it could be said McKinley was assassinated by one of the original OWS members) :

      Republicans: 4 (Grenada, Panama, OEF and OIF)

      Democrats 9 (WWI, Banana Wars, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Balkans, Libya, Egypt)

      For the record, I don’t agree with OIF, I think it was a personal matter for GWB that blinded everyone’s judgment. Furthermore I‘ve been there 2x and frankly I don’t think Iraqis appreciate their freedom as much as if they had earned it themselves and furthermore we blew that opportunity under Bush-the-Elder thanks to “statesmen” who tickled his ears. Unfortunately by waiting we liberated a country that was a shadow of it‘s former self and they would have had a better chance of success than we do now if we’d simply went in and brought Saddam to justice in 1991.

      But hindsight is always 20/20….

      Report Post » 700P  
    • Krutch
      Posted on June 17, 2012 at 3:58pm

      Lets see here, The ship sank quick enough to surprise even the U-boat captain, FDR (as secretary of the Navy) wanted to enter the war, had put our destroyers in harm way, wilson not only lied to get re-elected but was violating neutrality laws and changing the Constitution, Mrs. wilson was calling the shots at the end, and the media covered up vital info.
      Germany did warn the public about the war zone and dives on the wreck showed damage more than one torpedo should have caused. But the dives stopped before proof of munitions was found.
      The more things change the more they are the same!

      Report Post »  
    • RSHLUVER
      Posted on June 17, 2012 at 5:43pm

      Interesting point about The Blaze posting this, since all readers should be aware what Glenn Beck thinks of Woodrow Wilson.

      Report Post » RSHLUVER  
  • Lloyd Drako
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 9:21pm

    Many people see the Lusitania, as this article puts it, as one of the “triggers” for US entry into WWI. Naturally, it was more complicated than that.

    Wthin a year of the sinking, the much-derided President Wilson had used patient diplomacy, buttressed by timely threats, to get the Germans to back down and agree not to sink passenger vessels without making provision for the safety of passengers and crew. Since a U-boat that did that would have to expose itself on the surface, and since most Allied civilian vessels were armed with deck guns, a U-boat that did that was a dead U-boat; hence, it seemed that Wilson had won a great victory without firing a shot.

    In fact, however, an important part of the German argument had always been that the British, too, were making war on innocent civilians, long-term and long-range, by a blockade so total as to threaten the starvation of the German populace. So their surrender to Wilson was conditional on his ability to get the British to lift their blockade, which of course they would not do.

    Shortly after Wilson was reelected with the famous “He kept us out of war” slogan, the Germans went for broke, this time with unrestricted U-boat warfare–i.e., targeting American ships as well Allied ones that might happen to have American civilians on board. When US vessels were in fact sunk in March 1917, Wilson really had no choice but to ask Congress for a war declaration. Note, however, that this was a full 2 years after the Lusitania

    Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • historyguy48
      Posted on June 16, 2012 at 6:47am

      Especially during the early years of the war the Germans sank most ships with gunfire, not torpedos. They also usually allowed the crew to abandon ship in its lifeboats before sinking it. As they war progressed, convoys were instituted, and there were more destroyers available, German tactics were forced to change because the precious tactics woud have been suicidal.
      Also, submarines usually stayed on the surface and submerged only when forced to.

      Report Post » historyguy48  
  • Lowell1775
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 9:03pm

    War in most cultures and eras resulted in massive civilian deaths….Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Turks, Mongols, Europe’s religious wars, Iroquois exterminating the Erie tribe and trying the same on the Huron….etc. all resulted in leveled cities and slain populations with the survivors (if any) tortured to death or sold into slavery or left to starve.

    By the late 1600′s, Western culture started to overlay a veil of “civilization and law” on the savagery of war…as long as the adversary was still a Western culture. The Law of the Seas, the Congresses of Europe after the French Wars, the Hague and Geneva Conventions….etc.

    The American Civil War (Sherman and and Sheridan and Grant) once again started to strip away the protection’s normally accorded civilians and civilian property…probably because it was a civil war which are always among the most vicious struggles.

    While the video points out the hypocrisy of the Brits in transporting war materials on civilian ships….and the Germans not surfacing to warn the civilians and crew off…it neglects to mention that the subs of the time could only travel at 1/3rd to 1/2 the speed of the liners of the day. If you surfaced they would just run away…..but more importantly, the Brits had taken to clandestinely arming merchantmen and sinking subs with gunfire that surfaced to warn them to the boats. Also, most if not all British Liners were classed as auxiliary cruisers of the Royal Navy and had guns mounts,

    Report Post »  
  • Mr.Fitnah
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:56pm

    “Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans — still nominally Christian — and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam”.

    Hilaire Belloc who wrote in 1938:

    Great quotes here

    http://home.comcast.net/~vincep312/islam.html

    Report Post » Mr.Fitnah  
    • Lowell1775
      Posted on June 15, 2012 at 9:17pm

      Mr. Fitnah……absolutely a great compilation of quotes and thoughts in Islam by some the West’s greatest minds.

      Thank you for sharing.

      Report Post »  
  • The_Almighty_Creestof
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:38pm

    Hey, torture and kill away…their fight, their responsibility to step up to the plate and give as good as they get.

    Sorry, I stand with Israel…but the rest of these goatflockers can slaughter each other down to the last towelheaded man for all I care.

    No more American blood should be shed fighting & dying for people who claim they hate us and whose faith calls for them to kill us.

    They don’t like getting tortured and killed? Well, then either get back in line like good little sheeple, or pick up a 2X4 and start swinging for center field.

    Report Post »  
  • beckyspatflaveredstew
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:33pm

    Just one of many false flag attacks implemented by governments, thru out history. Problem, action, solution, the powers that be terrorize the citizenry, wait for an outcry, offer a solution. The solution is we the people must give up our liberty for security, against their attacks.

    Report Post »  
  • denkat56
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:31pm

    imagine using civilians as shields. didnt the japanese, and the germans do the same thing. kids working in the military plants, using american prisoners to keep our subs at bay so as not to sink thier ships.

    Report Post »  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:09pm

    .
    Does Obama own a boat?……

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • Jenny Lind
      Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:21pm

      If so, I pray it is leaky and he goes far out to sea-well I think he really IS farout somewhere.

      Report Post »  
    • MRMANN
      Posted on June 16, 2012 at 9:01am

      Yes, OBomba is at sea. Good one Jenny Lind.

      Report Post »  
  • Smokey_Bojangles
    Posted on June 15, 2012 at 8:08pm

    The Wilson Technique.

    Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love