Dead Wake by Erik Larson - October Book Club Online

[JoanK]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  Everyone is welcome.

October Book Club Online

Dead Wake
by Erik Larson

"Few tales in history are more haunting, more tangled with investigatory mazes or more fraught with toxic secrets than that of the final voyage of the Lusitania, one of the colossal tragedies of maritime history. It’s the other Titanic, the story of a mighty ship sunk not by the grandeur of nature but by the grimness of man." - ~ New York Times.

DISCUSSION SCHEDULE:

Week 1: to "Lusitania a Cavalcade of Passengers" p.89
Week 2: to "Lusitania: Helpful Young Ladies: p.191
Week 3: to "All Points Rumor p. 279
Week 4: to end p.353

For Your Consideration:

 
What interested you the most about German submarines? Do you agree they changed warfare forever?   

The two boats themselves are characters in this story. Which do you find more interesting: the chic luxury liner or the crude but deadly submarine? Can  you imagine yourself as captain or crew on either?

Russia recovered copies of the German codebook governing naval communications,  and gave one to Britain.  How important was this to the war?  Does it remind you of something similar in WWII? 

Why was Captain Turner not informed of the possibility of submarine attacks off the coast of Britain?

Were you surprised at the "gas" attacks Germany used on the allies?  And did it remind you of recent events? 

"It took more persistance than I thought, but I finally found it: dead wake is "the trail of a fading disturbance in the water"- PATH

Discussion Leaders:  Ella & JoanK

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[JoanK]

Anyone, if you're short of time or patience, feel free to skip posts. You can always go back when you feel like it.

[Ella Gibbons]

MARCIE AND ABERLAINE - WELCOME, We are so pleased to have you onboard. 

Here is an explanation of the cause of WWI - concise, informative.

https://theworldwar.org/explore/interactive-wwi-timeline?gclid=CNOls-WYq8gCFQIcaQodsI4I9g

[BarbStAubrey]

So glad to see you join us MARCIE AND ABERLAINE as we read about this controversial and currently changing understanding of history. For many of us WWI was not just a chapter to learn in 6tth grade history class since we had grandparents who told us about the war and for some of us we had grandfathers who fought in WWI. Hope you have some stories to share that bring us back to the early part of the twentieth century.

Some web sites that all suggest it was far more than the incident in Sarajevo that started WWI

Germany's Superpower Quest Caused World War I
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/germanys-superpower-quest-caused-world-war-i-10778

“The causes of the First World War are very complicated and broad,” explained Sir Max, whose book 1914: Europe’s Tragedy is to be released later this year.

“But the truth is that Austria and Germany bear the chief responsibility. They believed that they could win a war which would give them European domination.

“Nobody wants to say it as they don’t want to upset the Germans. We mustn’t over simplify it too much, it was a complex background, but Britain did not want a war and the Germans did.”

It was just as important for Britain to defeat Kaiser Wilhelm II’s Germany as it was to win against Hitler, he said.

His view that the war was triggered by the actions of Austria and Germany is shared by David Stevenson, Professor of International History at the London School of Economics, who has written several books on the topic.

He described that assassination of the Archduke - the trigger - as an act of “state sponsored terrorism” which gave Austria-Hungary the excuse it was looking for to declare war on Serbia.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/britain-at-war/10110657/Germany-and-Austria-started-WWI-seeking-European-domination-historian-says.html

Sure, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by pro-Serb Bosnians may have set the spark for the Great War. But the actual outbreak of hostilities began with an Austrian declaration of war on Serbia, German declarations of war on France and Russia, and a German invasion of Belgium, Luxembourg, and France...

...It’s true, for example, that Archduke Ferdinand’s assassins had links with the Serbian terrorist organization the Black Hand, and that members of the Black Hand had infiltrated the highest levels of the Serbian government. In the abstract, that sounds pretty ominous. But what that leaves out is that the Black Hand opposed the pre-WWI government of Nikola Pasic on the grounds that it was not sufficiently belligerent against Austria. Just one month before the assassination, Russia intervened to stop an attempt by the Black Hand to oust Pasic in favor of more a militant faction of the government.

While Serbia definitely wanted to dismember the Austrian empire, the same was true in reverse. Austria wanted to dismember Serbia, and was devising plans to do so long before the assassination.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/06/yes-germany-mostly-started-world-war/

World War One: 10 interpretations of who started WW1
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26048324

Even though so many records concerning events in the summer of 1914 have mysteriously disappeared (more so in Germany than anywhere else), historians over the past half century have been able to piece together evidence that gives us a clear picture of how this war came about.

A German historian in the 1960s, Fritz Fischer, was the first to compile evidence that implicated Germany’s military leaders in the outbreak of Europe’s Great War. His book, Germany’s Aims in the First World War, created such controversy that he released another book several years later to back up his findings: War of Illusions: German Policies from 1911 to 1914.

His conclusions are further substantiated in a modern volume by historian and author David Fromkin: the critically acclaimed book Europe’s Last Summer: Who Started the Great War in 1914?
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/1594.24.75.0/world/war/who-started-world-war-i

How did WWI start?
The simplest answer is that the immediate cause was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the archduke of Austria-Hungary. His death at the hands of Gavrilo Princip – a Serbian nationalist with ties to the secretive military group known as the Black Hand – propelled the major European military powers towards war.

The events that led up to the assassination are significantly more complicated, but most scholars agree that the gradual emergence of a group of alliances between major powers was partly to blame for the descent into war.

By 1914, those alliances resulted in the six major powers of Europe coalescing into two broad groups: Britain, France and Russia formed the Triple Entente, while Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy comprised the Triple Alliance...

...According to Sheffield, the First World War began for two fundamental reasons: "First, decision-makers in Berlin and Vienna chose to pursue a course that they hoped would bring about significant political advantages even if it brought about general war. Second, the governments in the entente states rose to the challenge."
http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/first-world-war/59782/how-did-the-first-world-war-start

Why did the Treaty of Versailles solely blame Germany for starting World War I?
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Treaty-of-Versailles-solely-blame-Germany-for-starting-World-War-I

No, Germany Didn’t Start World War I
...At the start of the war, it was widely reported that German soldiers in Belgium were acting like monsters – bayonetting babies, cutting off thousands of hands, raping nuns.

These reports were so unsettling that several teams from the US left for Belgium to verify them. They failed completely. No ravished nuns. No cut off hands. No impaled babies.

This should have alerted Americans that they were being conned. But no one wanted to hear it – especially not America’s president.
http://bonnerandpartners.com/no-germany-didnt-start-world-war-i/

[JoanP]

Just in from whirlwind weekend to the Carolinas of all places - had to go, had to celebrate grandson's 11th birthday.  No way was he able to understand we might not come - that we would be driving south into flooding and hurricane winds.  Am glad we went though - encountered none of the areas we'd been seeing on TV!

"The war began as a geopolitical equivalent of a brush fire."  Good to see you here, Nancy.   Thanks for pointing out Erik Larson's apt description of the start of the war.  And Barbara - thank you for your summation of the causes for WWI.   Too simplistic to pin it all on Germany, yet that's how it seems to be portrayed in history books, isn't it?

I was fascinated by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's story, "Danger"  in the Strand Magazine in 1914, published 18 months before the Lusitania disaster, which should have served as a warning of the powerful German submarines, challenging British sea power.  Here's a link if you are at all interested.  http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22357/22357-h/22357-h.htm#startoftext 
Amazing the detail.  Not sure of Sir Arthur's sources...

So - are submarines still widely used today?  Where are they?  I'd like to know.  I found an article on nuclear subs  last week...Don't know what I did with it.  Will hunt for it. 
Erik Larson has included so much in these opening chapters - 

ps  Will call off my search for today's nuclear submarines.  Suffice it to know they are out there - lots of them, big powereful ones.  You really don't  want to know more than that!  Scarey!

[Halcyon]

Good day everyone.  Sorry, I've been asleep in my deck chair.  So cozy. 

6-"there existed a widespread, if naive, belief that war.......had become obsolete-the  economies of nations were so closely connected with one another that even if a war were to begin, it would end quickly.  Capital flowed across borders."    What did you think when you read this statement?  

I read this shortly after President Obama addressed the United Nations.  His words were very similar.  He emphasized the closeness of the world economies, not just European.  And then there was Putin.  Very interesting.

[Ella Gibbons]

Bless those who serve beneath the deep,
Through lonely hours their vigil keep.
May peace their mission ever be
,Bless those at home who wait and pray
,For their return by night or day.

JOANP. - innumerable sites on the web of USA submarines.  Suffice it to say - All of the warfighting submarines the United States Navy currently operates are large and powerful nuclear-powered vessels of two types: attack submarines and fleet ballistic missile submarines called "Boomers." Many of these submarines are longer than a football field. Great Britain, France, China, and Russia operate nuclear-powered submarines. These and many other countries also operate small numbers of diesel or conventionally-powered submarines. In all, 43 countries operate over 600 submarines. The country with the largest number of submarines is Russia

[Ella Gibbons]

Oh, HALCYON - happy to see you

"And then there was Putin". - Halcyon

[DavidSimpson]

I'm up to page 78, so I'm almost done with this week's reading.  It's been interesting to read about the connections between Capt. Turner and Titanic, which had sunk just a few years earlier: 

• Turner had years earlier commanded Carpathia, the very ship that rescued the survivors of Titanic.
• The night Titanic was sinking, Turner was commanding Mauritania, (Lusitania's sister ship) elsewhere in the Atlantic.  Turner had chosen to head south to avoid the ice packs.
• Turner was called as an expert witness in the Titanic lawsuits, which were still going on.  He testified that he never would have traveled through an ice pack at high speed like Titanic did.  It was interesting to read that he didn't consider the men stationed as "lookouts" to be of much use.
• Following the Titanic disaster, ships were required to carry enough lifeboats for everyone, but there really wasn't room on Lusitania for that many standard life boats.  So they stored away a number of "collapsible" life boats that required assembly before use.

It was also interesting to learn that depth charges had not yet been invented; these apparently were developed later in World War I.

[ANNIE]

Looked at all the pictures of the QEII!! Wow, Ginny, you were traveling in style!  Loved the salon!  Did you have a 1st class cabin?  We traveled once on a short cruise to the Bahamas and I found all the dressing up and down just too much.  Have you seen how they dress when going to Alaska?  Comfortable!  There was a program on PBS about the ship that sails to the Arctic Circle and how warm it is up there?  I will look for a link.

I read a book about the arms dealers world meeting in the 1890's and how they divided up the countries that they would sell their arms to.  They knew that WWI would happen!!  Wonder what that title was?  I liked the author and read more than one of her historical fictional titles.  Again, I will look for a link.

Barb, your story of the grocery store trip for your mom reminds me of when my mother gave me a list to take to the A&P(I was 6 yrs old).  I had everything in my little basket except for the oranges because neither I or the stock boy could read my mother's writing.  She wrote in a back hand slant \\\\\\ (due to being left handed and made to write right handed). Anyway, we couldn't decide whether she wrote 12 or 1/2 dozen oranges so I decided to buy 12.  Needles to say, it was a long walk carrying those 12 oranges.      Again, needless to say, I soon learned to  read her handwriting better.

[ANNIE]

In looking for that book title, I came upon this new book about our joining in WWI and how it was a mistake.  I wonder if my library has this book.  I will be looking for it.

http://americasgreatestblunder.com

Still haven't found the book I mentioned but my library has the above and I have requested it.

[ginny]

Ann, yes it was, and yes we did have a First Class cabin which by modern standards was quite small.  There was a dividing line between the classes on the decks which I found somewhat offputting, the stairs were closed  off. So others did not come up and you did not go down to a different class. It would have been SO much shorter.

The QE II was used to transport British Troops in WWII  and in the Falklands war, I believe we were told.The thing reeked  of history. As you say, now there are all types of  cruises available.

Was there any  assurance to those undertaking sea voyages to Europe at that time from the UK on a British ship  that there would be some kind of protection offered?

David, those are really fascinating facts!

[ANNIE]

Here is the title of Taylor Caldwell's book about the arms dealers involved in WWI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty_of_Death

There are three books about these families and their climb to success in the arms industry.

Dynasty of Death
The Eagles Gather
The Final Hour

I have not read all of Taylor Caldwell's books but I did enjoy what I did read..

[Ella Gibbons]

DAVID, thank you for those facts, - we need FACTS from time to time, to merge with all the detail.  We haven't "talked" much about Captain Turner, have we?   He is a large character in the book. 

We have two captains in this book, two boats in this book.  One of the questions in the heading is "which do you find the most interesting to read about?  Which captain would you most like to serve under, feel secure with?"

Hey, Ginny, nice to see you here, hope you get the book soon.  Your voyage on the QE must have been fabulous!  I took one cruise in my lifetime and was so bored, I vowed that was the end of that.

And to answer your question of whether Captain Turner knew of the presence of submarines we must get into THE MYSTERY!   ROOM 40.  What an interesting chapter of history that is!  And the British breaking the German Code!

It is  more like reading fiction isn't it?   And all true!  It took place in "London, two blocks from the Thames......in an old building....the O.B."   Along its corridors was a secret operation in Room 40!

How would you describe what happened there?  And why the British did not notify any ships of impending disasters at sea?



Ann, thanks for your comments

[Jonathan]

WOW! What a lot of interesting posts. Lusitania's Wake is proving to be the gateway to a lot of fascinating history and commentary on present dangers.

'And then there was Putin.' 'America's Greatest Blunder...had President Woodrow Wilson not led America into the war...' 'All that background to WWI.'

And then there was that comment from Pat:

'Turner must have had some people skills too, in spite of how bad he was at schmoosing with the passengers.'

That had me thinking of what was said about the Captain when he showed up at the concert and talent-show in First Class the evening before the tragedy. Tension and apprehension had been in the air all the way across:

'Turner stepped forward at intermission. His presence had the perverse effect of affirming everything the passengers had been fearing since their departure from New York, in the way a priest's arrival tends to undermine the cheery smile of a nurse.'

Now that's setting a tone for what's to come. And the author does it again at Ellen Axson Wilson's funeral, 20 pages along:

'Family members carried the casket into the church as the organist played Chopin's Funeral March, that dour, trudging staple of death scenes everywhere.'

Pity the poor president. How desperately he tried keeping America out of the war. And yet it was the war that made him the statesman, and America the superpower.

In the biography of Colonel House I found this account of an event in Wilson's life:

'At four o'clock they went for a drive. Wilson had something to show his friend (House); the poignant figure of grief in the cemetery behind Washington's Soldiers' Home; it had been commissioned from Augustus St. Gaudens by Henry Adams to commemorate his great love for his wife, Clover, who had committed suicide. It affected House "much as some mournful strain of music would." The two friends sat for a long time in front of the marvellous statue, talking about ancient Greek ideas of beauty, and House asked Wilson why "the teeming millions of the twentieth century" could produce so little that was good. Two inhibited Anglo-Saxon gentlemen, brought up in the Victorian Protestant of the Old South, found they could overcome their instinctive constraints together and talk about life, death, and love.'

I had to think about JoanP finding the statue for us in the discussion of McCullough's Journey, along with the wonderful impressions made on her by the statue.

[Ella Gibbons]

Marvelous post, JONATHAN.  Thank you for that!  Larson is so good at this.

[DavidSimpson]

By the way, but book mentions "Chopin's Funeral March", played at the late Mrs. Wilson's funeral.  If you're not familiar with the name, you can find a recording on YouTube.com:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D05AB8xs7qA   You'll recognize it right away.

[PatH]

Thanks for the Chopin link, David.  It's been quite a whili since I've heard it, and it's fun to have the score too.

[JoanK]

Here is the statue Grief that enabled two stolid men to open their hearts (difficult to find a picture that does it justice.

http://tinyurl.com/qxtvxlu

[JoanK]

Amazing: the site that gives 10 different reasons for the start of WWI. "Relatively common before 1914, assassinations of royal figures did not normally result in war."


It seems to confirm my feeling that someone was using the assassination, or it's aftermath, as an excuse, but who was using what as an excuse for what seems to be up to the observer. Given the number of victims, both individuals and countries, this is unbelievable! It's possible to argue that everything bad that happened in Germany for the next 40 years (including Hitler's rise decades later and the aftermath) followed like a Greek tragedy. And Britain's economy was irreparably injured; a whole generation wiped out, and their power permanently crippled.

[Ella Gibbons]

Indeed JOANK, so much of WWI is unbelievable.

What I find most unbelievable in the book is what happened in ROOM 40 - I was utterly astonished to discover that the Lusitania could have been saved.

[JoanP]

Ella - the whole Rm. 40 set-up was astonishing, wasn't it?  The very idea that the fate of so many, rested on the subjective "whims" of so few.   a A handful of men - eager to keep secret the fact that they could monitor the movement of enemy submarines as long as possible.  They were watching the U-20 torpedoing other ships - every two hours -  for days before the Lusitania came into view!   

That's such an important question - "why wasn't Captain Turner informed of the submarines in the waters off the coast of Britain?" -  Do you think Rm. 40 would have notified the Admiralty of the U-20's activities  had Churchill not been away in Paris?  Do you see the entire affair as a series of miscommunications?

Yes, it does read  like a mystery - one in which we know what will happen - but not quite.  I was beginning to see both Captains Turner and Schwieger as men with heart.  Turner thought he could outrun any submarine and keep his passengers safe; Schwieger had been known to pick up men from ships he had torpedoed. -   Turner so unaware and uninformed of the danger ahead - and Schwieger unaware of the size of the Lusitania and number of passengers aboard.    Again, miscommunication, lack of information.

I listened to Chopin's funeral "dirge" David!  Nine minutes of it!  Really sad - heavy!  I'd forgotten what the whole thing sounded like.     I don't know how to turn it off - each time I come in to read your posts, I hear it. I smiled at PatH and her comment that it was " fun" having the score to follow it. My husband begins to squirm when it comes on ... We made a pact - we promised not to include it in either of our final services!
Poor sad President Wilson.  Had he not been in such deep mourning, he might have acted sooner to warn against sailing on the Lusitania at this time...

[ANNIE]

Hi Ella,!  I too was amazed at the Mystery Room 40 story.  It seemed that code breaking was not a new talent of the British government.  How talented and prepared Room 40 machinations were going on.  What did you think of the defense dept.'s teasing the German Navy with hints of what the British were going to do?  Caused the German Navy subs to change their plans.
I can't see that the two captains were very different.  Each one following the rules of their country.  Turner and Cunard's rules!  And the German captain following his own rules.
I am looking forward to reading the opinion of America's unwise entry into the war.  Sounds like what is being proposed for the US to not do in Syria.   

[JoanP]

"Wilson was ouraged at the German proclamation (that neutral ships would be in trouble) - would hold Germany to strict accountability if  Americans were killed."

Outrage, yes.  Action/Accountability, not so much...

[JoanK]

ANNIE: Room 40 is creepy, isn't it.

And strange to see Churchill involved as the head of the Navy. I keep having to remind myself "no, this isn't WWII." JOANP: we'll talk (a lot I hope) about whether he would have warned the Lusitania and why they weren't warned in the Next Section.
 

[JoanK]

And the two captains. Both unaware (JOANP), both following their countries rules (ANNIE).

Is that how war always has to be? If men were aware, and thought about what they were doing instead of just following what their country told them, would they fight?

Interesting what the German captain said: that it was harder to kill in a submarine. In line fighting, you saw the enemy attacking, and your blood was roused to fight back. But in a sub, you interrupted your breakfast to kill in cold blood helpless men. I would have thought the opposite: you're firing at an object, not a person.

What do you think?

[Ella Gibbons]

'IS THIS HOW WAR ALWAYS HAS TO BE" -Joank asked."If men were aware, and thought about what they were doing instead of just following what their country told them, would they fight?"

Yes, I think they would have to, JOANk.  An army must had teamwork, order, plans, strategies in order to be an effective fighting force.  Once begun it is a battle to win at all costs.

No, JOANP, I don't see the affair of Room 40 as a series of miscommunications.  I quote again:  "The Admiralty also harbored the persistent fear that Germany might attempt a full-scale invasion of Britain, Clearly any advance warning of German naval actions would be of critical importance."  They didn't want Germany to learn of the code-breaking and revise it before the full-scale attacks came..( Already Germany had been bombed by zeppelins (can't find the reference now to quote.)

Room 40 still surprises me with its policies:  I quote:

"information as to movements of submarines, minefields, minesweeping, etc.  But the Staff was obsessed with the idea of secrecy;  ..........keep the knowledge up our sleeves for a really great occasion such as the German Fleet coming out in all their strength to throw down the gage in battle.  In other words .....the information would be used defensivelyl and not offensively."

What a hard decision to make!  I can understand both points of view, but could I have followed orders and kept the knowledge secret for when the Germans attacked the country and let the individual ships arriving be hunted down and torpedoed?

Were they right or wrong?

[Ella Gibbons]

Before we leave the ocean and ships and go to the White House and President Wilson, I would like your ideas on the following: 

BEFORE THE WAR - CLOTH HALL



"Ypres occupied a strategic position during World War I because it stood in the path of Germany's planned sweep across the rest of Belgium and into France from the north (the Schlieffen Plan). The neutrality of Belgium was guaranteed by Britain; Germany's invasion of Belgium brought the British Empire into the war. The German army surrounded the city on three sides, bombarding it throughout much of the war. To counterattack, British, French, and allied forces made costly advances from the Ypres Salient into the German lines on the surrounding hills.

In the First Battle of Ypres (19 October to 22 November 1914), the Allies captured the town from the Germans. The Germans had used tear gas at the Battle of Bolimov on 3 January 1915. Their use of poison gas for the first time on 22 April 1915 marked the beginning of the Second Battle of Ypres, which continued until 25 May 1915. They captured high ground east of the town. The first gas attack occurred against Canadian, British, and French soldiers, including both metropolitan French soldiers as well as Senegalese and Algerian tirailleurs (light infantry) from French Africa. The gas used was chlorine. Mustard gas, also called Yperite from the name of this town, was also used for the first time near Ypres, in the autumn of 1917.

 Ruins of Ypres – 1919
Of the battles, the largest, best-known, and most costly in human suffering was the Third Battle of Ypres (31 July to 6 November 1917, also known as the Battle of Passchendaele), in which the British, Canadian, ANZAC, and French forces recaptured the Passchendaele Ridge east of the city at a terrible cost of lives. After months of fighting, this battle resulted in nearly half a million casualties to all sides, and only a few miles of ground won by Allied forces. During the course of the war the town was all but obliterated by the artillery fire.

AFTER THE WAR;



Gas attacks.   They appear from time to time, no matter what rules of war have been established. 
We've heard of them in Syria - what should countries do when this happens?  What did we do in Syria?  Was it effective? 

[DavidSimpson]

Chemical warfare (gas) came to be considered so brutal that it was outlawed by international treaty after World War I.  Also, it wasn't always effective.  Sometimes the German troops would deploy mustard gas, only to have a shift in the wind blow it back toward their own troops.  I learned in this book that early chemical warfare attacks involved chlorine (Cl₂) rather than mustard gas.  As described in the book, even very small amounts of chlorine are quite lethal.

[JoanP]

Thank you, David for some reassurance that the use of poison gas warfare  was "outlawed" after WWI...though not for humanitarian reasons, but out of fear that shift in the wind might blow it back on the troops who deployed it.

Do you sense similarities between the unleashing of gas warfare over Ypres and the atomic bomb on Hiroshima/Nagasaki?  I remember reading in Larson's book that  "the architects" of the chlorine gas bomb has no idea of the destruction in would cause - it was an experiment.  In a way, the atomic bomb's effects on those Japanese cities was experimental too, wasn't it.  The widespread devastation came as a shock to the US too.  Yet the threat of a nuclear bomb is still very much alive, isn't it?

"Gas attacks.   They appear from time to time, no matter what rules of war have been established."    Ella
An eye-opener of a question to start the day, Ella!   How effective are international rules against chemical and nuclear warfare today?  Any war rules for that matter?   We can't be complacent about the fact that there are rules if they are not observed. 

President Wilson was aware of the situation, that war was inevitable - told his friend, Col. House, that he had considered the international situation from all sides...and saw no way we could stay out of involvement in the war.
He saw the situation as hopeless...told his friend he wished someone would SHOOT him.  I'm going to look for that context.  It was a chilling comment!

I found the reference  p.29:
"Wilson confessed to House that as they were out walking, he had found himself wishing that someone would kill him."

[JoanK]

I have to apologize. Somewhere, I quotes something as said by U20's commander, when it was actually said by Von Trapp (of sound of Music fame. Amazing how many familiar faces we're seeing)

[JoanK]

ELLA: I refuse to accept your simple explanation for not warning Lusitania! It may be true, but IT'S NO FUN! The people are all dead, and don't read these posts anyway (unless you believe in ghosts), so we can't hurt them. Next week when we've read a little more, I'd like to pretend we're lawyers and marshal evidence for and against conspiracy theories. There's more evidence in the next section.

[JoanP]

Is that a riddle?  What did Captain Schwieger and Papa von Trapp have in common?  Will have to search for your quote, JoanK.

Personally, I'd find it more difficult to  look into the faces of the enemy and kill, rather than fire at the object...a ship full of the faceless enemy.  You don't even have to look back at the carnage you have caused...just sail straight ahead to be rewarded for the tonnage you have sunk!

[JoanK]

JOANP: von Trapp was a U-boat commander in WWI. He torpedoed a boat, killing 684. Later he wrote "So that's what war looks like. We are like highway men, sneaking up on an unsuspecting ship in such a cowardly fashion." But in hand to hand combat, you can shoot in self defense or rage, not cold bloodedly. (can't give the page: I'm reading it on the kindle)

Is that worse? you can certainly kill more people that way (i.e. the atomic bomb). People have argued that all the long distance killing methods we have now make war like a video game so it doesn't engage our morality or humanity.

[JoanK]

We'll be moving on in a few more days, you might start reading ahead now. And start marshaling your evidence for or against our conspiracy charge. But don't stop posting.

[Jonathan]

I'm following the action with the keenest interest. Haven't had the time to post.

[BarbStAubrey]

Must catch up - rough couple of days...

[nlhome]

I have a library copy of the book, so I have finished reading it. I haven't commented because I don't want to get out of sequence, and I don't have time to refer back to the book, which is due in a couple of days anyway.

I found the book very interesting and very readable. I usually read fiction, and I've read several books, and some series, set during or after the war, so I appreciate this book. Seems the fiction I read isn't that far off from the facts.

[Ella Gibbons]

Hi NLHOME!  Just jump in  here and post when something rattles your memory of the book.  We're happy you looked in on us.

These comments seem to me to be similar in content:

"People have argued that all the long distance killing methods we have now make war like a video game so it doesn't engage our morality or humanity." - JOANK

Personally, I'd find it more difficult to  look into the faces of the enemy and kill, rather than fire at the object...a ship full of the faceless enemy.   - JOANP

Do you think future wars will no longer be fought on the ground, but from the air, the sea and land missiles and bombs? 

Much to ponder from Erik Larson's book.

[Ella Gibbons]

Erik Larson does a romance!  Here is Woodrow Wilson, former President of Princeton, Governor of New Jersey, President of the United States courting this lovely lady, 16 years younger; reading poetry to her!  She is lovely: