Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by ngold on Sunday November 12, 2017 @04:10PM
(#15682646)
Whatever the truth of the matter, that was a fun read nonetheless.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by manangatangy on Monday November 13, 2017 @05:49AM
(#15685570)
>assassinated the Tsars sons family
I didn't know about this. Would you expand please.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by arca_vorago on Tuesday November 14, 2017 @06:42AM
(#15694240)
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by walshemj on Sunday November 12, 2017 @03:04PM
(#15682354)
Sounds like nut job fantasy's of perfidious albion - why would the UK support the south who competed with the UK as a producer of cotton.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by cryptonector on Sunday November 12, 2017 @06:33PM
(#15683160)
The UK was not a producer of cotton. They were a consumer. Of course the UK tacitly supported the South during the war, and it is no secret that had the right opportunity arisen, they would have openly supported them.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by walshemj on Monday November 13, 2017 @01:35PM
(#15688775)
The UK was but the "Empire" wasn't
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by cryptonector on Monday November 13, 2017 @02:48PM
(#15689586)
The South had been the UK's biggest cotton supplier prior to the war. If you think that UK textiles manufacturers were ecstatic that hey, now they might get more cotton from Egypt or wherever, you're not right. And those manufacturers employed many, many people in the UK.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by bryanrasmussen on Monday November 13, 2017 @04:36AM
(#15685341)
The history books I read as a child always said that the British government supported the south, but the British public as a whole supported the North, about 2 or 3 years into the war this was translated into official British government switching to support the North (when it was clear what the outcome would be)
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by Zerubbabel on Sunday November 12, 2017 @03:41PM
(#15682528)
So that the UK could eventually conquer the United States and seize all cotton production as per the original British conquest and institution of the colonies.
The rest of what the above poster speaks is true. If you are unsure, you need to examine history more carefully before you think yourself a fit judge of "nut jobs".
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by walshemj on Sunday November 12, 2017 @04:00PM
(#15682609)
Why would you want to conquer another country when you had vast resources already available in India.
Though if the anti catholic obsession of the monarchy had been replaced by one to recover the colonies 1812 would have been the time.
Re:The Trent Affair: When the Union and Great Britain Nearly...
by arca_vorago on Monday November 13, 2017 @02:27AM
(#15684859)
Very cool name selection by the way. I hope you stick around hn.
To act as if it was simply the Trent affair that was a main potential instigator of war between the US and Britain is to be extremely myopic about the bigger picture at play. A key forgotten piece of history in this saga is that the Russian tsar was also under threat by the British because they came to him to join them against the US and he refused and then sent two fleets of ships, one to NY and one to SF with sealed orders to attack anyone who attacked the US (in 1863), because the British were prepping for the post civil war collapse invasion, and they even had proxy-troops amassed on the Mexican/Canadian borders! For do not forget under Palmerston, England supports all revolutions, except her own. I also theorize this is why they financed the bolsheviks and post-Bakunin anarchists and assassinated the Tsars sons family later, in revenge for foiling their plans, besides the added step of consolidation/removal of another rival monarchy, as they were doing across Europe.
There is also evidence the the assassination of Lincoln wasn't just a lone nut, but had British backing. (Funnily enough, many US presidential assassinations match this pattern).
The death throes of these losses by the British are the setup for the following world wars, which were engineered largely by Edward the 7th.
If the British had attacked the US during this time using the Trent affair as the excuse, they likely would have created a US-Russia-Prussia coalition that probably would have won, essentially having WW1 in the 1860s instead.
This style of British subterfuge continues to this day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_iRIcxsz0