0
What was the vessel built in Britain that wreaked havoc on northern shipping until it was finally sunk in 1864?
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What vessel built in Britain wreaked havoc on northern shipping?
The CSS Shenandoah was built in Scotland and launched in August of 1863. She was purchased by the Confederacy in September 1864. Commissioned on October 19th, 1864, she formally struck her colors at Liverpool, England on November 6th 1865. She was the last unit of the Confederacy to surrender, and is said to be the last unit to fire a shot in anger during the war.
What happened at the Battle of Okinawa?
United States submarines had by late 1944 wreaked havoc on Japanese shipping. The bound-for-Okinawa troop ship Toyama Maru was sunk by the U.S.S. Sturgeon at a loss of about 5,600 nine months before the land campaign; these Japanese deaths (the Sturgeon escaped despite being pummeled by depth charges) are usually not even figured in battle losses. On October 10, 1944, Okinawa gained a dubious shorthand for disaster - the numerals 10-10. Waves of bombers pummeled the nearly-defenseless island, causing untold wreckage on land; over 80% of Naha was destroyed and more than 65 boats were sunk. Japanese anti-aircraft technology was not up to the nimble American planes. Shortly before the battle, the Japanese warship the Yamato was sunk by American air power on her trip to Okinawa. Widespread rumors that the ship was only given enough fuel for a one-way trip are false; Feifer debunks this (references). The Japanese had a plan to beach the Yamato on Okinawa's shore and use it as a land battery. Not that it would have done them much good on land.
Who helped Germany in the world war 2?
Britain was central to Allied victory in World War II. Some British contributions:The Royal Air Force defeated the Luftwaffe in the Battle Of Britain (1940/41), thus destroying the myth of Germany's invincibility. Southern England was the staging ground for D-Day. If Britain had fallen to the Nazis, there would have been no springboard to invade Normandy and ultimately defeat Hitler. Britain supplied and trained resistance movements all over Europe. British commandoes wreaked havoc on German submarine bases and other communication and supply lines.British, ANZAC and South African troops first drove the Italians out of North Africa and then defeated the Germans at El Alamein in 1942. The Axis defeat in North Africa provided the opportunity for the invasion of Europe via Italy as the newly-arrived American troops joined forces with the British and colonial soldiers. British and Indian forces tied up the Imperial Japanese Army in Burma for the duration of the war.Britain's airborne divisions shared the responsibility for vital pre-D Day landings with the US.British paratroopers of the Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry captured the key Pegasus bridge the night before the Normandy invasion - renowned US military historian Stephen E Ambrose believes the invasion might have failed without this.British and Canadian soldiers were responsible for Gold, Sword and Juno beaches on D-Day June 6 1944.British commando and long-range recconaissance troops were the pre-cursors of modern-day special forces and fought successfully behind the lines on many fronts.The Royal Navy captured a German submarine carrying an Enigma coding machine which enabled the Allies to decipher German radio traffic.It is incorrect to consider the British as minor allies of the United States in WWII. That perception is a modern one, brought about no doubt by Britain's relative military insignificance today. Britain's imperial power was on the wane when the war started but she still commanded vast resources, notably the allegiance of the soldiers of the Empire: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa and India. Britain was the mainstay of the struggle against the Nazis for two years before America entered the war. America would certainly not have defeated the Nazis on her own, while Britain would most likely have eventually been forced into a treaty with Hitler if America had not supplied her with money and weapons and later entered the war.AddendumThe above answer is excellent. I'd just like to add something. It's not widely cited as a key British contribution as there are ethical and military problems. From 1941 onwards Britain poured immense resources into its fleets of strategic bombers. The expense was vast. Between 1942 and D-Day, the RAF bombers were easily the most powerful and spectacular single weapon in Allied hands in Western Europe. Unfortunately, Bomber Command under Arthur Harris was addicted to area bombing. As a German expert on the war in Europe (Helmut Schnatz) observed more than once: if the RAF bombers had been used rationally and had focused single-mindedly on the plants making synthetic oil and on the transport network, the war In Europe could have been shortened by several months - possibly more.On the other hand, as an ex-Nazi told me, the frequent British air raids on cities in the Ruhr and Rhineland and other major cities probably did more than anything else to prevent the rise of another 'stab-in-the-back' legend. In many of the badly affected areas even hitherto loyal Nazis gradually came to see that Germany was utterly defeated and the Fuehrer just didn't care about their well-being or about defending them.Joncey
Did Canada have a large or small effect on the D-Day invasion of Normandy?
"Effect" is a relative term which is subject to opinion. Canada, with one decision, did have the third largest contingent of troops participating in the assaults. The Canadians under the command of Maj.-Gen. R.F.L.Keller were responsible for Juno beach in the center of the British front, tasked to establish a beachhead on a 5 miles front. they pushed further inland than the British or Americans against very fierce resistance to reach Carpiquet airfield 11 miles in by nightfall.The 1st Canadian Para Battalion dropped with the British 6th Airborne on the left flank and destroyed all their assigned targets and wreaked havoc behind the German lines.Approx. 14,000 Canadians landed and sustained 1,074 casualties,of which 359 were fatal. But that was only day #1, they went on to liberate Holland and capture the Sheldt ,no mean feat. the invasion went ashore along lanes swept clear of mines by the Canadian navy, and the Canadian airforce had bombers hitting German batteries while its fighters were hammering targets inland.Yes ! Canadian forces were very "effective".
How many people died in the Indian mutiny?
A controversial new history of the Indian Mutiny, which broke out 150 years ago and is acknowledged to have been the greatest challenge to any European power in the 19th century, claims that the British pursued a murderous decade-long campaign to wipe out millions of people who dared rise up against them. In War of Civilisations: India AD 1857, Amaresh Misra, a writer and historian based in Mumbai, argues that there was an "untold holocaust" which caused the deaths of almost 10 million people over 10 years beginning in 1857. Britain was then the world's superpower but, says Misra, came perilously close to losing its most prized possession: India. Conventional histories have counted only 100,000 Indian soldiers who were slaughtered in savage reprisals, but none have tallied the number of rebels and civilians killed by British forces desperate to impose order, claims Misra. The author says he was surprised to find that the "balance book of history" could not say how many Indians were killed in the aftermath of 1857. This is remarkable, he says, given that in an age of empires, nothing less than the fate of the world hung in the balance. It was a holocaust, one where millions disappeared. It was a necessary holocaust in the British view because they thought the only way to win was to destroy entire populations in towns and villages. It was simple and brutal. Indians who stood in their way were killed. But its scale has been kept a secret," Misra said. His calculations rest on three principal sources. Two are records pertaining to the number of religious resistance fighters killed - either Islamic mujahideen or Hindu warrior ascetics commi tted to driving out the British. The third source involves British labour force records, which show a drop in manpower of between a fifth and a third across vast swaths of India, which as one British official records was "on account of the undisputed display of British power, necessary during those terrible and wretched days - millions of wretches seemed to have died." There is a macabre undercurrent in much of the correspondence. In one incident Misra recounts how 2 million letters lay unopened in government warehouses, which, according to civil servants, showed "the kind of vengeance our boys must have wreaked on the abject Hindoos and Mohammadens, who killed our women and children. Misra's casualty claims have been challenged in India and Britain. "It is very difficult to assess the extent of the reprisals simply because we cannot say for sure if some of these populations did not just leave a conflict zone rather than being killed," said Shabi Ahmad, head of the 1857 project at the Indian Council of Historical Research. "It could have been migration rather than murder that depopulated areas. Many view exaggeration rather than deceit in Misra's calculations. A British historian, Saul David, author of The Indian Mutiny, said it was valid to count the death toll but reckoned that it ran into "hundreds of thousands". "It looks like an overestimate. There were definitely famines that cost millions of lives, which were exacerbated by British ruthlessness. You don't need these figures or talk of holocausts to hammer imperialism. It has a pretty bad track record. Others say Misra has done well to unearth anything in that period, when the British assiduously snuffed out Indian versions of history. "There appears a prolonged silence between 1860 and the end of the century where no native voices are heard. It is only now that these stories are being found and there is another side to the story," said Amar Farooqui, history professor at Delhi University. "In many ways books like Misra's and those of [William] Dalrymple show there is lots of material around. But you hav e to look for it. What is not in doubt is that in 1857 Britain ruled much of the subcontinent in the name of the Bahadur Shah Zafar, the powerless poet-king improbably descended from Genghis Khan. Neither is there much dispute over how events began: on May 10 Indian soldiers, both Muslim and Hindu, who were stationed in the central Indian town of Meerut revolted and killed their British officers before marching south to Delhi. The rebels proclaimed Zafar, then 82, emperor of Hindustan and hoisted a saffron flag above the Re d Fort. What follows in Misra's view was nothing short of the first war of Indian independence, a story of a people rising to throw off the imperial yoke. Critics say the intentions and motives were more muddled: a few sepoys misled into thinking the officers were threatening their religious traditions. In the end British rule prevailed for another 90 years. Misra's analysis breaks new ground by claiming the fighting stretched across India rather than accepting it was localised around northern India. Misra says there were outbreaks of anti-British violence in southern Tamil Nadu, near the Himalayas, and bordering Burma. "It was a pan-Indian thing. No doubt. Misra also claims that the uprisings did not die out until years after the original mutiny had fizzled away, countering the widely held view that the recapture of Delhi was the last important battle. For many the fact that Indian historians debate 1857 from all angles is in itself a sign of a historical maturity. "You have to see this in the context of a new, more confident India," said Jon E Wilson, lecturer in south Asian history at King's College London. "India has a new relationship with 1857. In the 40s and 50s the rebellions were seen as an embarrassment. All that fighting, when Nehru and Gandhi preached nonviolence. But today 1857 is becoming part of the Indian national story. That is a big chan ge." - Guardian
Vessel built in Britain that wreaked havoc on northern shipping until it was finally sunk in 1864?
The Alabama
A vessel built in Britain that wreaked havoc on northern shipping until it was sunk in 1864?
the ALABAMA the ALABAMA
What vessel built in Britain wreaked havoc on northern shipping?
The CSS Shenandoah was built in Scotland and launched in August of 1863. She was purchased by the Confederacy in September 1864. Commissioned on October 19th, 1864, she formally struck her colors at Liverpool, England on November 6th 1865. She was the last unit of the Confederacy to surrender, and is said to be the last unit to fire a shot in anger during the war.
How petra wreaked?
Petra was wreaked in earthquake of 363 A.D.
Sentence with wreak?
He wreaked havoc on his enemies.
What is the past tense of to wreak havoc?
Wreaked havoc.
What does alcohol do to the adolescent body?
makes it act 'wreaked'
What rhymes with Streaking?
creaked, freaked, shrieked, wreaked, cheeked, creaked, critiqued, eked, freaked, leaked, peaked, peeked,piqued, shrieked, sneaked, squeaked, tweaked, wreaked
Colonial Virginia official who crushed rebels and wreaked cruel revenge?
governor Berkeley
Is the halfway mark of the iditarod bad luck?
Yes, my mom has ran the trail and wreaked there.
What is the sirens goddess of?
Sirens were a mythic explanation to why boats wreaked and men were lost at sea.
How has the earthquake in japan caused devastaton?
people have died, homes have been wreaked and the country has got destroyed!
