The U Boat Threat

Authors Avatar

David Thomas    11DK                                                          Friday 31st January  

                        

History Coursework

The U Boat Threat

1.   A blockage simply stops something getting through.  In the case of World War I, blockades were set up to restrict the amount of supplies getting through to enemies ports. In earlier history surface ships simply blocking ships entering or leaving a port did this.

2.   Unrestricted submarine warfare was set up in February 1915.  It meant that any vessel heading for an English port would be fired upon.  This was because it was thought that some ships carrying food were also carrying supplies for the war effort.

2 b.   As the Germans could not break the British Naval blockade in the North Sea on German ports, they turned to using submarines to starve the British into submission, by destroying Allied shipping carrying food and raw material.  Source 4 shows that the German Admiral Tirpitz thought that by also blockading our supplies, Britain would face a similar situation as their country.

 

3.   The chart is source 2 shows three main points.  Firstly, the graph starts at only 0.3 million tons of Allied shipping loss.  This rises gradually due to the increase in German U Boats.  Secondly, it can be seen that in 1917 the reintroduction of unrestricted submarine warfare has had a great effect on the quantity of Allied shipping sunk.  The graph peaks at 6.25 million tons.  Lastly, it is apparent that the anti submarine tactics dramatically reduced the amount of shipping lost.  Depth charges were very effective, second only to mines.  It is also thought that the decrease is due to destroyers travelling with large convoys in order to protect them.

4.   There were a few serious food shortages and riots around Britain.  This information would have obviously been kept from most soldiers, so as not to reduce moral.  None of the soldiers would have wanted to know that their families were starving, so in order for this to be kept quite, home leave may have been made more exclusive.  However, the validity of this source could be questioned.  Apart from this source being seventy years old, much of it is second hand evidence and could have been exaggerated, or on the other hand played down.

Join now!

5.   Prime Minister David Lloyd George said, “ we were never faced with famine.” Whereas Charles Young, an injured infantry soldier who had returned home, clearly stated that, “ many died of starvation.”  These opinions are of great contrast to each other.  However, Lloyd George would have a very different perspective of the food shortages and riots around Britain.  Lloyd George would have been informed about the general situation.  It is unlikely that he would have been informed about specific towns or villages, and even if he was, it is improbable that he would remember particular events twenty ...

This is a preview of the whole essay