WesWorld

12 October 1933

Memorandum to Indian Government:

Quoted

We are dismayed to hear that the Kingdom of Bharat feels that their continued membership of the Cleito Treaty is no longer viable. However, in view of the international climate, especially with regard to Indias recent embroilment in conflict over Asir and the somewhat contrary practices of other parties claiming to abide by the Cleito Treaty, we can appreciate that this course of action is the only one which permits Bharat to continue to effectively protect its seaward defences.

It is our belief that, as a nation which has hitherto acted with the utmost regard to the Treaty, its objectives and the desire to maintain peace, Bharat will not threaten world security. Regardless of the underhand play which is apparently accepted in other parts of the world, we trust that Bharat will remain an upstanding nation.

9 November 1934

Letter published in The Daily Telegraph:

Quoted

Sir,

I am heartened to learn that the British Army is no longer planning to fight Bonaparte again, and has at least undertaken to provide for combat from motor vehicles rather than horses. However, it is apparent that despite this concession to modernity, they still plan on fighting the Kaiser, and at that, doing it badly.

The Cavalry are, I am told, being equipped with new armoured tanks, in order that they might better exploit a breach in a new Enemys lines. Equally, the Infantry is receiving improvements to its existing Liberty heavy tanks, a design some fifteen years old already. For a modern armed force, these Mark Eight vehicles are no more than death-traps: even in 1918, there were weapons capable of defeating their armour. Since then, the armaments of the rest of the world have only improved, yet British thinking has not advanced.

It is inevitable that other nations with which we might be obliged to engage in combat operations will also possess tanks: not being blinkered into thinking in terms of 1916, it is inevitable that they will have provided at least adequate protection against our 2-pound gun, and certainly a weapon capable of penetrating the weak armour of our own vehicles.

Only our heavy tanks might be able  with luck  to survive combat with an enemy tank, but at the price of their speed: the engine which powers them is even older than the tanks, so that they are more often than not stopped for repairs, and even when moving, moving at little more than a mans pace. Thus, it is scarcely conceivable that any enemy with a fast tank would choose to fight such a vehicle, as military strategists have time and time again shown that it is foolhardy to attack a strong point.

In consequence, only our fast, Cavalry tanks might be able to oppose an enemy tank attack, and it is they which might be forced to fight them in the process of exploiting a weakness in the enemy. Surely, then, it is incumbent upon us to supply our troops with a tank which has some chance of success when in combat, whether on the offensive or in defence.

It would appear to me, and surely to others, that this tank is not the heavy tank. It may have its utility still, when a breakthrough must be forced in a strong enemy defensive line. The main tank, though, ought to have a gun which can defeat an enemy tanks armour, which will surely be something other than the 2-pounder currently favoured. The armour should clearly be adequate to protect against the fire of other tanks, not merely that of heavy machine guns. In order to carry all this, the tanks weight will plainly be more than that of the present A9 Cruiser, but this tanks high speed must be maintained: the Liberty engine will not suffice, and a new engine must be found.

If, today, we were forced to fight against a modern enemy, our troops would be massacred, and our interests defeated. To prevent such a calamity, we must provide new tanks, tanks able to fight the next war rather than the last.

Yours faithfully,
Anonymous

2 January 1934

The Royal Navy has announced that it now has nine new battleships being built, in addition to five aircraft carriers. These ships represent the biggest program of new ship construction since before the last War, and represent the Navys commitment to maintaining the safety and security of the British Empire and Commonwealth against all foes.

Details of the new ships have not been forthcoming, although Vickers-Armstrong has reported that orders have been received for forty 16.5 and forty-five 15 naval rifles. The Admiralty has announced that it will distribute the details of the new ships in due course.

4 January 1934

Memorandum to the Japanese Government:

Quoted

It is with the utmost dismay that we receive the news that the Japanese Empire has left the Cleito Treaty. Whilst we understand the desire to be freed from its constraints, and to be free to act as desired when threatened, it is clear to us that this action has the potential to seriously aggravate the comparatively minor threats that Japan is exposed to. Nonetheless, we are hopeful that no such aggravation will take place if it can possibly be avoided.

15 January 1934

The Royal Air Force has today declared its first squadron of 300 mile-per-hour Hurricane monoplane interceptor fighters operational. The new aircraft are propelled by one, 885-horsepower, Rolls-Royce Peregrine engine, and armed with six machine guns. Over the next year and a half, over three hundred aircraft are expected to be completed, and a number of export orders are also anticipated.

21 January 1934

Memorandum to the Italian Government

Quoted

Sirs, we find the deployment of Italian naval vessels to Santiago da Cuba an unsettling development. Certainly, we recognise the desire for joint training between the Marina Militare and the Iberian Navy, and have no wish to hamper this process. However, we are concerned that this training is occurring in an area already inflamed by civil war, which has opened up deep mistrust between Mexico and Italy.

Whilst we hope and believe that this mistrust is in error, it nonetheless seems an unnecessary complication to be sending ships to within easy sailing distance of the Mexicans. As you are no doubt aware, the Mexicans have a disconcerting tendency to shoot, then ask questions of the survivors; we do not wish the Italian squadron in Cuba to fall foul of this, much less for any such incident to escalate into a more general conflict.

Certainly, it would appear to be particularly unnecessary, considering the close proximity of Iberia and Italy, to send forces to the Americas for training. However, we do believe that there is good reason for this  though we may not be privy to it  and are hopeful that this is does not prove to be the trigger for a new war.

26 January 1934

The Royal Navy today despatched a number of ships to locations around the North Atlantic. The main force, consisting of five battleships, with accompanying cruisers and destroyers, has deployed to Malta, with a view to further sailing to Souda Bay in Crete, in order to carry out warm-climate training exercises. Similarly, the Fast Battle Squadron and Fast Carrier Squadron have deployed to Jamaica, from where they will exercise with the Canadian heavy units presently in Bermuda. Additionally, flotillas of the new sloops have been deployed to Bermuda and Namibia, to serve as a nucleus to the new NATO anti-piracy task forces.

4 February 1934

The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company has announced that it has no plans to increase production to make up the shortfall in oil production as a result of the recent explosion in Mexico. They are confident that the dip in production will soon be rectified, and that supplies are adequate to cover needs in the interim.
11 February 1934

One brigade of troops from Burma have embarked into a number of ships for the voyage across the Pacific to participate in the South American peacekeeping operation. They have undertaken to continue the deployment for as long as is required to ensure safety for the inhabitants of Peru.

19 February 1934

Boulton-Paul today flew the first Defiant prototype; although missing its turret, and thus most of its armament, the aircraft showed that it had an excellent turn of speed and good handling. It is expected that the first production-standard aircraft will be ready in March, once the machine-gun turret is ready.

23 February 1934

Sir Edward Elgar, Master of the Kings Musick since 1924, has died aged 76.

7 March 1934

It has been discovered that a series of errors were made during the design process of the P Class submarines. It has been ascertained that the P Class submarines weigh in at 500 tons, rather than the 450 tons which had previously been believed, and that they are thus outwith the Cleito Treatys definition of Class B submarines.

The Royal Navy has undertaken to lay up the submarines in the Cromarty Firth, and to permit inspectors from other nations to ascertain that they are out of service until such time as action is approved. Currently, it is proposed that they be made available at cost price to other nations, but the matter is being referred to the Cleito signatories.

18 March 1934

Boulton-Paul has today announced that the Defiant bomber destroyer will not eb ready for production for some time yet. Difficulties have been experienced integrating the hydraulically-operated turret into the aircraft, and this will put the program back several months. The company has assured customers that the aircraft will, however, be in production by the end of the year.

24 March 1934

The King has sent his congratulations to Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, now also Queen of Belgium, on her success in the Belgian elections yesterday.

March 12, 1934 - London

The German naval attache will travel to Cromarty Firth to ascertain the status of the P-class submarines and report upon them.

Good news and well written.

Quoted

Details of the new ships have not been forthcoming, although Vickers-Armstrong has reported that orders have been received for forty 16.5 and forty-five 15 naval rifles. The Admiralty has announced that it will distribute the details of the new ships in due course.

Germany will be watching interestedly for these details.

Quoted

It is our belief that, as a nation which has hitherto acted with the utmost regard to the Treaty, its objectives and the desire to maintain peace,

India has been involved in more wars in the past ten years than any other country. "All nations want peace, but a peace that suits them."

Tanks - go for the Independant with the 3pdr gun, or the MkIII which isn't quite as big and ungainly.

Quoted

Certainly, it would appear to be particularly unnecessary, considering the close proximity of Iberia and Italy, to send forces to the Americas for training.

Cuba is closer to Mexico than the Med but it still doesn't qualify as "close". If they'd been based in the state of Guatemala or Belize I could see the point. As to why there and not the Med like usual; its good to operate in a different area and gives experience of deploying vessels away from Italian ports.

Operating in the the Bay of Biscay, or even the Azores would be far less provacative. Or even Liberia.

If a neutral (i.e. non-CT, and also non-'bailing') inspector is desired, the Brazilian naval attache would be honoured to offer his services.*

(* And perhaps some cash, as well. )

Quoted

Boulton-Paul has today announced that the Defiant bomber destroyer will not be ready for production for some time yet. Difficulties have been experienced integrating the hydraulically-operated turret into the aircraft, and this will put the program back several months. The company has assured customers that the aircraft will, however, be in production by the end of the year.

*grumble grumble* ( )
The FAB had been intending to double its order of Defiants following a reassessment of requirements, however with the delay it is possible that the additional 24 aircraft may be put to an open bid...

Cuba is barely 60 miles from Cancun. Close enough to be of worry.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Cuba is barely 60 miles from Cancun. Close enough to be of worry.

With Mexico's current MILITANT attitude, Cancun is barely 60 from Cuba. Close enough to be of worry to Iberia.

IIRC the MILITANT attitude orriginated from the AANM following an OOC Mexican bombardment sub design which somehow morphed into IC nastyness.

The AANM can largely thank itself for the creation of NATO, given its antics in the Caribbean and South America. 60 miles for a carrier group of 72 aircraft is indeed "Close" enough.

Obviously the Italians didn't expect the neighbours to give a crap about 72 aircraft and ACR's armed with 12" guns loitering in the Caribbean.

Obviously the Iberians didn't think the neighbours would care that they encouraged Peru to enter into a war on their own accord.

Obviously Japan didn't think that the country's in the region would mind that they join in on the intimidation of Mexico while on their "Goodwill" visit in the region.

You guys are nuts.

Quoted

60 miles for a carrier group of 72 aircraft is indeed "Close" enough.

Don't forget about the Togo Taskforce with 100 planes.

Quoted

Obviously Japan didn't think that the country's in the region would mind that they join in on the intimidation of Mexico while on their "Goodwill" visit in the region.

Intimidation of Mexico?? The Empire knows nothing about that.
"Goodwill" visit?? The Empire knows nothing about that.
Let's just say that that bit isn't finished yet and someone isn't going to be too happy about what is happening there.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
You guys are nuts.

To use a quote from the movie Broken Arrow....

"Yeah ain't it cool?!"

...nuts as in 3 nations intimidating Mexico, a nation that Iberia alone could quite effectively deal with?

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10

Quoted

60 miles for a carrier group of 72 aircraft is indeed "Close" enough.

Don't forget about the Togo Taskforce with 100 planes.

Quoted

Obviously Japan didn't think that the country's in the region would mind that they join in on the intimidation of Mexico while on their "Goodwill" visit in the region.

Intimidation of Mexico?? The Empire knows nothing about that.
"Goodwill" visit?? The Empire knows nothing about that.
Let's just say that that bit isn't finished yet and someone isn't going to be too happy about what is happening there.

I wonder if the outcome will be what Japan expects.....

You guys are aware that you have to work together to script a conflict, aren´t you? Sounds like some have forgotten this little bit....

Thats my whole point, I'm not aware of any conflict between Mexico and the AANM nations, yet the verbal jousting seems to have stemed from an OOC ship design posted a while back.

How it transformed from OOC hypothetical ship designs into IC animosity is beyond me...

There are however IC actions that have raised the eyebrows of a few players.

Quoted

...nuts as in 3 nations intimidating Mexico, a nation that Iberia alone could quite effectively deal with?

Without NATO, Mexico is still Allied to the US and Canada (NARC). Iberia deal with Mexico alone? I seriously doubt that. Before someone could shout "Hey! Gringos!", the combined NARC forces would have made sure the Iberian Navy's new base would be somewhere below the waves.

Quoted

I wonder if the outcome will be what Japan expects.....

Probably an outcome no one expects.

Quoted

How it transformed from OOC hypothetical ship designs into IC animosity is beyond me...

Perhaps that transformation might have something to do with the word "Iberia". It's very popular in South America (not!).

IIRC NARC is more or less a non-agression/trade treaty, none of the signatory's were obligated to enter a conflict to defend another.

http://wesworld.jk-clan.de/thread.php?threadid=3322&sid=

NATO is a step beyond that, offering dirrect aid to its signatory's if they are attacked by a third party.

That said the Mexican Canal project gives the U.S. and Atlantis something to consider if a third party decides to stomp on Mexico.

Quoted

You guys are aware that you have to work together to script a conflict, aren´t you? Sounds like some have forgotten this little bit....

Mac has raised this point previously. I can't really see Iberia agreeing to have NATO stomp all over her.

Here is Japan's expected outcome after unleasing Prof. Tomoe's "teleraygunporter"



I guess that canal won't be needed any more.....

Somehow I doubt the other surrounding nations would survive the resulting Tsunami created by destroying such a large landmass.

Japan would likely bear the brunt as the Tsunami would have the entire Pacific to gather up strength.
Prof. Tomoe would be swiming with the fishes...