General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: U-754 and Ebb
Posted by:
Ken Dunn
()
Date: April 14, 2008 02:43PM
Hi Jim,
First of all the author you are using as a source had an agenda as the title of his book (full title: Waves of Hate – Naval Atrocities of the Second World War) clearly indicates even though all he did was publish an account of the sinking without specifically stating what he thought was wrong about the attack (he also didn’t say anything about any “needless deathsâ€). You obviously considered it some form of wrongdoing too or you wouldn’t have asked about it in conjunction with the book you are writing. Obviously Bridgland thought there was some wrongdoing on the part of the U-boat or he wouldn’t have included the account in his book though.
Your interpretation of what Bridgland wrote: “At least one author has claimed that the crew of U-754 continued to fire its deck guns into the unarmed 259-ton fishing trawler Ebb long after it had stopped, causing the needless death of several fishermen aboard her.†doesn’t spell out what you think was wrong either but it adds the notion that some deaths were needless. Was it:
That the U-boat fired its guns at an unarmed target?
That the U-boat fired its guns at a small 259-ton vessel?
That the U-boat fired its guns at a vessel that was only a fishing trawler?
That the U-boat fired its guns at their target after it had stopped?
That the U-boat fired its guns and the resulting deaths were needless?
Or perhaps some combination or all of the above?
At any rate all that apparently happened here was that an enemy vessel was shelled until it sank without regard for the safety of her crew. America and Great Britain signed the same accords that required submarines to not sink ships without regard for the safety of the crew of the ship however American subs sailed with permission to sink without warning from the first day we were in the war. Germany abided by the Prize Regulations as long as any other nation and longer than most. Sinking without warning was the norm for all nations for almost all of the war.
U-boats generally, when possible and when they could see or otherwise determine that the target was being abandoned, held fire until the crew was off however there was no requirement to do so after the very early part of the war and on July 28th 1942 when EBB was sunk American subs had been sailing with orders permitting them to do the same thing for 8 months or so and allied submarines routinely simply sank without warning and left the scene.
Additionally in this case as in many such cases the attack happened at 4:00 in the morning – in the dark or at least in poor light and it isn’t clear from any of the accounts what the U-boat could see at the time even though they were close to their target initially. The accounts point out that the U-boat circled EBB and that would have required her to move away to make the turn. The muzzle flash from even the small 20mm gun at night is enough to really screw up your vision not to mention the muzzle flash from the 88mm deck gun. It is also unclear which rounds caused the causalities. Just one round from the 88mm gun hitting a small target like that could have caused all of them and it could have been the first round or any of the others. There just aren’t enough details in any or all of these accounts taken together to actually determine exactly what happened. All we can really deduce from these accounts is that it appears the U-boat sank the EBB without regard for the safety of her crew and that was common for allied subs too. There is no evidence in any of these accounts that they intentionally targeted any of the crew.
Captain Moore’s account is more balanced and includes the following: “No attempt was made to fire directly into the lifeboat but the sub continued to fire while the crew was abandoning ship.†Source: Moore, Captain Arthur R. A Careless Word… a Needless Sinking. Kings Point, NY: The American Merchant Marine Museum at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point NY, 1988. Copyright: Captain Arthur R. Moore, 1983.
Had the U-boat intended any wrongdoing they surely would have attacked the crew in the water or in the lifeboat and they didn’t. They simply sank the ship but didn’t target the crew. It is also apparent from the full versions of all three accounts (Bridgland’s, Moore’s and Browning’s) that many of the rounds fired by the U-boat were fired after EBB was abandoned (Moore’s account includes the statement: “The engines were stopped and the vessel abandoned at onceâ€) and none of them indicate that rounds fired at that time caused any of the causalities thus you have no basis at all for classifying any of them “unnecessaryâ€.
We only know that Bridgland was of the opinion that there was wrongdoing because he included the attack in his book about naval atrocities yet there is no evidence this was in any way an atrocity. Captain Moore (a very respected author and former American merchant marine officer) had strong feelings that a U-boat should wait until a ship was abandoned before finishing her off and he voiced that opinion to me during a phone conversation several years ago when he was helping me research the sinking of my dad’s ship. He also refrained from classifying the attack on EBB as any sort of a crime in his account of the attack and pointed out that the crew wasn’t targeted in the lifeboat. Dr. Browning simply reported what happened without voicing his opinion about wrongdoing. Robert M. Browning, Jr., Ph.D. is the much respected chief historian of the U.S. Coast Guard and is well aware of the rules of engagement used by all sides during the war. Both Captain Moore and Dr. Browning are somewhat used as sources by the U.S. National Archives and if you write the Archives for information on an American merchant ship sunk by a U-boat during the war they will probably include the accounts from one or both of them in the information they send you as they have done me over the years.
The bottom line here is that if you are going to claim wrongdoing in the sinking of a merchant ship by a U-boat you need to be clear about what is fact and what is just your opinion as well as what is just the opinion of your source. Everybody has the right to an opinion but it shouldn’t be stated as fact when you are dealing with people’s reputations. As a general rule your readers just want to know what happened and they don’t give a damn about your opinion. If you are going to write about atrocities you need to do some real research, not just depend on some writer’s opinion.
An example I sometimes cite is the small Japanese fishing boat sunk by the U.S. navy during the Doolittle raid on Japan. The sinking was filmed and has appeared on TV many times in documentaries about the Doolittle raid. According to the commentary that accompanies the film it was feared that the fishing vessel might have had a radio and might contact Japan and warn them of an enemy aircraft carrier so close to Japan so it was simply sunk without warning and without even knowing if it had a radio – they just blew it out of the water with gunfire. I am not saying this was wrongdoing as I would have certainly done the same thing without hesitation (its called “operational necessityâ€) but it points out why a U-boat appearing to do the same thing can’t be considered a crime, especially without knowing all of the details. Additionally there are limits even to “operational necessityâ€. For example had they shot the survivors in the water it certainly would have been a war crime in my opinion as a surface warship could have plucked any survivors out of the water and made them prisoners without jeopardizing their mission. However in this case I don’t think there were any survivors but I am not sure – I haven’t seen that film in a long time and I haven’t done the necessary research to determine all of the facts – sound familiar? (-:
Regards,
Ken Dunn
First of all the author you are using as a source had an agenda as the title of his book (full title: Waves of Hate – Naval Atrocities of the Second World War) clearly indicates even though all he did was publish an account of the sinking without specifically stating what he thought was wrong about the attack (he also didn’t say anything about any “needless deathsâ€). You obviously considered it some form of wrongdoing too or you wouldn’t have asked about it in conjunction with the book you are writing. Obviously Bridgland thought there was some wrongdoing on the part of the U-boat or he wouldn’t have included the account in his book though.
Your interpretation of what Bridgland wrote: “At least one author has claimed that the crew of U-754 continued to fire its deck guns into the unarmed 259-ton fishing trawler Ebb long after it had stopped, causing the needless death of several fishermen aboard her.†doesn’t spell out what you think was wrong either but it adds the notion that some deaths were needless. Was it:
That the U-boat fired its guns at an unarmed target?
That the U-boat fired its guns at a small 259-ton vessel?
That the U-boat fired its guns at a vessel that was only a fishing trawler?
That the U-boat fired its guns at their target after it had stopped?
That the U-boat fired its guns and the resulting deaths were needless?
Or perhaps some combination or all of the above?
At any rate all that apparently happened here was that an enemy vessel was shelled until it sank without regard for the safety of her crew. America and Great Britain signed the same accords that required submarines to not sink ships without regard for the safety of the crew of the ship however American subs sailed with permission to sink without warning from the first day we were in the war. Germany abided by the Prize Regulations as long as any other nation and longer than most. Sinking without warning was the norm for all nations for almost all of the war.
U-boats generally, when possible and when they could see or otherwise determine that the target was being abandoned, held fire until the crew was off however there was no requirement to do so after the very early part of the war and on July 28th 1942 when EBB was sunk American subs had been sailing with orders permitting them to do the same thing for 8 months or so and allied submarines routinely simply sank without warning and left the scene.
Additionally in this case as in many such cases the attack happened at 4:00 in the morning – in the dark or at least in poor light and it isn’t clear from any of the accounts what the U-boat could see at the time even though they were close to their target initially. The accounts point out that the U-boat circled EBB and that would have required her to move away to make the turn. The muzzle flash from even the small 20mm gun at night is enough to really screw up your vision not to mention the muzzle flash from the 88mm deck gun. It is also unclear which rounds caused the causalities. Just one round from the 88mm gun hitting a small target like that could have caused all of them and it could have been the first round or any of the others. There just aren’t enough details in any or all of these accounts taken together to actually determine exactly what happened. All we can really deduce from these accounts is that it appears the U-boat sank the EBB without regard for the safety of her crew and that was common for allied subs too. There is no evidence in any of these accounts that they intentionally targeted any of the crew.
Captain Moore’s account is more balanced and includes the following: “No attempt was made to fire directly into the lifeboat but the sub continued to fire while the crew was abandoning ship.†Source: Moore, Captain Arthur R. A Careless Word… a Needless Sinking. Kings Point, NY: The American Merchant Marine Museum at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point NY, 1988. Copyright: Captain Arthur R. Moore, 1983.
Had the U-boat intended any wrongdoing they surely would have attacked the crew in the water or in the lifeboat and they didn’t. They simply sank the ship but didn’t target the crew. It is also apparent from the full versions of all three accounts (Bridgland’s, Moore’s and Browning’s) that many of the rounds fired by the U-boat were fired after EBB was abandoned (Moore’s account includes the statement: “The engines were stopped and the vessel abandoned at onceâ€) and none of them indicate that rounds fired at that time caused any of the causalities thus you have no basis at all for classifying any of them “unnecessaryâ€.
We only know that Bridgland was of the opinion that there was wrongdoing because he included the attack in his book about naval atrocities yet there is no evidence this was in any way an atrocity. Captain Moore (a very respected author and former American merchant marine officer) had strong feelings that a U-boat should wait until a ship was abandoned before finishing her off and he voiced that opinion to me during a phone conversation several years ago when he was helping me research the sinking of my dad’s ship. He also refrained from classifying the attack on EBB as any sort of a crime in his account of the attack and pointed out that the crew wasn’t targeted in the lifeboat. Dr. Browning simply reported what happened without voicing his opinion about wrongdoing. Robert M. Browning, Jr., Ph.D. is the much respected chief historian of the U.S. Coast Guard and is well aware of the rules of engagement used by all sides during the war. Both Captain Moore and Dr. Browning are somewhat used as sources by the U.S. National Archives and if you write the Archives for information on an American merchant ship sunk by a U-boat during the war they will probably include the accounts from one or both of them in the information they send you as they have done me over the years.
The bottom line here is that if you are going to claim wrongdoing in the sinking of a merchant ship by a U-boat you need to be clear about what is fact and what is just your opinion as well as what is just the opinion of your source. Everybody has the right to an opinion but it shouldn’t be stated as fact when you are dealing with people’s reputations. As a general rule your readers just want to know what happened and they don’t give a damn about your opinion. If you are going to write about atrocities you need to do some real research, not just depend on some writer’s opinion.
An example I sometimes cite is the small Japanese fishing boat sunk by the U.S. navy during the Doolittle raid on Japan. The sinking was filmed and has appeared on TV many times in documentaries about the Doolittle raid. According to the commentary that accompanies the film it was feared that the fishing vessel might have had a radio and might contact Japan and warn them of an enemy aircraft carrier so close to Japan so it was simply sunk without warning and without even knowing if it had a radio – they just blew it out of the water with gunfire. I am not saying this was wrongdoing as I would have certainly done the same thing without hesitation (its called “operational necessityâ€) but it points out why a U-boat appearing to do the same thing can’t be considered a crime, especially without knowing all of the details. Additionally there are limits even to “operational necessityâ€. For example had they shot the survivors in the water it certainly would have been a war crime in my opinion as a surface warship could have plucked any survivors out of the water and made them prisoners without jeopardizing their mission. However in this case I don’t think there were any survivors but I am not sure – I haven’t seen that film in a long time and I haven’t done the necessary research to determine all of the facts – sound familiar? (-:
Regards,
Ken Dunn
Subject | Written By | Posted |
---|---|---|
U-754 and Ebb | Jim Duffy | 04/13/2008 02:08PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Ken Dunn | 04/13/2008 02:36PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Jim Duffy | 04/13/2008 05:25PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | john | 04/13/2008 06:27PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Jim Duffy | 04/13/2008 07:05PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Ken Dunn | 04/14/2008 02:43PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Rainer | 04/14/2008 04:50PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Jim Duffy | 04/14/2008 10:32PM |
Re: U-754 and Ebb | Kim Codner- Nelson | 09/05/2014 01:40AM |