Had today's New York Times been in actions back then, the Germans would have been told of the "secret minefield" and some court would rule the Germans were murdered in violation of articles of war.
But, in reality, that was how to wage war. Intercept messages and set traps and kill them before they killed you.
Secrets were really secrets then, as well as disinformation fed to the enemy.
That's what I was thinking. It would not have been a secret today.
Yeah. After all, the public had a right to know and those poor German U-Boat crews probably had their civil rights violated.
Geeze!!
"Had today's New York Times been in actions back then, the Germans would have been told of the "secret minefield" and some court would rule the Germans were murdered in violation of articles of war."
It's not like they didn't want to.
http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521607825
Well, had today's New York Times been involved, we'd be hearing how we should pull out of the war after losing one ship and how the President was unwilling to admit his failures after the sinking of this one ship.
Even if we did get the U-boat with the minefield.
bingo
I wish it was possible to lure our enemies as well into a killing field like it was 60 years ago, but then again what if we really find out what happened to OBL 6 decades from now?
From "Silent Victory," Clay Blair, Jr. - 1975
" ... In June 1943, Congressman Andrew Jackson May, a sixty-eight-year-old
member of the House Military Affairs Committee returning from a war zone
junket, gave a press interview during which he said, in effect, 'Don't
worry about our submariners; the Japanese are setting their depth
charges too shallow.' Incredibly, the press associations sent this story
over the wires, and many newspapers, including one in Honolulu,
thoughtlessly published it ... "
After the war Admiral Lockwood wrote, " ... I consider that indiscretion
cost us ten submarines and 800 officers and men ... "