Comments by "Jim Taylor" (@jimtaylor294) on "USS Texas (1892) - Guide 278" video.

4:40 For a moment we had another Warspite'ian attraction to other objects on our hands XD . Would be appropriate though, as the next USS Texas is a contemporary of said Super-Dreadnought :D .
10
...except for the whole protecting US Trade on the open seas thing... that's the main reason every large nation made having a navy a thing.
3
...or at least, that's what she's claiming to be :3
2
So I have observed XD
1
@ℂ'𝕖𝕤𝕥 𝕊𝕚 𝔹𝕠𝕟! Aye. It would seem that the Brazillians getting two Super-Dreadnoughts from the UK - with a third looking likely for a time - was the final straw in breaking the US Congress's curtailing of the Navy... at least gradually. (the S-Carolina's still being nuetered quite badly) The Germans pretty much crash building a navy from scratch though was likely the largest factor in the US finally getting serious re' Capital Ships.
1
@ℂ'𝕖𝕤𝕥 𝕊𝕚 𝔹𝕠𝕟! Yup. Especially as a few of the earliest ones were British built... which is weird to think about.
1
@j_taylor Well the UK had 80% of the global shipbuilding market at the turn of the century (a record nobody's bested nor is likely to), so they were the natural choice for a countries like Brazil, which lacked the industry to manufacture naval grade armour plate, nor other components essential to warship construction.
1
@ℂ'𝕖𝕤𝕥 𝕊𝕚 𝔹𝕠𝕟! not really relevant, as warship contracts are dealt with via mere politicians, not their bosses in higher office.
1
^×4 I disagree. Crime on the high seas has always been a thing. The end of spates of mass piracy such as the Barbary Pirates were a boon aye, but not a total end to the issue. Operating near the Qing Chinese coast for instance was risky for a considerable period, due to endemic piracy as a result of poor investment in their own navy. @genericpersonx333 Or to put it another way, the US had the luxury during the period of being uninvested in global naval matters... but also lost out on being able to respond to potential trade disputes, or take part in / mantain [by the visible ability to use force] nuetrality from other's wars. Though slightly late to responding to the changing naval situation, the US did indeed change approach just in time, but still had capability gaps for quite some time. (in Cruisers for instance, as Drach's covered in the past)
1