True, which is why the French at first resfused to acquire the submarine. They feared that it would force escalation and that all navies would use such a "diabolical" device.

 

Someone copied your thread, by the way, Jay. As soon as you put it up, someone made a copy.

 

 

True, softwar, which is why some developments , such as bombing of civilian populations, was an accident. Once you do it to the enemy, the enemy can immediately take the same measures against you.

 

While it wasn't new technology, Special Forces was an innovation in the prosecution of warfare. The decision to use commandos was an interesting case where, instead of immediately organizing their own ops, Hitler declared that the use of SF was outside the boundaries of war. While they could have set up their own SF units and started strikes at the UK, he instead opted to execute any commandos captured. Strange

 

it was a tad hypocritical in the sense that although para trooped in, the german soldiers used on ebenmal in 1940 were special forces.

 

it's even more ironic when the term "commandoes" is a legacy of the corruption of the militia forces used in the Boer war

 

hitlers reaction was due to a loss of pride when they had some visible successes, but he'd ignored all prev british commando raids prior to then because they'd been a bit ordinary.

 

 

 

 One of the reasons Britain maintained it's strength was because few other nations could afford to commit as much to the navy.

For most nations the land threat is the vital one. For Britain, the navy could be both a direct protection against invasion and a foreign policy tool at the same time . Thus Britain had, for a while a lead no one could compete in.

By contrast, in Europe, when one country gets a tactical advantage(like Bonapartist France)sooner or later the others can copy because the difference between one European army and another is not inpenetrable.