Riain
Banned
Well actually since they built numerous capital ships for foreign powers then there is strong evidence that yes the British could build more than 3.5 capital ships a year, especially as that was an average and there were some years when the British built notably more ships and some years when they slacked off.
Anyway I asked if you were arguing that is was morally wrong for the British to make alliances in the face of a German Fleet that was created entirely to put pressure on the British and you answer boils down to:Yes.
Fine I now know your position.
Just to restates mine for the record. It is that Britain was never entirely as clear in its collective political mind to oppose Germany as some later historians suppose. There was some marked debate on not simply the scale of intervention in Belgium but its objectives. I therefore argue that while it might not be a sure fire solution actually Germany would have been better off with a fleet of battleships and cruisers not aimed at the British in the North Sea but sufficient to defend German interests in the Baltic and its coasts and possibly contest the French in Germany's oversea Empire. This might not stop the British weighing in against them but if it prevented the Entente Cordial being quite so cosy that might well have slowed if not out right limited British intervention which has to be in Germany's interests. There is even the possibility that it might have prevented any kind of Anglo-French rapprochement at all which would have been extremely beneficial to Germany's interests.
I have counted a couple of the ships Britain built for foreign powers given they were taken on by the RN, which leaves only a couple maybe 3 or 4 not counted which is hardly an indication of great slack in the British shipbuilding industry and great restraint by British politicians in the face of intolerable provocation.
I don't think it is morally wrong for Britain to concentrate in the North Sea or to make an Entente with France and Russia. My problem is with the argument often stated on this board that Germany building a 'bigger' fleet from 1899 'provoked' Britain and since Germany didn't need a fleet and Britain did Germany was morally wrong to 'provoke' Britain. Germany was perfectly within its rights to expand its navy in the face of the 1893 Franco-Russian alliance and the massive preponderance of the RN, just as it was within its rights to expand the Army in 1913 when France went to a 3 year conscription term and Russia began making offensive mobilisation plans. I don't buy the 'Germany is the guilty party' line, that's all, there is enough blame to go around for every ignorant dickhead of the era.