Remember The Maine

[Waku]

On February 15, 1898, a mysterious explosion destroyed the American battleship Maine in Havana Harbor forcing the United States into a war with Spain.

In 1976, H.Rickover found out the ship's demise was self-inflicted.

What do you know/think?

[Stefan Härtel]

quote: 1898: USS Maine Exploded At least 250 military personnel were killed when the battleship USS Maine exploded while at anchor in Havana Harbor, Cuba. Although the cause of the explosion was never fully determined, the event contributed to the tensions leading to the Spanish-American War.

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/s...sh-m/maine.htm

(I just have to pretend I'm Waku at some times )

[Waku]

Casualties on USS Maine:
Officers: 2
Sailors: 230
Marines: 28
Total: 260

Survivors of USS Maine:
Officers: 24
Sailors: 60
Marines: 11
Total: 95

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm

Why was History so lenient to the officers?
Why none of the 24 officers knew the causes of the disaster?

Edit: I wrote 17 officers survived but checking out again the statistics I found I was wrong: 24 officers survived:
[This message has been edited by Waku (edited April 17, 2001).]

[Chris 62]

I didn't look at the links, guys, because I know what caused the explosion. A spark in coal bunker set off the Maine's coal, blowing a whole through the hull. USN investigators confirmed this after the Spanish-American war. Certain US newspapers (Hearst's Journel for one), very much wanted war with Spain, because they felt that Cuba was part of the United States' 'Manifest Destiny', and should be annexed. The US congress thought differently after the war, and Cuba was not annexed.

------------------
All knowledge begins with the phrase: I don't know.

[kIndal]

I agree with Chris, the true reason of the explosion was a internal explode provoked by the coal.
It was only a easy reason to declare the war to Spain and conquer Cuba, Puerto Rico and Philipines...and the Pacifican Possesions. Which were important bases for the control of Caribean sea and Pacific, the natural ways to expand for USA.

[Shaka Naldur]

even a US history book that I read says that the Spaniards didn´t sink the maine, if a us book history says so....

[Waku]

It seems proved the causes were internal (we can discard the theories envolving spanish or cuban agents).

But... is there any good reason to have only 2 casualties among the officers and 258 among the rest of the crew?

(Percentually 8% officers died, 80% crew died)

Where were the officers? were they in the city?

[Stefan Härtel]

Well, of course, I believe all of you; it just is a bit weird: An American ship exploding in a hostile harbor?
I'm not attempting to start a political discussion here, but we just had this in the Chinese sea...

[Henrik]

quote: Originally posted by Waku on 04-17-2001 03:30 PM Where were the officers? were they in the city?

That is actually possible you know...
Either that or its all a great conspiracy
(seriously though, I think it was an accident whit some rather unfortunate effects).

[Chris 62]

quote: Originally posted by Waku on 04-17-2001 03:30 PM It seems proved the causes were internal (we can discard the theories envolving spanish or cuban agents). But... is there any good reason to have only 2 casualties among the officers and 258 among the rest of the crew? (Percentually 8% officers died, 80% crew died) Where were the officers? were they in the city?

On this type of early iron battleship, the crew's quarters were below the waterline of the ship, while the officer's quarters were above the ship's waterline, so most of the crew would have been overwhelmed by the fumes of the coal fire below decks, while the officers (who had portholes) had a better chance of both breathing and escaping the ship from the upper decks.


------------------
All knowledge begins with the phrase: I don't know.

[Jay Bee]

Someone here read Leguineche's book on the War of Cuba & Mr Hearst? Very entertaining. I agree that the maine thing wasn't but a cheap excuse to expel Spain from the Western hemisphere.

I never quite understood though the REAL reasons why PR was annexed but Cuba was not. cpoulos could you fill us in?

[Exile]

JayBee, there is at least a chapter in Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought, (1959), that details some of the reasons for the US failure to annex Cuba after the war. I have a copy around here somewhere, if you're really interested, but any university library should have a copy of this book.

Salutations,
Exile

[Jay Bee]

Oh, well, a short summary in here would suffice I guess Can you give me the bibliograhical info for that book?

[Exile]

Well, Richard Hofstadter is one of the premier Americanists of the postwar period, though nowadays his books are considered more as a starting point for research than the definitive work in the field. Social Darwinism was one of his earlier ones and IIRC, his research revealed a strong strain of late 19th century "Anglo-Saxonism" in 1890s American politics which strongly frowned on the idea of incorporating a new state into the Union that was primarily hispanic in ethnicity. The question, at the time, wasn't "Should America annex Cuba?" but rather, "Does America really want to allow these 'equatorial'people, and the financial and social burdens we believe they would invariably subsequently become, into the United States?" Typical 19th century-style racism. I believe that this is an oversimplification of his argument, but hopefully, you get the idea.

Salutations,
Exile

[Jay Bee]

Yes, I have heard something about that. The concept of 'Aztlan' (Chicano) probably originated as a Latino response to that "Anglosaxonism". Both of these concepts are quite abandoned nowadays, which is great.

But while this might explain why Cuba was not annexed, it surely does not explain why Puerto Rico was.