Question about Antwerp

abc123

Banned
Someone once said that Antwer is a "dagger pointed into a heart of Britain". Why is Antwerp so important?
 
Antwerp was, and still is a very important place in Europe. Mainly because of its huge harbor and good location. In the middle ages it was one of the most important cities in the world.
 

abc123

Banned
Antwerp was, and still is a very important place in Europe. Mainly because of its huge harbor and good location. In the middle ages it was one of the most important cities in the world.

True, but why is possesion of Antwerp by a hostile power such a grave danger for Britain?
 
The quote "a dagger pointed at the heart of england" Is from the middle ages and usually refers to the Spanish Netherlands. In the 16th century what is now Belgium was controlled by Spain. Spain and England at war means Antwerp would the closest port Spain could use to launch their armada. Antwerp was huge, for that time the biggest and most important port in Europe.

i think Napoleon once called Antwerp a dagger pointed at the heart of England.

Ireland has been called a dagger pointed at the heart of england too;)
 

abc123

Banned
The quote "a dagger pointed at the heart of england" Is from the middle ages and usually refers to the Spanish Netherlands. In the 16th century what is now Belgium was controlled by Spain. Spain and England at war means Antwerp would the closest port Spain could use to launch their armada. Antwerp was huge, for that time the biggest and most important port in Europe.

i think Napoleon once called Antwerp a dagger pointed at the heart of England.

Ireland has been called a dagger pointed at the heart of england too;)


Weren't some using that phrase in WW1 too?:confused:
 
The quote "a dagger pointed at the heart of england" Is from the middle ages and usually refers to the Spanish Netherlands. In the 16th century what is now Belgium was controlled by Spain. Spain and England at war means Antwerp would the closest port Spain could use to launch their armada. Antwerp was huge, for that time the biggest and most important port in Europe.

i think Napoleon once called Antwerp a dagger pointed at the heart of England.

Ireland has been called a dagger pointed at the heart of england too;)

Of course, Ireland is also a dagger pointed at the heart of Ireland....:p
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Weren't some using that phrase in WW1 too?:confused:

yes, And there was a second part that goes something like,

"the Berlin to Baghdad railroad is a 28 cm guns pointed at India".


I think a lot of these memorable quotes are more politicians making internal political statements than factual analysis of strategic issues. Good relations with the French/Germans was more important to UK security than who could use Antwerp.
 
It's a logistic-strategic location that in theory would provide a naval base to strike directly at the core of British naval strength. In practice it's one of those military nostra that never really held true in any scenario as the sheer weight of the Royal Navy in its own ground is too great for any one enemy to overcome, while the idea of a joint Franco-German-Russian alliance against the UK is too improbable given all the many PODs required to make this remotely possible.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
It's a logistic-strategic location that in theory would provide a naval base to strike directly at the core of British naval strength. In practice it's one of those military nostra that never really held true in any scenario as the sheer weight of the Royal Navy in its own ground is too great for any one enemy to overcome, while the idea of a joint Franco-German-Russian alliance against the UK is too improbable given all the many PODs required to make this remotely possible.

I do love the Franco-Russian landing in England in a book, complete with an endorsement by an Admiral that this could easily happen, "if naval funding was cut". The Russians landing several hundred thousand soldiers in the midlands in only 10's of hours in 1900 was quite enjoyable. :D

I think a lot of the fear of German attacks in WW1 and WW2 was due to fear mongering by Admirals in times of peace. The Admirals knew there was nothing like a good scare to get more funds for new battleships.
 
I do love the Franco-Russian landing in England in a book, complete with an endorsement by an Admiral that this could easily happen, "if naval funding was cut". The Russians landing several hundred thousand soldiers in the midlands in only 10's of hours in 1900 was quite enjoyable. :D

I think a lot of the fear of German attacks in WW1 and WW2 was due to fear mongering by Admirals in times of peace. The Admirals knew there was nothing like a good scare to get more funds for new battleships.

Before WWI there was more reason to worry about it than before WWII. On paper at least the High Seas Fleet was one of the most powerful naval forces of the day, and one that would have the potential to strike directly at the British Isles.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Before WWI there was more reason to worry about it than before WWII. On paper at least the High Seas Fleet was one of the most powerful naval forces of the day, and one that would have the potential to strike directly at the British Isles.

Agreed, the lack of powerful air wings, radios, and radar makes planning an operation much easier. Still, these books used to scare the public were way over the top. Could Russia really put 250,000 soldiers on ships in 1900? Much less supply them.
 
Agreed, the lack of powerful air wings, radios, and radar makes planning an operation much easier. Still, these books used to scare the public were way over the top. Could Russia really put 250,000 soldiers on ships in 1900? Much less supply them.

Hell, no. I don't think the Russia of 1900 could raise 250,000 troops in any kind of fashion sufficient to wage a major modern war in a land conflict without telegraphing it.
 

Cook

Banned
i think Napoleon once called Antwerp...
A gun pointed at the heart of England.

In the twentieth century the approaches to Antwerp are far too easily blocked, which is why it was not used as a route for the BEF in World War One and why it took three months from the time the harbour of Antwerp was captured intact in 1944, for it to be made fully operational.
 
Antwerp and his huge deepwater Harbor was always of Military importance
the Spanish Empire in order to invade England

Napoleon needed the Harbor for his Battleships

German Empire needed that Harbor too during WW1
because to use as west port for German Battleships and merchant shipping
they even build a railway from Antwerp to Duisburg for Transport

During WW2 Antwerp play a important role during Allies to push forward the Third Reich
Because for supply with ammo and fuel & food to north frontline
Ironically they used the railway the German build in WW1
That why Hitler wanted "Unternehmen Wacht am Rhein" (aka Battle of the Bulge)
to reconquer Belgium and Antwerpen Harbor and push the resupply back to small french Harbors.

during Cold War Antwerpen was important Harbor for NATO
and Sovjetunion had the Harbor on list for Nuclear weapon targets
 
Agreed, the lack of powerful air wings, radios, and radar makes planning an operation much easier. Still, these books used to scare the public were way over the top. Could Russia really put 250,000 soldiers on ships in 1900? Much less supply them.

Ask Japan;)
 
I heard once that the currents in the Channel flow from Antwerp to the British coast, so all you have to do is put a rowboat out into the current and lean hard on the tiller and you`ll wash up on the English coast. in the age of sail this is not a good thing to have to defend against.
 
Top