Was it Voltaire that described Prussia as "an army with a state attached to it"?

Would that make generals running the Prussian navy (and the reason that the navy existed) seem a lot more sensible?

Was it Voltaire that described Prussia as "an army with a state attached to it"?

Would that make generals running the Prussian navy (and the reason that the navy existed) seem a lot more sensible?

"Where some states have an army, the Prussian army has a state!" - yes, it is Volaire.

"Where some states have an army, the Prussian army has a state!" - yes, it is Volaire.

By 1897, the German fleet comprised one squadron of eight battleships. This was the sixth largest navy, and one that posed little threat to Britain...

His grandmother had expressed the opinion that when he was a boy what he needed was a good spanking. Considering who she was, grannie probably knew whereof she spoke.

Also, this was the age of AT Mahan & the Influence of Sea Power upon History. As far as I remember, this book made a strong impression on the Kaiser. He took from the book the message that ANY power that wanted to be great needed a great navy.

The Kaiser was an admiral in the German, British, Russian, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, and Greek navies and no doubt had all the necessary uniforms.

but german colonies were never that impoitant. germany mostly had colonies because everyone else had those and it was felt that germany somehoe ought to do the same (and get its own "place in the sun"). the colonies were economically meaningless, if i recall right, more money went in than ever came out.
colonies were never really popular in germany, not even with the right wing.

all that means that there was no huge need or desire to defend those colonies and expanding those colonies would have not been feasible anyway.

at lesat that is the grand picture, i believe.

Also worth noting here, that the German Navy was building new ships, while the British navy was replacing old ones, as a result it was a possibility, given the need for Britain to maintain its colonies, that Germany could achieve better local superiority.

Absurd to say that Britain at the time would have needed Germany as a naval ally.

Tirpitz told Conservative Party politicians that building the fleet would help support its goals of stopping the growth of the Social Democrats, and prevent the Reichstag from growing more powerful - that is, it would slow down the growth of democracy, a dirty word to many at the time (and not just in Germany). Tirpitz said it would promote German industry, create jobs, enhance German prestige, etc.

That seems like an odd argument for Tirpitz to sell to Germany's elite, who were classically educated. In Athens, the formation and rapid expansion of the fleet had led to the power and extent of their democratic institutions increasing at the expense of their more traditional, aristocratic institutions, such as the Council of the Areopagus.

The Royal Navy building program picked up steam.

Some argued that Britain, by building the Dreadnought, had made its own fleet obsolete and given up its advantage.

To be fair, steam initially had major problems. For example, early steam propulsion was based on paddle wheels like Mississippi riverboats used in the days of Mark Twain. Such wheels were tremendously vulnerable to enemy fire!

Also, early steam engines were extremely inefficient, and a ship could not carry enough fuel to get across the Atlantic on steam power. This led to an extended period of 'steam-and-sail' ships in both commerce and navies.

Of course, they were more expensive, because they were generally larger, with bigger guns and more armor.

I don't think you defined the 'two powers policy', so for those in the dark: Great Britain's naval policy rested on the idea that she may end up at war with a powerful coalition. So the policy was that the Royal Navy should be equal in strength to the next two most powerful navies in the world.