HalfPointFive

HalfPointFive t1_j63xzwe wrote

I don't think you should be downvoted because you make some good points. If you look at him through the lens of someone obviously very chivalrous (in the traditional sense) his actions are more understandable. It's easy to say "more lives could have been saved", however the argument that men would have swamped the ships is also a possibility. At all times, he appears to have been eminently concerned with the welfare of women and children, which I think is quite honorable. This comes at the expense of men, obviously, and also himself. His chivalry also makes the war crime more comprehensible. Having been on the Titanic, he would have experienced a passenger ship sinking with women and children. The idea of a warship (the uboat) sinking passenger and merchant ships probably pissed him off. It's not right of him to kill the uboat survivors, but I feel like if he were ordered to sink ships full of women and children he would refuse the order.

0