Prof. David Stevenson has pointed out that while the blockade meant overseas imports dropped to 20% of prewar levels, the Germans had never relied on shipping to run their economy the way Britain did. And Russia had just bowed out of the war, turning over a lot of territory and resources in its peace deal.

 

Instead, there were more immediate military reasons for deciding the war in the west ... the last-hope Ludendorf offensives had failed, and then the Allied counteroffensives had succeeded ... the German army was reduced to a shadow of itself on the field of battle, and couldn't have stopped anyone ...

Certainly it had nothing to do with the balkans.

 

The blockade had several effects on germany - notably on agricultural production - massive fall in yeilds fromk 16 onwards whether this is decisive is debatable but the germans thought it was as it led to the collapse in moral on the home front and the desperation to secure the Ukraine etc which led to a lot of german troops being left as garrison there.

 

What it also did was enable the entente to move troops from overseas to europe, and to import a lot of gear from the US.

 

In ww2 as peopel of said with a large part of europe unde german control the effect was less. With the specific exception of preventing germany importing oil by sea, but the effect of sea power on the allied side was at all times to keep the UK and USSR in the war and from US entry on allowed phenomenal amounts of resource to be delivered to the battlefield. In 44 the USAF alone had 30,000 airdraft overseas and every gallon of fuel and ecvery bomb they dropped got to the airfield by sea at some point

I believe I read it in "Inside the Third Reich" (the tell-all by Hitler's architect). The Germans were considering design requirements for the generation of their tanks meant to cope with the T-34 et al. Hitler decided the matter with his bigger gun and thicker armor concept but there was a brief thought of simply copying the Russian T-34 and producing it.

 

The idea was scrapped when it was realized that the T-34 pattern required the engine to be of aluminum. Germany could not make its own T-34s because Germany did not then have access to aluminum ore (bauxite I suppose) which the USSR did have.

 

 

I have read and generally believe that although the collapse of the German will to stay in the war may be explained in terms of a reaction to the British landing at Salonika or to events in the Balkans or explained by a collapse of civilian leadership in Germany, etc, the real underlying cause was the four year naval blockade of Germany by the British Royal Navy.

Did the British Royal Navy blockade win the war with Germany?

Well, I don't think the Royal Navy and blockade did win the war with Germany. There was only one bad winter (in 1916 when the potato harvest failed) and material came in over the border from neutral Holland anyway.

 

Germany didn't surrender after its fleet ran away at the Battle of Jutland, it surrendered after its army ran away after the Ludendorf' offensives  ...

I suppose that what I am really asking is - does sea power from WWI to present still have the same role it has had in the past?  Is it still as effective at obtaining and as necessary to the attainment of victory in every war?

Yes. He who controls the seas controls the Earth.

I'm not sure how useful this slogan is, Herald.

Here's someone's list of current wars - nothing special about it.

 

link