Question for those who know naval history better than I do:
Given that CAs were built partially as a result of treaty limitations, would it be fair to say that no major power would have bothered with building significant ships in the tonnage category that includes CA if there were no treaty limitations? From what I read, and what I saw here, it seems like CAs are a response to the naval treaties the big boys were a part of (Soviets are an exception). Does that mean that CAs are largely or exclusively a response to treaty issues?
Do we have any naval plans that were cooked up with the idea of completely disregarding the treaties? (More so than even Italy's "we're pretending to abide by the treaty when we really aren't" naval plan.)
Given that CAs were built partially as a result of treaty limitations, would it be fair to say that no major power would have bothered with building significant ships in the tonnage category that includes CA if there were no treaty limitations? From what I read, and what I saw here, it seems like CAs are a response to the naval treaties the big boys were a part of (Soviets are an exception). Does that mean that CAs are largely or exclusively a response to treaty issues?
Do we have any naval plans that were cooked up with the idea of completely disregarding the treaties? (More so than even Italy's "we're pretending to abide by the treaty when we really aren't" naval plan.)