Why Anglo-American war plans did not make war likely

What is a particularly misleading interpretation found in otherwise respected naval history?

Treating interwar British and American contingency planning as evidence that the two countries were likely to fight confuses professional preparation with political intent.

Inferring a high probability of Anglo-American war from extensive plans and exercises confuses contingency work with political intent. Britain and the United States were the strongest naval powers available to one another as demanding planning opponents. Staff work against that benchmark tested assumptions, kept officers practiced, and produced plans adaptable to less capable enemies. A contingency shows professional preparation and does not establish that political leaders expected or desired the war described in it.