Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Imperial War Museums" channel.

  1. What makes you think that the ships 'didn't fit in the RN?' Both were at Jutland. Your last sentence demonstrates your profound ignorance of the actual casualty figures at Gallipoli.
    1
  2. Actually, around 57,000 Scots died in WW2. Coal production was essential to the war economy in WW2. Haven't you heard of the Bevin Boys? Miners in general were discouraged from joining up, as were other workers in essential industries. The rest of your post is incomprehensible.,
    1
  3. How is it that videos of this sort always attract people like this? Cosmic, old chap, would you care to express your opinion about Patton's shambolic campaign in Lorraine, the triumph of Bradley & Hodges in the Hurtgen Forest, or the 600+ merchant ships lost off the us East Coast in early 1942 when Ernie King failed to respond to Paukenschlag?
    1
  4.  @nickdanger3802  How sad. You have degenerated into nothing more than a troll. Unless of course, you can explain the relevance of any of this to the subject under discussion. I will not bother to reply again unless, by some miracle, you are able to reverse your sad recent decline, and manage to up your game.
    1
  5.  @dost328  No, it was not. Then, as now, in Britain, a suggestion by a Minister was simply that. The final decision was that of the Prime Minister, which is why he was, and is, so-called. Whatever you might think, Churchill had no role in the planning of the Operation.. Nicholas Lambert's book ' The War Lords and the Gallipoli Disaster' is clear on the subject. He argues that Asquith ultimately decided on the Gallipoli operation, not in a meeting of the subcommittee on war policy, but in a meeting of the subcommittee on food prices. Facing skyrocketing wheat prices, due to the war and crop failures in the Southern Hemisphere (particularly Australia), Asquith needed a way to reduce food prices to prevent political unrest. And because he was a good free market Liberal, storming Gallipoli is seen as more militarily possible than instituting food rationing.S At the same time, the Russians were demanding an immediate loan of 100 million Pounds, to prop up the Rouble, which had become virtually worthless on international markets after their defeats in East Prussia. Asquith ultimately came to believe that Gallipoli offered the chance for a decisive victory against the Ottomans, solving the wheat problem, by reopening the granaries of Romania and Southern Russia to international markets, and restabilizing Russian government credit, all in one blow. So yes, Churchill was responsible for pushing the operation, but it is Asquith’s government and he made the final decision. However, when both the naval operation and the amphibious landing failed, Asquith made sure that it wasChurchill who took the blame. You could also refer to the demand from Russia for support to ease the pressure on their southern flank, in an urgent communication sent by the Russian Chief of Staff to Herbert Kitchener. Actually, I have done my homework.
    1
  6. Sadly, I found myself obliged not to renew my membership after my last visit. George Orwell made a pertinent comment, which does still have some relevance to these people :- ‘England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always anti-British’.
    1
  7. Then perhaps the same sanction should have been applied to Ernie King after his (lack of) response tro Paukenschlag?
    1
  8.  @drinksnapple8997  Roger Hill received a DSO and a DSC, both well-deserved. However, his actions hardly justified a VC.
    1
  9.  @daniellastuart3145  I know. This is why my definition of Scharnhorst as 'a seriously undergunned fast battleship' is correct. They actually started work on Gneisenau but abandoned the project, which is why one of her triple turrets still exists in Norway.
    1
  10. No, she wasn't.
    1
  11.  @cortkim  The first British bombs fell on Berlin the night after the first German bombs landed on London. The germans had a firm policy not to bomb cities or civilian targets.' I wonder if they conveyed this noble purpose to the good citizens of Republican Spain during the Civil War, or to those of Warsaw, or Rotterdam?
    1
  12.  @nigelraporam6917  Bullshit. What ethnic cleansing?
    1
  13. Around 120,000 French troops were lifted from Dunkirk.
    1
  14.  @phlm9038  Well, Vice Admiral Dover's records identified just over 123,000 'Allied' troops being lifted out of Dunkirk. As these were almost entirely French, apart from a small number of Belgians, if the British Evacuation Fleet didn't take them, who or what did?
    1
  15.  @bubiruski8067  Apart from the fact that your post doesn't make sense, hasn't it occurred to you that the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the German declaration of war, might just possibly have influenced the US entry into WW2, rather than the British?
    1
  16. When British law related to Commonwealth-born residents, which had given Spike a secure place in the UK, changed, he applied, in 1960, for a British passport. The application was refused, partly because he would not swear an Oath of Allegiance. Spike could have become a British citizen, simply by taking the oath.
    1
  17.  @Boppy-B-B  Actually, the Tobruk garrison was originally 9th Australian Division, supported by (British) 3rd Armoured Brigade. The only Indian troops seem to have been a small contingent from the 18 Indian Cavalry Regiment, attached to 3rd Armoured Brigade. From mid August, the Australians were lifted out by the Royal Navy, and replaced by the Polish Carpathian Brigade, 70th (British) Infantry Division, & 4th Royal Tank Regiment, who were eventually relieved during Operation Crusader. When Tobruk fell in June, 1942, the defences had been allowed to fall into disrepair, and 2nd South African Division could not hold them.
    1
  18. You think Churchill had any input at all into the planning of Gallipoli? How fascinating. This fixation some people have about Churchill is quite mysterious, based largely as it is on ignorance and propaganda.
    1
  19.  @dougamundson6836  Gee, what would have happened in the Pacific if Japan had had the industrial power of the US, and the US that of Japan? What ifs are generally pointless. What is a fact is that Rommel was never able to defeat Montgomery, whereas he was defeated by him on more than one occasion.
    1
  20.  @dougamundson6836  'Do you have ANY idea what happened in Sicily?' Do you mean what actually happened, or what the 1970 comedy movie claimed happened? The imaginary 'race to Messina' for example? You really shouldn't confuse George Patton with George C. Scott.
    1
  21.  @dougamundson6836  'What ifs' are NOT always pointless. Japan didn't. As you haven't answered my comment, I wonder if you might explain why Rommel was 'so much better' instead? You might start by explaining the tactical brilliance of the 'Race to the Wire' which led to Erwin's defeat by the Auk during Crusader.
    1
  22. Oh look! An intellectual.
    1
  23. 'With the RAF reduced to nothing invasion was a certainty.' Rather, an invasion ATTEMPT, might have been made. At which point, the towed German barges would encounter the concentrated forces of the Royal Navy as they plodded down the Channel.
    1
  24. You were wrong. He suggested it. Asquith authorised it, and the military produced the failed planning.
    1
  25.  @johnwright291  Indeed, largely because his superior, Herbert Asquith, used him as a convenient scapegoat at the time. Since then, of course widespread recognition of Churchill as the 'Greatest Englishman' has drawn upon him the attention of the left, who now happily blame him for everything since the Black Death.
    1
  26. Do you think that Churchill had any part in the planning of the Operation? If so, you must be remarkably badly educated.
    1
  27. The clash between Beatty's force and Hipper's battlecruisers was a tactical German victory, pehaps because of Beatty's mishandling of BS5. The clashe between Jellicoe & Scheer, however, was unquestionably a British tactical success.
    1
  28. Really? Which wars did he monger?
    1
  29. Churchill had nothing to do with the planning or execution of the campaign. His total involvement was to suggest it to Asquith. Of course, to get precisely the sort of comment that you have excreted, it is only necessary to mention Churchill.
    1
  30.  @TheTfrules  You should visit the museum before making such comments.
    1
  31.  @TheTfrules  Perhaps you might also consider looking up the qualifications of the people presenting the video before calling someone a 'numbnut' for having an opinion which, evidently, differs from your own and is not, therefore, worthy of respect. I also have reservations about the quality of this presentation. Presumably I am also, therefore, a 'numbnut' despite my First in Modern History?
    1
  32.  @nickdanger3802  Sorry, I am surprised that you should post such a fatuous comment. Of course the RN & RCN used a lot of American built equipment, but the crews who fought & won the Battle were British & Canadian. To follow your argument, it would be logical to assume that the US Navy victory at Midway should not be credited to the American air crews, but to the Douglas Aircraft Company, who built the Dauntless. It would, of course, also be foolish and wrong. Churchill said, I believe, 'give us the tools & we will finish the job.' Huge American resources did indeed supply many of the tools, but I did not anticipate that you would seek to belittle the efforts of the RN & RCN in this manner.
    1
  33.  @nickdanger3802  'Midway If two thirds of the aircraft had been provided for free that would be a valid statement.' Valid? Absurd, more likely. Today, England are playing India in a Cricket Match. The best batsman in world cricket, the Indian captain Virat Kohli, may well score a century (100 runs or more). If he does, who should get the credit, Kohli, or the bat manufacturer?
    1
  34.  @peterclark6290  Would you perhaps point me to my post where I referred to anyone fighting a 'perfect war?' If you can't then I would suggest that trying to attribute false claims to someone when you lack sensible arguments is not reasonable.
    1
  35.  @peterclark6290  The subject of this thread is 'Mulberry Harbours and Dieppe'. What is insulting about 1). pointing out that the first ship of the type you described only appeared in 1968? 2). Asking you to refer me to a post which contained a false statement of which you chose to accuse me? 3). 'Obviously you think the war was done to the best of Britain's ability.' Another false claim. When have I previously suggested that?
    1
  36.  @nickdanger3802  Alternatively, how well would the bat perform without someone to hold it? At the time, the Soviets were actively fighting Germany, whilst Malaya was still at peace. I wouldn't dispute that the British underestimated Japanese capabilities, but they were hardly alone in that. In December, 1941, the war in North Africa was going very well. Auchinleck had just defeated Rommel in Operation Crusader. Events in the Far East resulted in the transfer of Australian divisions back to Australia, and prevented the full exploitation of Crusader. Didn't FDR suggest that supplying equipment to the British as akin to 'giving your neighbour your hose pipe when his house is on fire, without asking him to pay for it?' If you wish to continue belittling the United States' allies in WW2 by grumbling about equipment supply then feel free. These posts are serving no purpose.
    1
  37.  @peterclark6290  In point of fact, I didn't delete anything. YouTube does sometimes lose posts, but I had no reason to delete mine, as responding to your insults was quite entertaining. I won't re-write it, but if you still have it please feel free to copy and post it. Still, at least you have ceased posting your odd suggestions about using catamarans to escort Atlantic convoys, and begun to concentrate on attacks of a personal nature instead. As I recall pointing out in the lost post, my old University Tutor used to remark that people who resort to such measures do so because they have lost the argument.
    1
  38.  @peterclark6290  In point of fact, it was a First in Modern History from Manchester University in 1974. My principal tutor was Professor M R D Foot. You can look him up for yourself to assess his credentials. I confess I rather lost interest in your fantasy Swath-hulled vessels when I read that the first one was built in the Netherlands in 1968-1969. I assume that even you would agree that this was rather late for the Battle of the Atlantic?
    1
  39. Largely because the video has correctly ignored the myth. Churchill proposed the operation, but didn't authorise it, and certainly didn't have any involvement in the planning, despite the claims of the revisionist anti-Churchill bandwagon.
    1
  40. It could have been worse. Remember 'The Longest Day' which seemed unaware that the Canadians were there at all?
    1
  41.  @hurri7720  I do not regard a creature like Nick Clegg as a countryman in anything except place of birth. You appear to pick up your opinions of the odd comment you hear on television. I get mine from history books. I know that you 'didn't refer to serious historians' as it is abundantly clear you haven't read any.
    1
  42. Some sources say HMS Orion was first.
    1
  43. Churchill did not plan Gallipoli. He suggested it, Asquith authorised it, and the army/navy command produced the flawed planning. The degree of basic ignorance on here is astonishing.
    1
  44. The US didn't 'give' large numbers of destroyers. The British were offered fifty elderly warships which they used as convoy escorts, once they had refitted them. They were paid for.
    1
  45. You do know he didn't have any input into the military planning, I suppose? Sorry. My mistake. Of course you don't.
    1
  46.  @yingyang1008  He proposed using Sea Power as a means of removing the Ottoman Empire as an ally of the Central Powers, and as an alternative to the unfolding carnage on the Western Front. The proposal was presented, forcefully no doubt, to the Prime Minister, Herbert Asquith. Asquith approved of it and planning was then undertaken by an Allied team of senior army and navy commanders, both British and French. This team did not include Churchill. Churchill held no government position after 1929, until he was recalled by Chamberlain as First Lord of the Admiralty on the same day that Chamberlain declared war. Who were these people who were so keen to fan the flames of war, and how exactly was Churchill of use to them?
    1
  47.  @yingyang1008  You mean he consistently warned, when out of government, that Hitler & nazism were a serious threat to the stability of Europe, and had expansionist military ambitions? Was he wrong?
    1
  48.  @yingyang1008  Would you care to give examples of the regular scenes of which you speak? Norway was a military failure, certainly. Should the British and French have simply remained inactive and not attempted to intervene? The Norwegian naval campaign, by the way, was a disaster for the Kriegsmarine's surface fleet, which remained largely irrelevant for the rest of the war. Mers el Kebir was a justified action. The British had no idea, at the time, how closely a Petainist would co-operate with Germany. The French armistice/surrender had required that the French fleet return to French Atlantic ports, where it would be placed under German 'supervision.' The British concern was that it might be used in support of a German invasion attempt. Dresden (an Anglo-American joint operation) was undertaken at the request of the Soviet Union. I have never heard a credible argument from people who apparently believe that, in an industrial war, the soldier who loads the shell into the gun is a legitimate target, but the 'civilian' who manufactures the shell, or provides the food without which armies could not fight, is not. In one sentence, There are no civilians in modern warfare.
    1
  49.  @yingyang1008  He, and FDR, allied with the Soviet Union because both believed Stalin was the lesser of two evils. No-one 'gave' Stalin anything. He, or rather his armies, simply took it. Would you suggest that the Western Allies should have attacked the Soviets after May, 1945?
    1
  50.  @yingyang1008  Which countries had Stalin invaded in 1939? Oh, and Stalin invaded Poland almost three weeks after Hitler, not at the same time. The west allied with the Soviet Union on the basis of 'My enemy's enemy is my friend.' I don't recall ever raising the idea of good versus bad. I simply addressed your bizarre fixation about Churchill. You don't believe that there was dem,ocracy in Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, then?
    1