Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Who actually won The Battle of Jutland?" video.

@xornxenophon3652 There is certainly a flaw in your logic. Britain had a worldwide empire, and built/maintained her fleet to ensure that it, and Britain's trade routes, were protected. Who do you think ferried British troops to France without loss, similarly brought troops to the Western Front (and, of course, to Gallipoli and the Middle East) from all over the Commonwealth and Empire, and then systematically starved Germany into collapse & revolution?
6
@xornxenophon3652 Where else would you suggest the Grand Fleet could have been used? The Somme, Verdun, or Passchendaele?
5
Was that why the High Seas Fleet spent the rest of the war swinging round anchor chains in the Jade, whilst the Royal Navy maintained a blockade which systematically starved Germany into collapse, revolution and, in the case of the HSF, mutiny? Because of their 'victory' at Jurland?
4
Perhaps you didn't know that, within days of returning to port, Scheer reported to the All Highest that the Fleet must not be risked again, and then urged upon him a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare? The United States Navy, by the way, only became the largest in the world from around the middle of WW2. Don't you see something of a contradiction in your criticism of the British Two Power Standard on the one hand, and then complaining that the British could afford a failure because of the size of their fleet on the other? 'though some in Britain wanted to launch an attack (Copenhagen style) on the US Navy after World War I.' Really? Who wanted to do that, and to what end? I assume that you have impeccable sources?
4
It is called 'History.' I can, perhaps, sympathise with someone with your name wishing to forget most of the history of the 20th century, however.
4
Actually, Churchill called him that.
4
@xornxenophon3652 The problem with ships is that they aren't much use on land. Like at Gallipoli, for instance.
3
So, in your 'unbiased' opinion, the 'winners' spent almost the whole of the rest of WW1 swinging round their cables in the Jade, before collapsing in mutiny when asked to face the Royal Navy again, whilst the 'losers' continued to dominate the oceans, and imposed a blockade upon Germany which, by mid 1918, had reduced her people to starvation and revolution. Have I got that right?
3
As best I recall, after their brirf encounter with the Grand Fleet, the High Seas Fleet fled back to the Jade, and never risked coming within range of it again.
3
@craignairn4854 You are wasting your time replying to this notorious troll. He infests the internet with his anti-British one sentence comments.
3
@Boppy-B-B Jellicoe did not 'bungle.' He was wise not to risk his fleet in a chaotic pell mell action, after Scheer had begun his run for the Jade. What was foremost in Jellicoe's thinking was the need to retain naval control of the North Sea, which he did.
3
The Press certainly did, as the scribblers in their offices (and bars) demanded a second Trafalgar.
3
Please explain how it was that, after the 'German Victory,' the 'winning side' spent almost all of the rest of the war swinging at anchor in the Jade, whilst the 'losing' side controlled the seas, and imposed a blockade on Germany which drove her people to starvation & revolution? Please then explain how it was that, following a naval mutiny, the 'winning side' arrived at the main naval base of the 'losing' side in order to surrender? Please explain how it was that the commander of the 'winning' side immediately after the battle told his Kaiser that a further engagement with the 'losing' side should not be risked, but that a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare should be pursued instead?
2
Except that the German fleet never risked a further confrontation with the Grand Fleet. Two sorties were aborted almost before they had begun. As a result, whilst the HSF swung around cables in the Jade, the British Northern Patrol systematically drove Germany into malnutrition, revolution, mutiny, and defeat.
2
@Finnbobjimbob Yes, he is. He is a troll who posts simply to annoy. Best to ignore him.
2
Most battles are decided by more than simply corpse-counting. Do you really think that the tactical 'victors' were the ones who, in reality, fled the battlefield?
2
Perhaps you haven't read the many assessments by British naval historians which accept that there were failings on the British side?
2
@iansneddon2956 You are wasting time and effort replying to this 'Mark Harrison.' He infests a host of sites, almost entirely with 'controversial' single sentence anti-British comments. The quintessential troll.
2
@iansneddon2956 Grossly unfair. The HSF did sortie again. On 25-27 November, 1918. They even went as far as Scapa Flow.
2
Well, whose fleet controlled the oceans and imposed a blockade, and whose fleet barely poked a nose out from the River Jade, and finally mutinied when asked to sortie in 1918?
2
Don't be a fool. The Royal Navy won the Battle of Jutland because after it, the German fleet never dared challenge the Grand Fleet again, but swung peacefully at anchor in the Jade whilst the RN's Northern Patrol systematically starved Germany into revolution, mutiny, and defeat.
2
How would inflicting greater losses on the High Seas Fleet have released 'hundreds of thousands' of troops for offensive operations in the Mediterranean, still less what would part of the Grand Fleet have done there, considering that the allies already had naval supremacy there in any case? 'Mining in the U-boats?' THe Germans also had mines, and U-boats, and such attempts would simply have exposed British ships to risk with little obvious gain. Moreover, how much tighter could the Northern Blockade really have been?
2
@iansneddon2956 Quite, Scheer knew haw close his fleet had been to a catastrophe, and within days was warning the All Highest that it must not be risked again. Of course, it wasn't.
1
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
@TinaHollner Except that it was the High Seas Fleet which fled the battlefield, and the Grand Fleet which controlled it the following day. Furthermore, they continued to control if thereafter. Perhaps you think that corpse counting is how to determine the result of a battle. It isn't, or Stalingrad would have been a German victory. I haven't made up any definition. I have simply stated a few facts, however much they might annoy you.
1
'THE' HMS Dreadnought? Please try harder!!
1
Only if you judge battles by counting corpses, rather than by considering strategic objectives. I wonder if you would consider Stalingrad of Kursk German victories, using the same criterion.
1
@xwormwood The point is that some (generally Germans) do indulge in corpse-counting where Jutland is compared, rather than accepting that the outcome of the battle was an undoubted British strategic success. Of course you can compare battles, simply by determined who achieved their strategic objectives, and who didn't. Regardless of the level of loss.
1