The blind spot British subjects have for their monarchs has always puzzled me, and most Americans for that matter. The Royal Family members have done quite all right over the years in the command structure of the British military forces. Except maybe HRH the Duke of Wessex. But even he is aide de camp to Her Majesty, and all he did was wash out of marine training!Originally Posted by David Manley
No blind spot, I do actually work in this business so I see it first hand.
From memory I think that both Edward (VIII) and George VI ( when they were just Princes) were both on Battleships at the Battle of Jutland.
Interesting thread.
Seems the Royal Navy had a good fight with the Kaiserliche Marine.
Before buying a single book about the Skagerrak Schlacht I'll get an overview with this one:
ZOOM! Right over your heads.
How hard do you find it when trying to get a beer at the bar Ken?
Rob.
It's apparently easier than making a point here!
Maybe its just not a good point
Don't let your bias decide what a good point is. Royal military careers are fore drawn conclusions. Royals allow the admiralty to assign them duties. They only have to say the word and the admiralty will fold like a cheap card table.
Pointless arguments are rarely won, but its easy for both sides to lose. Opinions on the Royals have been divided since the institution of monarchy!
The Americans rejected the British government and Monarchy in the 18th century, if you want it back, please ask!
So what you are saying is that Royals do what they are told by the Admiralty unless they don't want to in which case they tell the Admiralty what they want to do and it happens? Thats a bit weird.
In fact their active careers aren't that different to those of more "regular" serving officers. They have to be, since no-one is going to let them put personnel and expensive kit at risk. Or put them in positions where they would be expected to make decisions that would be beyond their capabilities. And thats no different to any other serving officer. We don't routinely let numpties drive SSNs or MCMVs or steer the research programme. Ceremonial positions are different of course but by that stage they are effectively beyond the regular armed services anyway.
So like I said, I really don't see what the point is.
Unless of course the point is that the Head of State is prepared to allow serving members of their family face the same dangers in action that any other family in the country would do. In which case I'd agree, and suggest that politicians should be encouraged to do the same, since it may make them think a bit more before they embark on the latest military "adventure"
Boy, are you naive, David. The system is rigged. You seem to think that people with privilege would forego it in order to serve their country. In actuality, people with privilege always exercise their privilege, otherwise, they lose it. That's your blind spot right there. You seem to think that royals are just regular blokes.
Spot on David! As usual, you are quite correct.
Kenneth, I have to say you are the naive and misinformed one, PLEASE, let it go!
Please inform my wife, she is convinced this is NEVER the caseSpot on David! As usual, you are quite correct.
And You wonder why people make fun of the brits.
If a head of state is prepared to allow members of their family to serve as their subjects do, then they are exercising their privilege to say so. If she had said no, he would not have gone. Your queen exercised her privilege concerning her prince's assignment. You can bet that she talked to her prince about it first. No prince is going to simply take orders from someone who got their position at the admiralty by using their own privileges and connections. They know how the game is played. You are simply making excuses for their behavior.
I am now going to play the politics card Gents.
Let us agree to differ on this matter and pass on if you please.
Rob.
Works for me.
Thanks Ken.
Rob.
US Naval War College documents pertaining to the original post are now digitally available online in case you all didn't realize it.
http://www.usnwcarchive.org/exhibits...battle-jutland
Of special interest to me and possibly other wargamers is No 3. Gaming the Battle of Jutland.
http://www.usnwcarchive.org/exhibits...ing-the-battle
The promised video of the battle is not what I expected unless they plan on releasing a more comprehensive one?
https://www.facebook.com/NavalWarCol...type=2&theater
Last edited by Nightmoss; 06-01-2016 at 19:07. Reason: clarification
"It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
–English Proverb
Since I still have no real idea what Ken's beef is I'm happy too.
Nice to see Admiral Cox there
Is it possible that the programme makers 'dumbed it down for the consumption of the general British public, who had probably never heard of the Battle of Jutland, and in so doing made it lose its appeal to people like us?
That's exactly what happened, and it is fairly common in TV. Programmes like this are aimed at the "avwrage" viewer rather than those with a deeper knowledge on a sibject
Yes, they don't seem to understand that what we really wanted was an AAR!!!
Nice one Fred!
Rob.
My latest blog entry is a brief report on the Naval Wargame Society's refight of Jutland at the National Museum of the Royal Navy on May 31st, also a few shots from inside the NMRN's Jutland exhibition, which includes the ship's bell from HMS Hood
http://dtbsam.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06...ortsmouth.html
Thanks for the link and photo.
"It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
–English Proverb
Nice.
When I imagine that those battleships shoot at each other with hughe calibers over incredible distances...
(Did they play it historical or was there room for new tactics?)
I wondered if any little ships got stood on!!!!
Ok, I read it in your blog, David.
Interesting.
I would like to visit this exhibition.
Last edited by Comte de Brueys; 06-14-2016 at 00:51.
Vaguely historical, but the light forces were used far more aggressively in the early phase of the battle.Nice.
When I imagine that those battleships shoot at each other with hughe calibers over incredible distances...
(Did they play it historical or was there room for new tactics?)
None at allI wondered if any little ships got stood on!!!!
I read a report about the Skagerrak/Jütland battle now.
Seems the German fleet had a lucky day.
Again England had hacked German radio operations.
What I wonder about is: The Germans try to lure parts of the British home fleet into the North Sea. I think they tried to destroy Beatty's battlecruiser division and his battleship division that was not stationed in Skapa Flow.
Why did the complete British Home Fleet left for the battle?
Now I understand why everyone favours battlecruisers in my SF literature (Jack Campbell / David Weber / etc.). Fast ships - heavy artillery - first to go - famous commanders.
Because the German "isolate part of the fleet and destroy it" plan was pretty obvious.Why did the complete British Home Fleet left for the battle?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks