Britain fought to maintain its Imperial supremacy - nothing to do with your point about Naval power, which, as are all your points, a red herring (no pun intended)
You have come some distance in your belligerent defence of Britain's part in the sacrificing of so many young lives in defence of The Empire (your feeble minded friend still has some way to go) - that is what World War One was about - the continuance of the exploitation of large sections of the planet.
As far as your hero Kitchener was concerned - the fiasco of 'the wrong sized shells' forced him to offer his resignation - that's what I remember - that his resignation was rejected on the basis that it would have been a political embarrassment to have accepted it at the time, i beside the point.
The man became a liability and, as Lloyd George pointed out in his memoirs, the government was happy to see him go - the conspiracy theory that his death might have been deliberate is part of his legacy, as were his concentration camps.
Kitchener was a military thug and he brought that thuggery into Word War One.
Seven years before the outbreak of war his behaviour was noted and condemned by The Hague Convention - but then again, we all have our heroes
Jim Carroll

The Hague convention of 1907 denounced Kitchener's encirclement and closure policies, stipulating that a conqueror shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country, and condemning collective punishment procedures, asserting, no general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.