Lying requires consistency and IME the Russians are very, very, bad at this. They are much, much better at telling a good story, just not good enough under intense scrutiny and actual evidence. 
Which is why their/Assad not damaged here, anti-US narrative isn't going so well, apart from the British Buggering Corporation.
Human nature with propaganda needs to be taken into account and the Vulcan attack on Port Stanley is a very good lesson on this. The bravo UK on a very limited and not very successful attack has to be weighted against the physiological impact on the Argentinians where we showed we could attack with 'heavier' forces with impunity, but their are much better examples of this:
The Royal Navy for hundreds of years have accepted losses in the line of battle. The battle of Jutland was about the German Grand fleet breaking the British blockade of Germany, if they failed they would lose WWI. The UK lost more ships mainly through the loss of Battle cruisers, which were over-gunned cruisers, with inadequate armour, which when penetrated with 14-15" shells they penetrated the magazine with fatal results (The same happened to HMS Hood in WWII against the Bismark). Despite more losses Admiral Jellicoe kept pressing and only broke off the engagement when he was worried it was a trap to lure the UK fleet, so they could be attacked by U-boats. The victory was that the German Grand Fleet never challenged the Royal Navy again on the high seas and Germany lost WWI. 
Now lets fast forward to 1982. General Belgrano was 'allegedly' sailing to intercept and a attack the UK carriers but HMS Conqueror, 'quietly' sorted out the error of her ways with a couple of Mk42's. The outcome was that the Argie navy never left port again to challenge the Royal Navy.
Trump, quite IMO has set down a marker (and made the world a safer place) to show that challenging US hegemony and red lines has consequences in a way that Obama disasterously failed to do and made the world a much more dangerous place, where every tyrant and misfit dictator were prepared to try it 'on' and see what they could get away with. They now know, it is much less than before.
Just to add to that great summary; the German High Seas Fleet had a maximum armament of 12 inch main guns. It was the British Grand Fleet that had 15 inch guns on their Queen Elizabeth class super dreadnoughts, four of the class being in the Fifth Battle Squadron, that tailed behind the First Battlecruiser Squadron. It was poor fire controls on the battlecruisers that has been found to be the main cause of the loss of 3 of their number. The German battle cruisers also had light deck armour, and took some hits that should have proved as fatal as on the Royal Navy ships, but for the greatly superior fire controls undertaken as the norm by their crews.
The loss of the Hood 25 years later to the Bismark and Prinz Eugen was however down to the heavy shells of the battleship and battlecruiser penetrating the weak deck armour on about five occasions, then igniting the main stern magazine with a flash fire going to the forward magazine. The Hood's stern and bow were blown off, the main middle section then sunk, with the other pieces quickly following within 3 minutes. Just 3 men survived.
The truth is the battlecruisers were a flawed concept as originally their value lay in their great speed, 25 knots and heavy armament of eight 12 inch guns, but at the expense of only being fitted with light armour. Development of the dreadnoughts into the five British super dreadnoughts that had a top speed of 24-25 knots, eight 15 inch guns, and very heavy armour greatly narrowed the "advantage" of any battlecruiser in both the British and German navies. The German battleships also started to catch up in terms of speed and armament, and by WWII the British battlecruiser HMS Hood had little, if any, advantage over the German battleship Bismark that had it all; speed, armament and very heavy armour. At Jutland the Vice Admiral Sir David Beatty also, to compound the issues, allowed his battlecruiser squadron to approach far to close to the German High Seas Fleet and not take full advantage of the range of his main armament; 14 miles compared to the German's 11 miles. In fact it was the German fleet that opened fire first once in range of the battlecruisers. The other crucial factor was also the fact that Beatty had taken his fleet away from the very significant back up of the super dreadnoughts that would have provided the heavy fire power, 15 inch shells with a range of up to 15 miles, to cover the battlecruisers.
But overall, as Rod2 states, Jutland proved to the German High Seas Fleet that they could not effectively destroy the Royal Navy's command of the North Sea. The High Seas Fleet was designed to be a "Risk Fleet"; the thought being that the German fleet could inflict maximum damage of the Grand Fleet with it's smaller risk fleet and thus create a chance that they could equal it in size for the major
der Tag, that in fact both the British and Germans were hoping for. The Risk Fleet soon realised at Jutland that the risk was too great and only sailed out of it's base again as a fleet on the 18th August 1916 as they thought a small British fleet was sailing out into the North Sea. They then got news it was the full Grand Fleet and, without firing a shot, turned tail and sailed back to port, only to reappear after the Armistice in 1918 to surrender to the Royal Navy and anchor in Scapa Flow where they scuttled their ships.
The World power had shown their might, again, and advertised who was boss
