Australian Politics Forum - Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #75 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:10pm

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:05pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:16am:

And its greatest legacy, the continuing commemoration of the ANZAC legend at Gallipoli, by both the victorious and the vanquished, is a testament to the good will between former enemies that is unequaled anywhere in the world.

I'm not so sure about the "unequaled" but most certainly there was grudging respect between the two foes. The Anzacs referred to the Turks as Johnny Turk or Abdul.

They also fraternized during truces and burial in no-mans land, and exchanged goods by throwing oranges and onions from the Turks for tins of jam and bully beef from the Aussies.

The common soldier on both sides recognised the shared agony of the conditions and climate of the trenches. They also recognised the bravery and stupidity and the discipline of the other in obeying mindless orders and charges.

But it didn't stop either side from cutting down the other and showing no quarter in battle.

I was referring to the ANZAC legacy... Referring to its enduring commemoration at Gallipoli by Australia, New Zealand, Britain, etc and Turkey.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 17258 Gender:	Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault .... Reply #76 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:11pm .
Back to top	Conviction is the art of being certain IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 120438
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #77 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:16pm

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 7:41pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

Yes - the only way to land in Gallipoli was to send in commandos
been called off.

There were no such thing as commandos in 1914 in concept or fact, so that was going to happen.

You have to remember we are talking 100 years ago and the British Army was not a professional homogeneous force that meets that description today.

The British Army was a far flung organisation that was more a collection of individual regiments with very different traditions and standards and very little experience nor organisation at any level to work in large divisional, corp and army level operations.

And that description and realization to true for the BEF in 1914-15 as it does for the Gallipoli force.

My full text was:

Quote:

Yes - the only way to land in Gallipoli was to send in commandos
in the night to take out all the well entrenched Turkish firing positions overlooking the beaches first.

If that was not successful then the landings should have been called off.

Stupid POMs - sending our men into a shooting gallery.

They needed to take out the enemy positions silently.
Only commandos can do that.

They must have had some force like that -
if not the British should have trained an elite force to do the job.

Back to top

IP Logged

OldnCrusty

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #78 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:25pm

Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:01pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 3:30pm:

Well - it's proportional - Australia had the highest Allied rate of casualties...... that sort of tends to give us a privilege of looking down our colonial noses at others.

Don't give us that crap.

Spin-doctoring 8,000 Aussies dead to Britain's 21,000 for the sake of winning a sick oneupmanship competition is pretty damn tasteless.

I'm not certain of the Gallipoli campaign but I think the claim of the highest proportional loses apply to the total losses for WW1.

It would be interesting to know the comparison but my guess would be for the Gallipoli campaign the Brits would have lost a greater absolute number and a great proportion of deaths to numbers deployed.

The poor old Poms didn't just have to suffer the stupidity of the overall fiasco but also suffered from the gross stupidity and incompetence of the local commander Lieutenant-General Sir Aylmer Gould Hunter-Weston, the original and archetype donkey general.

The Anzac's had a Pom in command, Gen Birdwood, but he had redeeming feature (as did other Brit Generals - the Brits had some of the best and some of the worst of WW1). The Australian citizen soldier officers at brigade level and below did a much better job of caring and protecting their men in all issues from hygiene to tactically then many of the British officers..

Back to top

IP Logged

OldnCrusty

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #79 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:40pm

Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:06pm:

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 7:32pm:

The landing at Anzac Cove was a mistake. For whatever reasons (current and tide or stuff up) the actually landing was one mile north of the intended landing site. So calling it a stuff up "sending men into a perfect shooting zone" is completely wrong.

Correct.

But as this throws a measure of blame back onto Australians themselves, this Inconvenient Truth will be quickly brushed aside and forgotten.

How does that throw any responsibility of the failure of the campaign on to the Australians?

Back to top

IP Logged

OldnCrusty

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #80 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 10:13pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 12:25pm:

WW 1 may not have happened if real statesmen, instead of Edward VII, had engineered alliances and not forged a Europe that left Germany isolated.

BS. Although Germany protested 'encirclement' and probably believed and acted on that belief it was not factual.

In July 1914 the diplomatic situation in Europe was a Balance of Power (and essentially Mutually Assured Destruction) which had been the widely supported diplomatic aim of ALL European powers since the fall of Napoleon.

The biggest changes that was reducing Germany's perceived power were changing economic and social changes and not diplomatic changes.

Specifically the rise in importance of Industry and the declining in importance of agriculture. These changes favoured Britain, France and Russia and disadvantaged Germany, AH and Turkey. Essentially Germany's two allies AH and Turkey were agricultural and trading powers and not industrial powers were losing economic strength and political and military power to the point that Turkey was known as the "sick man of Europe".

There may have been a need to re-balance and realign with new treaties and alliances and there were opportunities to do such. Britain in particular would have been receptive to a re-balancing. Britain had an uneasy Entente with France and Russia which was signed more out of need rather than conviction.

(Edward VII had a zero role in British politics or diplomacy, and no influence or responsibility).

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #81 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 10:24pm

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 10:13pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 12:25pm:

WW 1 may not have happened if real statesmen, instead of Edward VII, had engineered alliances and not forged a Europe that left Germany isolated.

(Edward VII had a zero role in British politics or diplomacy, and no influence or responsibility).

Edward VII had 40+ years to encourage alliances with his crowned nephews and with British and continental politicians and heads of state. He meddled in European affairs to the end of his life and set the agenda for German isolation that persisted after his death.

Prior to German unification, Russia was the target for Edward VII.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault .... Reply #82 - Apr 26^th, 2014 at 10:35pm A hundred years on, China is where Germany was then. Will China start a war?
Back to top	IP Logged

OldnCrusty

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #83 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:04am

Bobby. wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:16pm:

They needed to take out the enemy positions silently.
Only commandos can do that.

They must have had some force like that -
if not the British should have trained an elite force to do the job.

Elite/Special forces are not used for missions of this scale then or now. Elite/Special forces might be used for stealthy reccies and/or the seize and hold of key points for short periods (1-4 hours) before the main force arrived.

But that capacity did not exist in fact nor concept in 1914.

Back to top

IP Logged

OldnCrusty

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #84 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:12am

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 10:24pm:

Edward VII had 40+ years to encourage alliances with his crowned nephews and with British and continental politicians and heads of state. He meddled in European affairs to the end of his life and set the agenda for German isolation that persisted after his death.

Prior to German unification, Russia was the target for Edward VII.

If you say so Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 120438
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #85 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:33am

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:04am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:16pm:

They needed to take out the enemy positions silently.
Only commandos can do that.

They must have had some force like that -
if not the British should have trained an elite force to do the job.

Elite/Special forces are not used for missions of this scale then or now. Elite/Special forces might be used for stealthy reccies and/or the seize and hold of key points for short periods (1-4 hours) before the main force arrived.

But that capacity did not exist in fact nor concept in 1914.

Well it should have existed -
they treated their troops as canon fodder.

Quote:

Elite/Special forces are not used for missions of this scale then or now.

Rubbish - that's what commandos do.

Back to top

IP Logged

Lord Herbert

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 34441
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #86 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 8:25am

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:25pm:

The Anzac's had a Pom in command,

A quick reminder: The Australian government had voted to let the Australian soldiers be under the command of the British. It was entirely at the discretion of the Australian government that the soldiers were not under Australian command.

Back to top

IP Logged

Lord Herbert Gold Member Offline Posts: 34441 Gender:	Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault .... Reply #87 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 8:28am OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 26^th, 2014 at 9:40pm: How does that throw any responsibility of the failure of the campaign on to the Australians? Australian navy personnel were in the bridge of the leading ship which dropped anchor in the wrong place, with its consequent tragedies.
Back to top	IP Logged

Lord Herbert

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 34441
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #88 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 8:34am

Bobby. wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:33am:

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:04am:

Elite/Special forces are not used for missions of this scale then or now.

Rubbish - that's what commandos do.

Correct.

The rough terrain and steep topography was exactly suited to SAS-style initial reconnoitering and the establishing of a security perimeter for the bulk of the landing parties.

You're on a roll, Sir Bobby.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 120438
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Gallipoli disaster not Britain's fault ....
Reply #89 - Apr 27^th, 2014 at 8:41am

Lord Herbert wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 8:34am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:33am:

OldnCrusty wrote on Apr 27^th, 2014 at 7:04am:

Elite/Special forces are not used for missions of this scale then or now.

Rubbish - that's what commandos do.

Correct.

The rough terrain and steep topography was exactly suited to SAS-style initial reconnoitering and the establishing of a security perimeter for the bulk of the landing parties.

You're on a roll, Sir Bobby.

Thanks Lord Herbert.
If I was a general in command I would not lead my men into battle unless
I was sure they could win.

This surety could only be assured if the Turkish defenses were removed first.

Back to top

IP Logged