Australian Politics Forum - The Gallipoli Campaign

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Defence › The Gallipoli Campaign

(Moderator: Brian Ross)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1

The Gallipoli Campaign (Read 217 times)

UnSubRocky

Gold Member

Offline

Crocodile Hunter: Origins

Posts: 25067
Rockhampton
Gender: male

The Gallipoli Campaign
May 31^st, 2023 at 3:33pm

Gallipoli: a quick guide to frequently asked questions and general information

Source: https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_...

Quote:

The Dardanelles campaign happened in part because the fighting in Western Europe had reached the first of a long series of stalemates and in part because, in the east, the Germans had delivered a series of blows to the Russians who, fearing a second offensive by Turkish forces from the south, appealed to their allies for assistance. The British and French agreed to attack Turkey. Their objective was to wrest control of the Dardanelles and re-establish sea communications with Russia through the Black Sea and end the Ottoman Empire’s role in the war.

The Anzacs were part of the British-French force attempting to capture the Dardanelles and were selected because their training had progressed and being based in Egypt, they were readily available.

A book on the Gallipoli Campaign sits in my room ready to be read. I know very little about the campaign, other than the estimated landing dates and time of day it happened. I know that the campaign was a human casualties disaster that ended in an ANZAC withdrawal/loss.

What I do not know is why Gallipoli was chosen as the place to invade to secure the Dardanelles. Could another more suitable location have been chosen by the British to more effectively win their operations in the region?

At this stage...

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Moderator

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 44333

Re: The Gallipoli Campaign
Reply #1 - May 31^st, 2023 at 5:03pm

The original plan was for a "limited landing" to force the Dardanelles. This was rapidly expanded to become a full sized landing near the Straits to open them and allow passage. The original landings were to be at Cape Helles and ANZAC Cove. Unfortunately it all failed. The RN advertised their intentions first by their attempt to force the straits initially by naval forces and then by landing marines to take the forts guarding the straits. To the Turks it was obviously going to be a precursor to bigger operations to take the straits. The staits were the only route to a naval power like Great Britain, which relied on their naval power to control events.

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

UnSubRocky

Gold Member

Offline

Crocodile Hunter: Origins

Posts: 25067
Rockhampton
Gender: male

Re: The Gallipoli Campaign
Reply #2 - Jun 1^st, 2023 at 9:11am

Do you think the ANZACs could have had a more strategic place to land (other than the accidental landing at the wrong place) to have had a more high-value target? Or was the British research of the area sufficient that the landings were the most ideal places to do a beach landing?

From what I understand, Russia and Turkey had a few decades-long hostilities between them before WW1 occurred. The opening of the Dardanelles was to assist the Russians in committing more troops through the straits and letting them fight the Turks and the Eastern Europeans allied with the Axis Powers.

At this stage...

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Moderator

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 44333

Re: The Gallipoli Campaign
Reply #3 - Jun 1^st, 2023 at 11:37am

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 1^st, 2023 at 9:11am:

The Recce was insufficient with out a doubt. There is an argument that they landed deliberately where they landed but more than likely that is a post ipso justification. They should have landed further north where the going was easier at Suvla Bay, rather than ANZAC Cover. They would have faced fewer defenders as well. They lacked verve and paid the penalty.

Quote:

From what I understand, Russia and Turkey had a few decades-long hostilities between them before WW1 occurred. The opening of the Dardanelles was to assist the Russians in committing more troops through the straits and letting them fight the Turks and the Eastern Europeans allied with the Axis Powers.

Russia and Turkey had fought at least three wars before this. Russia had defeated Turkey in the last conflict some 20 odd years before.

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Belgarion

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5682
Gender: male

Re: The Gallipoli Campaign
Reply #4 - Jun 4^th, 2023 at 3:26pm

According to historian Peter Hart they did not land at the wrong place as such, the plan was for the first wave to land on a 1600 yard front from ANZAC cove to about 1 mile north of Gaba Tepe. However the Midshipman in charge of the second most southerly string of boats believed he was too far south, too close to Gaba Tepe, and so began edging north. Given the darkness and difficulties of station keeping all the other boats began doing the same. This resulted in all the boats coming ashore crowded together at the northern end of the landing area instead of spread out along the entire length.
The cunning plan was to head up the hills, take and hold the high ground south of Suvla, then when reinforced push forward down the other side and take the forts from behind. It looked good on paper.....

« Last Edit: Jun 4^th, 2023 at 3:32pm by Belgarion »

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)

IP Logged

Pages: 1

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page