<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for ANZAC Day</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2010</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:53:52 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2012</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>ANZAC Day</title>
            <description>Today is ANZAC Day, the Australia-New Zealand equivalent to Memorial Day. New Zealand Website on ANZAC Day. The Australian Equivalent. The Gallipoli Campaign was the brainchild of Winston Churchill, an attempt to force the Dardanelles and reach the Black Sea, freeing up the Russian Black Sea Fleet and opening up new routes of supply and a new thrust at the Austrians and Germans via the Balkans. Churchill really had the hots for the idea that Italy and the Balkans represented the &quot;soft underbelly&quot; of Europe. He was to be all for going in that way during WWII, as well. One...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:44:33 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2006-04-26</title>
            <description>
                Yes, the Old Contemptibles.

Whose loss can *still* be laid at the feet of their leaders...
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44393</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44393</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:07:44 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2006-04-26</title>
            <description>
                Yes, the Old Contemptibles.

Whose loss can *still* be laid at the feet of their leaders...
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44392</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44392</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:07:42 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from UtahMan on 2006-04-26</title>
            <description>
                Not in anyway to slight the Commonwealth troops - the Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders all earned their honors - but remember: the best British regulars were lost early on, in the first few months.

It would be interesting to see if things would have been any different if more of those veterans had survived, and been a cadre for the later hurriedly trained regiments to build upon.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44391</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44391</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:51:09 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from ibm on 2006-04-26</title>
            <description>
                Admittedly the record of the Turkish military as guardians of their secularity hasn&apos;t been perfect in a representative democracy sense but typically if not 100% what happens is their civilian politicians screw things up so badly they are almost cutting each throats in Parliament as well as on the streets. At that point the military steps in, knocks heads together until some signs of reason appear and hands things back to the civilians. Inevitably there are some casualties, but what, at that point, would be the alternative?
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44377</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44377</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:49:00 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2006-04-26</title>
            <description>
                Ry - while the Generals have taken some unfair hits, there are still piles of flung poo that stick.

Poor planning by people who didn&apos;t understand the conditions they were sending the soldiers out into among them, but in context, it was the use of non-UK troops as the shock troops, not only because in many cases they were better individual soldiers, especially in the attack (and there are exceptions abounding - the Brits were especially tenacious in defense) they were also treated like second-class citizens compared to UK troops.  There&apos;s a reason Australia demanded in WWII that it&apos;s soldiers serve under Australian generals and, perhaps more importantly (think Breaker Morant) under Australian legal jurisdiction.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44360</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44360</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:10:07 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from ry on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                &quot;Gallipoli, along with the treatment and use of Commonwealth troops in France, marked the high tide of Britain&apos;s command and control of Commonwealth Forces.&quot;
This was too subtle a snark for me this morn.  A 30 mile bike ride can do that to even a youngish man/boy/whatever-the-hell-I-rate-around-here.  
I took that at face value and had a real &apos;WTF is John thinking?&apos; moment when I wrote what I did. Which brings me to another point:  if C2 was so limited is it really a fair criticism of the Flags for shortcommings not of their own making?  If the crux was not intelligent use of troops but of the speed of the OODA loop, is it fair to slam the Flag?  Of course, never having had the condition of my butt being decided by a Flag colours my opinion on the matter.   

And of course I&apos;m only doing Gallipoli.  It&apos;s the only WW1 battle I know even remotely well.  I may be stupid for trying to argue with A Walking Talking Military Encyclopedia, but I&apos;d be down right insane to try and argue things like Paschendale or The Somme.  

Oh, you probably write decent to good &apos;Muricanese.  It&apos;s the translation from &apos;Muricanese to stuff ry understands that seems to be the problem.  
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44354</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44354</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:12:53 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from SezaGeoff on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[Update:-
<a href="http://www.skp.com.au/memorials/pages/00012.htm" rel="nofollow">Memorial to Ataturk in Canberra</a>
]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44353</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44353</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:11:53 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from SezaGeoff on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[Sgt. B,
As can be seen by the attached <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1614594.htm" rel="nofollow">article</a>, the Returned Servicemen's League has officially welcomed Turkish descendants of the Gallipoli enemy to march in the Anzac day parade.
We also celebrate Anzac day together at Gallipoli, but it will be long time till anybody gets together with the Japanese on <a href="http://www.anzacday.org.au/education/activities/sandakan/sandakan01.html" rel="nofollow">Sandakan</a> or the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/changi/history/burma.htm" rel="nofollow">Thai/Burma railway</a>.
]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44352</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44352</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:25:12 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Toluca Nole on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                Not sure what it is about the flick, but &quot;Gallipoli&quot; is a favorite film of mine.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44351</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44351</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:09:04 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Sgt. B. on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                I shall leave the analyses of leadership to you all, but I would like to point out another result of Gallipoli...

The Turks, after the battle, treated the ANZAC dead with the same respect and tenderness as their own.  Years after the battle, fast friendships were forged between former enemies...
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44350</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44350</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:25:15 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[<i>Gallipoli, along with the treatment and use of Commonwealth troops in France, marked the high tide of Britain's command and control of Commonwealth Forces.  The propensity of British Generals to use non-UK troops for the really bloody work, while at the same time treating them as second-class citizens, caused the command relationships to be much different in WWII.  Especially since, pound for pound, the Commonwealth soldiers were in main, better quality troops than those from the UK (exceptions on both sides abounding, of course).  Like it or no, the colonials were, if nothing else, generally healthier than their UK counterparts.

Regardless, all the soldier's quality was oft-times squandered by execrable generalship.</i>

Well Ry, you're applying my words above to only Gallipoli, whereas, from context, I *intended* them to refer to Brit Generalship in, um, general.  Obviously, I was not clear, another reason I never have scored that pundit job with the huge paycheck, but instead pay to publish myself...]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44343</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44343</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:28:38 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Maggie on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                I am reading about this episode in &quot;A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East by David Fromkin.  What a *&amp;* up!  I&apos;m astonished that Churchill made it back from being blamed for this.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44342</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44342</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:21:11 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from ry on 2006-04-25</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[(Adds a few dozen ceramic plates to 'Don't Crush Me!  My Fluids Will Ruin The Decor!' armor system).
Ain't you being a bit hard on the generals here, Armorer?

I've gotten a somewhat different view from Keegan in <i>Intelligence in War</i>(I think it was that.  Don't quote me just yet.).  I get the impression that it was the inability to get word from the captains leading companies up thru the higher echelons that was the real culprit.  Not incompitence or 'Evilness by The Officer Class'.  It took time for 'Johnnie Turkey' to react, even if THAT general knew what he was about and had a mobile reserve in place.  Early success was not followed up or exploited.  Allowed the Turks to actually man their defensive lines.  

I dunno.  I get the impression that Gallipoli was as success that nearly was with a little initiative by the junior officers or abandonement of the phase line approach by the UK and replacement with the Auftrag style of command the German General Staff(and later the US Army) used.  Essentially, Gallipoli wasn't Anzio, where MArk Clark's subordinate passively waited for the Wehrmacht to come and destroy his beachhead, and they obliged him.   ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44340</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html#comment-44340</guid>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:47:25 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>


