io9: How The Most Daring Plan Of WWI Turned Into A Military Disaster
This coming Sunday marks the centenary of one of WWI’s most infamous campaigns: Gallipoli. It was an audacious attempt by the Entente to break the European deadlock with a master stroke. Instead, it quickly turned into a hellish ordeal and a resounding defeat. Here’s why Gallipoli seemed like a good idea at the time – and why it was doomed to fail.
With the war along the Western Front at a standstill in early 1915, allied leaders were looking for ways to break the stalemate. Many were worried that the deadlock might be permanent. Lord Kitchener, the British secretary of state for war, reluctantly conceded that operations needed to be established elsewhere.
WNU Editor: An utter and complete disaster .... with 250,000 casualties.
3 comments:
Gallipoli was baby.
Neville Chamberlain has obvious defects, but I wonder about Churchill.
I recently read that the the joints chiefs (or their predecessor) were against Operation torch. They said it would delay D-Day for a year. If it is true, I have a dim view of FDR. He pushed it. FDR pushed it and he pushed it, because Churchill did. If you are going to bash FDR (I would) over torch then you have to hit Churchill too.
I have read (it might be revisionism) that Churchill was against independence of India in the early 1930s and this was a reason he was kept out of the British cabinet.
Maybe it was in the execution at Gallipoli. What if they landed west of Istanbul?
I'll take pugnacious over insipidness, but if you don't have competence to go with that pugnaciousness you are going to have a lot of wrecks.
Talking about Churchill I realize I have nearly 20/20 hindsight and am in the peanut gallery.
In WWII, Churchill was still
pushing to reach Germany via
the "soft underbelly of Europe,"
the Balkans. He had his
pluses, but military
strategy wasn't one of
them.
ofs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOCe2Y7iVF8
Post a Comment