Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "History Hit" channel.

  1.  @marypetrie930  I am very well aware that there were more British that died in the Dardenelles campaign and it included one of the Kings own regiments made up of his farmers from Sandringham. Most Australians actually aren't aware of the British losses. A British historian made huge headlines a while back when he told Australia to get better perspective. BUT WHAT HE FORGOT was that Australian lost a massive slab of a single generation. I don't know if you've been to Australia, but know that in many country towns there are memorials with the names listed of those killed. They often list multiple names from the same family. There were Australian families that LOST ALL THEIR SONS in WW1. The effect it had on Australia which was at the time only a small population (under 5 million) was massive. Its what we hold against the British command, they took the best of a generation and lead them to a slaughter.
    3
  2.  @marypetrie930  This is a repeat of a previous comment and I already answered that. So if your not listening then FK-off. The percentage is irrelevant. We didn't have any excess population to lose in the first place let alone the bulk of an entire generation of young men. At that point in Australia history we couldn't lose that. We certainly couldn't lose them the FK-wit British Aristocratic Generals who sat on the beach sipping tea as they let the peasants be slaughtered.
    2
  3. Actually the British were at Gallipoli and in fact their losses were greater than the ANZACs. In fact there was one quite special regiment that was annihilated. There was the Sandringham Regiment that came from the farming families that worked on the King's estate at Sandringham. There was a film made about this called "All the Kings Men (1999)." NOTE: that film was heavily criticized because it had some scenes for which there was NO evidence ever produced. But the loss of that regiment through incompetence by the British officers was something the British could simply hide. They were not simply soldiers from somewhere else, they were young men the King actually knew because they worked for him on the Kings farm. Its only an idea, but the loss of the Sandringham Regiment MAY have had something to do with the British getting out of Gallipoli. The reason the British losses are less known is because to the British Gallipoli was just another part of the War. To Australia and New Zealand this was everything because our entire force was sent to Gallipoli. I don't know if you've been to Australia or not but in many small country towns there are WW1 monuments that list all those from the area who lost there lives. We had some towns that lost EVERY young man at Gallipoli and families who lost all their sons at Gallipoli because in those days we put brothers and cousins and neighbors in the same unit. We trusted the British and they threw away 1000s of lives including many British. One thing we never heard much about until recent years were the Turkish loses. With the increase in Australians visiting Gallipoli, the Turkish government also pointed out the Turkish losses. I never really knew until recently how bad they were. What that's done is give many Australians a better appreciation for how pointless the Gallipoli campaign was. There's an Australian film about the campaign called "Gallipoli." Its famous as one of Mel Gibson's first major films. Its goes into how stupid the whole thing was. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallipoli_(1981_film)
    1
  4. Yo - 1 here. My answer is: Because the Aussies and Kiwis thought the British wouldn't use us as cannon fodder like they were famous for doing with the Welsh, Irish & Scotts. WE WERE WRONG. 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♀️
    1