Can we put all the blame on Churchill?

[old man emu]

My contention is that the Dardanelles campaign was a suitable course of action for the Western European Allies to take. The reason that it was a huge stuff up was that the British High Command failed to adequately supply the correct artillery and ammunition for the terrain encountered, and the British Generals running the operation failed to take advantage of the gains made by the troops on the first day. After that, the Generals fall back into early 19th Century forms of attack which were impractical against 20th Century firepower and poorly reconnoitered terrain.

 

Churchill's policy in dealing with the Ottoman Empire and assisting the Russians was sensible in the circumstances. It would divert Ottoman troops from the Suez and at the same time open another front that the Austro-Hungarians would have had to deal with.

 

As to the claim that Churchill kicked over an ants' nest by refusing to hand over the two warships that the Ottomans had had built in Great Britain, that was the culmination of a lot of diplomatic wheeler dealering that was not going Great Britain's way. You have to go back twenty years into the 1890's and follow developments in the relationships between Great Britain, Germany, the Austro-Hungarians and the Ottomans to see what lead to the creation of the policy to strike through the Dardanelles.

 

OME

 

 

[fly_tornado]

the buck stops somewhere

 

 

[old man emu]

Saturday morning and it's raining a bit. I went to the library and found a book entitled "The Grand Deception" by Tom Curran. Published in 2015 ISBN 978-1-925275-00-1 . Apparently Curran's research found Churchill "disingenuous and interfering". I'll comment later when I've finished reading the book.

 

OME

 

 

[Bruce]

OME, I will be interested in your findings.

 

A book on WW1 worth reading is "The Guns of August" which won a Pulitzer prize. The author had access to previously unknown sources, like the letters generals etc wrote to their wives, where they said what they really thought.

 

Churchill certainly was an unusual character and a maverick, yet he became the leader of the Tories.

 

Here's a sad fact... more than half of young British people think that Churchill was a mythical character, like Robin Hood.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

OME, I will be interested in your findings.A book on WW1 worth reading is "The Guns of August" which won a Pulitzer prize. The author had access to previously unknown sources, like the letters generals etc wrote to their wives, where they said what they really thought.

 

Churchill certainly was an unusual character and a maverick, yet he became the leader of the Tories.

 

Here's a sad fact... more than half of young British people think that Churchill was a mythical character, like Robin Hood.

A thousand years ago half the children thought Robin Hood was mythical.

 

 

[old man emu]

A thousand years ago half the children thought Robin Hood was mythical.

Ahhh! The myth of Robin Hood. Was he real? Was he a Nottinghamshire noble? Was he an archer?

 

I refer you to a little volume entitled "Robin Hood - The man behind the myth" by Graham Phillips and Martin Keatman 1995 ISBN 1-85479-996-7 which explores the historical records. Their research identifies a peasant revolutionary from Wakefield, Yorkshire in the 1320's when Edward ll was king.

 

1320 Welsh border barons, father and son, both named Hugh Despenser, gain the King’s favour,

 

1320 The Scots assert their independence by signing the Declaration of Arbroath

 

1322 Barons’ rebellion, led by Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, is crushed at the Battle of Boroughbridge in Yorkshire.

 

1326 Edward’s wife, Isabella, abandons him and with her lover, Mortimer, seizes power and deposes Edward. The Despensers are both put to death.

 

1327 Edward is formally deposed by Parliament in favour of Edward III, his son, and is murdered in Berkeley Castle on the orders of his wife, Isabella

 

One fact that militates against Robin Hood being a nobleman is his alleged great skill with the long bow. That was not a weapon that a nobleman would ever consider using.

 

OME

 

 

[Bruce]

I've seen 2 documentaries about Robin Hood and I'm still confused about whether he looked like Kevin Costner or Russel Crowe.

 

 

[old man emu]

Richard Greene; Errol Flynn .... Frank Sinatra (Robin and the Seven Hoods)

 

In Mel Brooks's 1993 spoof of the Robin Hood legend. Cary Elwes is Robin (with a lighthearted jab at Kevin Costner's bad English accent in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves)

 

Prince John:

 

And why would the people listen to you?

 

 

Robin Hood:

 

Because, unlike some other Robin Hoods, I can speak with an English accent.

 

OME

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Ahhh! The myth of Robin Hood. Was he real? Was he a Nottinghamshire noble? Was he an archer?

I refer you to a little volume entitled "Robin Hood - The man behind the myth" by Graham Phillips and Martin Keatman 1995 ISBN 1-85479-996-7 which explores the historical records. Their research identifies a peasant revolutionary from Wakefield, Yorkshire in the 1320's when Edward ll was king.

 

1320 Welsh border barons, father and son, both named Hugh Despenser, gain the King’s favour,

 

1320 The Scots assert their independence by signing the Declaration of Arbroath

 

1322 Barons’ rebellion, led by Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, is crushed at the Battle of Boroughbridge in Yorkshire.

 

1326 Edward’s wife, Isabella, abandons him and with her lover, Mortimer, seizes power and deposes Edward. The Despensers are both put to death.

 

1327 Edward is formally deposed by Parliament in favour of Edward III, his son, and is murdered in Berkeley Castle on the orders of his wife, Isabella

 

One fact that militates against Robin Hood being a nobleman is his alleged great skill with the long bow. That was not a weapon that a nobleman would ever consider using.

 

OME

So which of these characters was theRobin Hood? Was it Thomas?

 

 

[Spooks]

Here's a sad fact... more than half of young British people think that Churchill was a mythical character, like Robin Hood.

But....but.....but they're going to university and evyfink doing useful subjects such as David Beckham studies and Sociology. We have record GCSE/A-level results and record numbers going to university.....they must be smart surely? (Inside I'm doing this )

 

 

[Bruce]

I hope you are joking Spooks about Beckham studies.

 

 

[Spooks]

BBC News | EDUCATION | Beckham in degree course

 

Well technically it was/is a module.

 

I don't think many people realise what a joke the education system is over here. It has basically become a way of reducing unemployment through student enrolment and non-job creation.

 

 

[Spooks]

P.s It has friends too

 

Top Ten Useless Degrees

 

 

 

[Bruce]

I see Melbourne there with a doctorate in ufology. It makes me want to weep.

 

As if the taxpayer didn't have better things to spend money on. And yet the standard of education is abysmal.

 

Here in Australia, we have confused quality of education with money spent on it.

 

I would like to make people have to show they understood the physics of driving to get a license... this makes me a grumpy old git, out of touch with modern education.

 

 

[Spooks]

I see Melbourne there with a doctorate in ufology. It makes me want to weep.As if the taxpayer didn't have better things to spend money on. And yet the standard of education is abysmal.

 

Here in Australia, we have confused quality of education with money spent on it.

 

I would like to make people have to show they understood the physics of driving to get a license... this makes me a grumpy old git, out of touch with modern education.

There's definitely some bizarre form of elitism developing with education.

 

We were hoping to emigrate to Oz this year but we hit a snag.

 

My wife has worked in telcoms as a Telecom officer for 17 years yet the assessing board in Australia demands a degree in telecoms in order to assess her skills We did query whether a degree was relevant as she started work before you needed a qualification to wipe your butt, and 17 years with the same company more than proves her competency however "computer said no". Irritating as the job is on the skills list

 

So unfortunately we are staying in the UK for now as although she is more than good enough for the top telecom company over here, she's considered too poorly educated to work in a country which is very behind with its telecom infrastructure it is infuriating, but hopefully something will change.

 

Sorry to go on, it boils my bladder

 

 

[old man emu]

So which of these characters was the Robin Hood? Was it Thomas?

None of them.

 

Phillips and Keatman propose three men:

 

1. Robert Hood of Wakefield - the Robin of early ballads

 

2. Fulk Fitz Warine an Earl of Shropshire - the Robin of the Renaissance stories

 

3. Robert Fitz Odo of Loxley in Warwickshire

 

OME

 

 

[Soleair]

I feel your pain, Spooks.

 

Why not consider matching bureaucratic jobsworths' myopia with private enterprise? Try these:

 

The BEST Fake Diplomas, Transcripts & Degrees Online!

 

Next Day Diplomas - Fake Diplomas - Fake Transcripts - College, High School, Equivalency

 

http://fakediplomanow.com/

 

etc.......

 

 

[Spooks]

We had considered it (thanks for the suggestion!) as an unaccredited degree in telecoms would just require a competency demonstration report. Unfortunately we would have to back date it as her previous 17 years experience would be classed as unqualified

 

But on a good note! She is using this setback as an opportunity and is retraining as a nurse next year. So we'll try again in five years time

 

 

[Bruce]

Keep trying Spooks, the system is so crazy that something might just work, like applying for special treatment on account of being handicapped by being married to an aviation nut.

 

Australia has no quality control on university degrees. You can get a masters degree for grade 7 stuff and you can have a much harder course for an associate diploma from another place. I think they are not allowed to fail anybody these days, but still you need to enroll and go through motions for years.

 

 

[old man emu]

Spooks,

 

Since you live in Birmingham, you could always crawl under a German HVG at Felixstowe and get across the Channel. Then dressed as a fleeing minority member, fly to Bali, and from there sail a small boat to Australia. When you get here, seek political asylum because you were being persecuted by Sharia law in your native land.

 

OME

 

 

[Spooks]

If we stay in the EU I might be able to claim political asylum anyway

 

 

[Yenn]

It took several years for my grand daughter in law to become an Australian citizen. She was a Pom. It would probably been a lot faster if she had been a Muslim refugee.

 

 

[old man emu]

Iv'e just started to read the book:

 

"The Grand Deception" by Tom Curran. Published in 2015 ISBN 978-1-925275-00-1 . OME

The author is bringing up a mass of evidence detailing Churchill's interference in the operational side of the Royal Navy's activities, and so far I'm only up to January 1915.

 

Apparently, the Royal Navy studied the idea of forcing the Dardanelles back in 1911 an determined that to do so successfully required a joint land and sea operation of massive proportions.

 

As I read I fear that I am going to end up agreeing with FT's side of the argument.

 

OME

 

 

[Bruce]

Those WW1 imperial Russians were dreadful. They used to lower their artillery to speed up their own troops during an attack.

 

They really deserved it when the troops finally revolted in 1918 and strung up the generals on their way home.

 

So meeting up with that lot by taking over the Dardanelles would have been a bad thing.

 

I wonder to this day whether this event was a factor in the British finally agreeing to end the war in 1918. England would never have been the same if there was a troop revolt.

 

 

[old man emu]

The whole Dardanelles saga is a complex web of local nationalism, political diplomacy, end-of-empire decay, Western European trade imperialism and so on and so forth.

 

What we suffer from is that at the time Australia and New Zealand were necessarily introverted in their foreign and domestic policy because they were trying to get their countries established. Also, no one then had the access to confidential government papers that are now available for research. Also, the people did not control the dissemination of knowledge as we do at the start of the 21st Century. Could your Great-grandparents communicate in seconds with people all around the world from their own homes?

 

How well are you informed of the political/historical situation of the Middle East as it has reached this stage compared to the situation in that corner of the Mediterranean back at the turn of the 20th Century? Our great-grandfathers knew nothing. They went to war as British patriots, and fought and died in blind ignorance.

 

OME