Why are British such terrible allies?

>ANZAC's enemies cared more for their well being than their allies

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beersheba_(1917)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Magdhaba
youtube.com/watch?v=SuofQ5LdtT8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

Australians and New Zealanders seemed to be treated as cannon fodder. The Turks knew they were combating an inexperienced and young enemy so maybe they had sympathy. Some Australians were only armed with a bayonet while Ottomans had been given German weaponry and proper guns, it was probably demoralising even the Turks to fight Anzacs at times.

...

Problem is this country making a lauding of failure like Ypres and Gallipoli and not successes like
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beersheba_(1917)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Magdhaba

Hell we rampaged all the way from Libya through Egypt and Palestine kicking the fucking crap out of everyone, fucking peacenik cunt journos...

...

Thanks for sharing those, interesting to see Australian leaders and victory over the ottomans but yeah we dwell a lot on the hardships and painful loses of ww1

>we
what part of the army are you from m8?

War correspondents and journalists are generally hated by anyone who's been in them military for being scumbags out for a story.
Heck, we even had Sir John Monash through WW1 who was possibly one of the best generals of his time and had quite a number of victories like the Second Battle of Villers-Bretonneux (oh and we stole a German tank for good measure) and instituted some quite modern reforms to our military

Former Aust-Army- officer

you fucking ungrateful sods, britain literary invented you, nurtured you, protected you and you whine over a booboo at galipoli. you would be nothing, a literal abbo desert if it werent for the united kingdom.

fucking scum of the earth, no wonder you are convict descended probably welsh as well

>Dat pic.

Whoever made it should be hanged in Taksim square.

its important to remember gallipoli because our countrymen under the command of the british died achieving nothing
its not a lesson of what we can do as a nation like a big successful campaign, its a lesson of what can go wrong and what we can lose

eh, ANZAC soldiers were all British-born anyway

...

it was Churchill's fault anyway
and I doubt the British ever helped much
they did not even send redcoats to help us out during the land wars

Atagay being a euro cuck as he was always been.

You don't into the comprehension much do you?

People also forget that the British & French died at the Gallipoli and in far greater numbers than the ANZAC forces. We lost around bit under 10,000 killed, the Brits & French where about 45,000 if I remember correctly (plus some Indian forces) and the Turks where about 55-57,000
There's lessons to be learned from failure for sure, the hardest ones. But we can also learn to celebrate success too.

More Brits died at Gallipoli than Aus or Kiwi soldiers combined. It was a strategic disaster, but they butchered their own as well as us.

...

I love this

Yeah, if only he'd be more like old m8 recep e. turning a great country into fucking Çomaristan

>a great country

Obviously never been to Turkey in 90s.

>they butchered their own as well as us.
true enough the empire was still a thing and many subjects felt the need to prove themselves
also after having participated in the second boer war without much trouble people figured what's the harm in a bit of fun
battle of chunuk bair was pretty cool even if it there is not really a feeling it made a difference

>this is what people actually believe

You were/are British, in a British expedition, with soldiers from England, Scotland, Wales, New Zealand and Australia. Lots of people died, you werent a seperate entity or side who was badly done to or treated, people from everywhere just died.

just the entire thing was a waste of time
and Zealand has a pretty small population even today

All of world war 1 was a waste of time, so was world war 2. Europeans are the biggest bunch of ingrates on the planet.

The UK literally fought WW2 to protect Poland from the Nazis you dipshit.

All of it was a waste, imagine how much better the world would be if not for WW1+2

Well Britain wouldn't have gone broke and ended up spending everything on defending France.. then having to do it again in WW2 which bankrupted the country well into the 1960s and it was still kind of shitty in the 80s.
The amount of money that went into just munitions alone was enough to soak up most of the Brit Empires cash and not counting an entire generation of men that simply disappeared. Kind of funny how people hammer on the Brits for a lot of things, but to be honest they didn't 'absolutely have to' abide by their defence treaty with France and go as nuts deep as they did- but it was to some extent the morally correct thing to do and they did it.

Same with WW2, euro's poke them and go 'wah, you didn't come rescue us from zee germans', but both the UK and France where absolutely tapped out in 1939, they where fucking broke ass and barely able to help themselves, let alone anyone else. It'd actually be quite interesting to imagine what the UK would be like if they didn't blow the bank on fighting wars.

before the outbreak of ww1 many European city's were apparently oddly calm
youtube.com/watch?v=SuofQ5LdtT8

even out of context
this image comes to mind

ANZAC = white men beaten by Turk goat herders with shitty weapons and tactics. Kiwis/Aussies are only good for catching bullets.

>ausfailians literally had to fall for turkish propaganda to create something resembling a national identity
>in reality there 400k brits, 70k frenchmen and 60k ANZACS at Gallipoli. Brits constituting the vast majority of casualities.

>Gallipoli
>Singapore
>Gazala
Why was the U.K. so shit at war in the 20th century?