Jackson Jive
Oct 9th 2009 | 11:30 pm
#241
Account Closed
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,784
Re: Jackson Jive
And people in the UK don't use the work "Paki"? I heard it used several times. The fact is that there is an element in ALL Western societies who are racist. I teach in a high school and there are some Aussie kids who are racist and I discuss their attitudes with them, but my most racist student is from Birmingham, he is constantly calling other kids in the class racist names and making racist comments in general. I don't like the racist element in Australia, I just don't like the high handed, holier than thou attitudes being expressed by other countries that I find highly hypocritical.
Oct 9th 2009 | 11:43 pm
#243
Account Closed
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 546
Re: Jackson Jive
I wouldn't spend a second of my life with people who think it is amusing to use the terms coon and boong/bung when talking abut aboriginal people .. it's not nice at all... the terms are rude ... there is no nice way of saying these words. It's like some white folk in america that casually refer to black people as niggers.
Oct 10th 2009 | 12:23 am
#244
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 691
Re: Jackson Jive
As I can't be arsed taking this any further and I would have hoped you would have researched your own subject, I will just settle for a cut and paste.
Historical Criticism
Gallipoli shows much of the conditions and events that soldiers endured in the Gallipoli theater of war. The most notable deviation of the film from reality, and the one for which it has been most criticized, is its portrayal of the chain of command at the Nek. Although he is seen wearing an AIF uniform, Colonel Robinson is often mistaken for an Englishman due to his accent, which is in fact a clipped Anglo-Australian accent typical of the time and not a deliberate attempt to mislead the audience.
In any case, Colonel Robinson's character equates to the brigade-major of the 3rd Brigade, Colonel J.M. Antill, an Australian Boer War veteran. Indeed very little British command and control was exercised at the Nek. In his best-selling history, Gallipoli (2001) Les Carlyon agrees that the film unfairly portrays the English during the battle and Carlyon lays the blame squarely at the feet of Antill and 3rd Australian Light Horse Brigade commander Brigadier General Frederic Hughes - "The scale of the tragedy of the Nek was mostly the work of two Australian incompetents, Hughes and Antill."[8]
The film implies that the fictional and benevolent General Gardiner called off the attack, when in reality the attack petered out when half of the 4th wave charged without orders whilst the surviving regimental commander in the trenches, Lieutenant Colonel Noel Brazier, attempted to get the attack called off.
Other critics, Carlyon included, have pointed out that the Australian attack at the Nek was a diversion for the New Zealanders' attack on Sari Bair, not the British landing at Suvla. The British were therefore not 'drinking tea on the beach' while Australians died for them. Moreover two companies of a British regiment, the Royal Welch Fusiliers, in fact suffered very heavy losses trying to support the Australian attack at the Nek once it was realized that the offensive was in trouble.[9] Some have also criticized the film for its portrayal of British officers and their disdain for Australian discipline behind the lines. According to Robert R James, no evidence for any such disdain on the part of British commanders for their Australian troops actually exists;[10] however, British command's low regard for the discipline level of Australian troops behind the lines has been widely documented by old historians (such as C.W. Bean) and new ones (Les Carlyon) alike and by oral tradition of the survivors.
Historical Criticism
Gallipoli shows much of the conditions and events that soldiers endured in the Gallipoli theater of war. The most notable deviation of the film from reality, and the one for which it has been most criticized, is its portrayal of the chain of command at the Nek. Although he is seen wearing an AIF uniform, Colonel Robinson is often mistaken for an Englishman due to his accent, which is in fact a clipped Anglo-Australian accent typical of the time and not a deliberate attempt to mislead the audience.
In any case, Colonel Robinson's character equates to the brigade-major of the 3rd Brigade, Colonel J.M. Antill, an Australian Boer War veteran. Indeed very little British command and control was exercised at the Nek. In his best-selling history, Gallipoli (2001) Les Carlyon agrees that the film unfairly portrays the English during the battle and Carlyon lays the blame squarely at the feet of Antill and 3rd Australian Light Horse Brigade commander Brigadier General Frederic Hughes - "The scale of the tragedy of the Nek was mostly the work of two Australian incompetents, Hughes and Antill."[8]
The film implies that the fictional and benevolent General Gardiner called off the attack, when in reality the attack petered out when half of the 4th wave charged without orders whilst the surviving regimental commander in the trenches, Lieutenant Colonel Noel Brazier, attempted to get the attack called off.
Other critics, Carlyon included, have pointed out that the Australian attack at the Nek was a diversion for the New Zealanders' attack on Sari Bair, not the British landing at Suvla. The British were therefore not 'drinking tea on the beach' while Australians died for them. Moreover two companies of a British regiment, the Royal Welch Fusiliers, in fact suffered very heavy losses trying to support the Australian attack at the Nek once it was realized that the offensive was in trouble.[9] Some have also criticized the film for its portrayal of British officers and their disdain for Australian discipline behind the lines. According to Robert R James, no evidence for any such disdain on the part of British commanders for their Australian troops actually exists;[10] however, British command's low regard for the discipline level of Australian troops behind the lines has been widely documented by old historians (such as C.W. Bean) and new ones (Les Carlyon) alike and by oral tradition of the survivors.
Oct 10th 2009 | 12:36 am
#245
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 691
Re: Jackson Jive
The key fact which is wrong, Is the diversionary charge on The Nek is shown in the movie to be covering for British troops landing at sulva bay when it fact they were protecting Kiwis.
You should read Australian author Les Carlyon's acclaimed Gallipoli book. It is his view that the scale of the disaster at the Nek lays at the hands of Two Australian officers, Hughes and Antill. His book is accepted as the authority on this campaign.
2 companies of British troops suffered massive losses going in to assist the Anzacs.
None of this is known by watching the movie of course...
You should read Australian author Les Carlyon's acclaimed Gallipoli book. It is his view that the scale of the disaster at the Nek lays at the hands of Two Australian officers, Hughes and Antill. His book is accepted as the authority on this campaign.
2 companies of British troops suffered massive losses going in to assist the Anzacs.
None of this is known by watching the movie of course...
Oct 10th 2009 | 12:56 am
#246
Account Closed
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,188
Re: Jackson Jive
You're an idiot and nothing anybody says here will change that. Make sure you reinforce Creationist theory as well next time you are teaching 'history'.
Last edited by iamthecreaturefromuranus; Oct 10th 2009 at 1:01 am.
Oct 10th 2009 | 10:14 am
#249
Banned
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,855
Re: Jackson Jive
l think l read somewhere a reason for the failure might have been a element of racism, those that planned the campaign might have underestimated the Turks and thought they were inferior, all the British had to do was show their might , the British navy would sail in and bombard the shore and Turkeys capital city with its cannons and they would all just run away and surrender. Instead the Turks sunk the British navy with mines and onshore cannons and then defeated the allies on land.
Oct 10th 2009 | 1:37 pm
#250
Banned
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 22,348
Re: Jackson Jive
Originally Posted by mohogony:
All those English inbred upper class Champagne sipping generals that thought ordering men to run straight into the German machine guns like at the Somme was he way to win the war, it was Aussie generals like Monash that had the brains to use new tactics that won the war.
Actually, Mohogony is correct. At first I also disbelieved it but further research appears to confirm that it's true.
All those English inbred upper class Champagne sipping generals that thought ordering men to run straight into the German machine guns like at the Somme was he way to win the war, it was Aussie generals like Monash that had the brains to use new tactics that won the war.
Actually, Mohogony is correct. At first I also disbelieved it but further research appears to confirm that it's true.
Oct 10th 2009 | 1:57 pm
#251
Banned
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,855
Re: Jackson Jive
Originally Posted by mohogony:
All those English inbred upper class Champagne sipping generals that thought ordering men to run straight into the German machine guns like at the Somme was he way to win the war, it was Aussie generals like Monash that had the brains to use new tactics that won the war.
Actually, Mohogony is correct. At first I also disbelieved it but further research appears to confirm that it's true.
All those English inbred upper class Champagne sipping generals that thought ordering men to run straight into the German machine guns like at the Somme was he way to win the war, it was Aussie generals like Monash that had the brains to use new tactics that won the war.
Actually, Mohogony is correct. At first I also disbelieved it but further research appears to confirm that it's true.
Oct 10th 2009 | 2:04 pm
#252
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,463
From: Brisvegas
Re: Jackson Jive
If you guys are really interested in the factual events of WWI, there's a really good Australian War Records site with heaps of information available. I sat down with my husband one night (he does all our family history research) reading the witness statements about the death of my grandfathers, dad, brother, and uncle that were all killed within a week of each other in France during WWI. It was really sad, but it gave an insight into the men that you don't get from just hearing second hand stories. There was also some doubt in my family as to whether one of my relatives had actually died or whether he'd run off after receiving a "dear john" letter. We found his records and he was definitely killed. I can't remember which site it was, but the list of war record sites are here http://www.nla.gov.au/oz/genelist.html#Military. Might make for interesting Sunday reading in what I hear is still a pretty cold spring in the southern states right now.
Oct 10th 2009 | 2:27 pm
#253
Banned
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,855
Re: Jackson Jive
What a waste of life, all for nothing just because some mad Serb shot some Austrian Prince. Also WW1 created the conditions for Hitler to come to power and start ww2.
Last edited by mohogony; Oct 10th 2009 at 2:32 pm.
Oct 10th 2009 | 3:00 pm
#255
Banned
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,855
Re: Jackson Jive
yes, Britain spends most the 19th century Fighting France and
most of the 20th century fighting Germany so it does'nt have to become a part of Europe then in the 21st century it just hands the country over to Europe.
most of the 20th century fighting Germany so it does'nt have to become a part of Europe then in the 21st century it just hands the country over to Europe.
Last edited by mohogony; Oct 10th 2009 at 3:02 pm.
