Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: rlmorel

Churchill was not involved in the execution of the plans at the Dardanelles. The British drew short straws in the on the spot leadership in both the Naval and Military departments. De Robeck and Ian Hamilton were both remarkably good at missing opportunities.

And there is the matter of extreme bad luck, which haunted the Naval assault especially.


60 posted on 12/24/2017 7:36:16 AM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: buwaya

Hamilton wasn’t given the troops that he needed (and asked for) and didn’t have adequate air support, particularly in the early phases.


65 posted on 12/24/2017 7:48:03 AM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: buwaya

Of course Churchill wasn’t involved in the execution at the operational level, but he was fully involved in the conceptual aspect and approval of it, and in conception, it was a very, very bad concept.

The failure of that should have rested squarely on his shoulders. That he was able to resurrect his career later on is a tribute to him.

There was a very high degree of contempt (and rightfully so in some aspects) for “The Sick Man of Europe”, but to base the entire success on the plan on the judgement that they would just fold on their own land was beyond stupid.


66 posted on 12/24/2017 7:48:33 AM PST by rlmorel (Liberals: American Liberty is the egg that requires breaking to make their Utopian omelette.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson