Thread replies: 10
Thread images: 3
Anonymous
2015-11-22 16:13:37 Post No. 27956325
[Report]
Image search:
[Google]
Anonymous
2015-11-22 16:13:37
Post No. 27956325
[Report]
Was Gallipoli a doomed operation from the start?
In Churchill's memoirs, he claims that he never intended taking the Dardanelles with ground troops. HIS plan was to hit the coast with a naval barrage to secure it, using the ships that the Royal Navy would have scrapped by the end of the war anyway since Dreadnaughts and new tech came to the fore in 1906. The point of a naval operation would have been to use ships that were disposable, and allow them to get some sort of gain before they were doomed for the scrap heap anyway.
Churchill in part blames the Admirals who had an emotional connection to these ships, claiming that instead of seeing the ships as an asset to be disposed, they rather saw them as a charge to protect. The admirals pulled back when mines started to hit their ships, and then gave the Turks 5 weeks to prepare rather than launching a surprise operation.
But of course, it was Churchill's plan and in his memoirs he would try to mend his character for one of the great failures of his career.
So was Churchill really to blame? Or was he just a victim of people meddling with his original plan until it became something that no one really wanted?
