How true is it that Brits sent wave after wave of Aussies to

>>2261956
Look at the average Australian post on 4chan and tell me you're surprised that they didn't care for these people.

>>2262029
I think Aussies are amazing posters.

File: 1445992309336.webm (3MB, 640x350px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x350px

>>2262151
t. Aussie

It's more like they wanted to break the stalemate in the west, which was meat grinding everyone.

All they ended up doing was creating a new stalemate in the east.

>>2261956
British men: 340,000 (including Newfounders and Indians)
Casualties: 120,000

Australian men: 50,000
Casualties: 28,000

Somewhat myth but Aussies did bare the brunt.

They did that for other reasons, not because they want to genocide Australians

File: churchill_admiralty.jpg (39KB, 300x381px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 300x381px

dude soft underbelly lmao.

>>2262248
He referred to Italy as the "soft underbelly" during WWII, not the Ottoman Empire in WWI.

File: 1479877885639.png (19KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 499x499px

>>2262236
>British men: 340,000 (including Newfounders and Indians)

Yeah, the famous Britons from Canada and India

>>2262364
Canada was a settler state though, unless they exclusively sent natives.

>>2261956
myth, the aussies formed a minority in the gallipoli campaign.

as for not caring about troops they showed the same concern for the aussies as they showed to everyone else.

>>2262364
Most people in Canada & Newfoundland that went to war where either immigrants from the UK, or still held ties to the place.
Newfies in particular where willing to bleed for their right to remain a colony rather than join Canada up until it merged, which was a tad controversial.
I have neighbors in Ontario who still claim Canada kept forcing referendums until the odds went in their favour. I believe it was 52% in favour of Canada, which is surprising because Newfoundland was essentially ruined for its support of Britain in the wars and responsible government essentially guaranteed a miserable existence.

>>2262438
Soooooo... not much?

There's a great myth here in Australia that most of those deaths came from British orders and that Australian officers dreaded the orders but had to do it for "muh king and cuntry". In honesty, most of the orders came from Australian officers who either had no idea what they were doing or were determined to throw men at the enemy in order to break their lines.

The ANZAC myth is integral to the foundations of this country as a Federation. Even as early as the 1880's, Sir Henry Parkes was already planning to build a pre-emptive mausoleum for Australians who were to die in some "great war" which would unify the colonies.

>>2261956
>How true is it that Brits sent wave after wave of Aussies to the slaughter at Gallipoli because they didn't care about colonials?
Bullshit.
>Is it a myth to build up Australian nationalism...?
I don't know where the fuck this meme came from. This myth has not been pushed by any documentary I have seen or historian I have read. There's only a few Aussie retards that I've seen push it, and only here and the odd idiot in article comments, doesn't even seem that broadly held an opinion.

>>2262683
That stupid Mel Gibson movie is where it came from.

>>2263110
The CO was Aussie though, not English (Peter Weir BTW, Gibson only started).

>>2263117
starred* fucking auto-correct

>>2262639
well they wanted to minimise casualties up to a point, if only so they didnt run out of troops, but past that point they were willing to trade men for advantage

>>2261956
That isn't the point of the event, it's that as the other anon posted it was a very bloody event (>50% casualties) in difficult terrain and one of our first major showings.