bu kadar geniş olma

@@CIHANOZEL-ij6vd ne diyon ya

As a Turk i hate our enemies, you should change your sick mind.🇹🇷

@@muharebe_istasyonu saçmalama

​@muharebe_istasyonu enemies?

'More & more people disregard & dishonour these brave men...' if this is so, they are fools whose opinions can be ignored.

Just got back from my dawn service. Nz here too bruh

@@AtraaHaha, Yes we certainly can’t forget the brother country across the pond.

ANZAC, Australia and New Zealand mate. Been to the dawn service this morning, it's growing in size every year. Regards from New Zealand.

No one I know of or have seen disregards or dishonours these men. Not sure WTF you’re talking about. If anything, it’s the complete opposite. There is a lot of somber respect.

Well it has a lot to do with why this day was chosen. It is no celebration or glorification of war. The Turks and ANZACs had no beef with each other, but we all died for a cause that really didn't affect us either.

​​@@glenchapman3899 We Turks had a reasonible cause, we defended our fatherland against invaders.

@@muharebe_istasyonu Sorry I didn't mean it that way. Our two countries had no beef with each other. We were only there because the British told us to be. But if we had not gone there, you would not have come looking for us either if that makes sense. The fact that the average ANZAC had more respect for Turkish troops than their own commanding officers is very telling

@@glenchapman3899 You're right mate im sorry, the only reason of this nonsense was British Empire.

Thank you for your comment!

We are glad you enjoyed the video!

@@BattleGuideVT 429 am is the correct time for dawn service as it was the landing time for ANZACs...im a veteran who has done 3 trips there....dived gallipoli last year on the wrecks and was there for 75th where i dived as a navy diver..and went for 100th... ANZAC descendant also

Prodphetic bye cumtz grow up its on

There is no such thing called Anzac Cove, you named it. İts our land and named Kaba Tepe.

@@muharebe_istasyonu 1985 yılındaki Anzak Günü'nde "Anzak Koyu" adı Türk hükümeti tarafından resmen tanındı.. Time to lose the hatred buddy

​@@muharebe_istasyonuaww my bro thats the fat shut down. Its okay

@@jammyscouser2583 My condolences for your uncle. I hope such pain never happens again. That person who commented is a complete idiot. Turks like that are very few. As a Turk, I know history well and as dear Ataturk said, I say that the Johns who died there are no different from our Mehmets.

Absolutely beautiful. How are you doing?

Awesome, thank you!

Thank you, currently writing this from the ANZAC service in Christchurch :)

Thank you kindly!

Thank you!

Wow, thank you!

Thank you kindly!

Glad you enjoyed it

Thanks for liking

You're very welcome!

Thank you too!

Glad you enjoyed it!

Thank you for your comment!

Thanks Jack!

Thanks for the kind words Alex.

@@BattleGuideVT Anytime! Keep up the nice work. I appreciate the videos that you make :).

I made sense by did not work how they what’d it.

It didn't really. British Intelligence had already done an extensive study in 1906 (google British Naval Intelligence Study 1906 and you can read the report for yourself) that predicted, with scary accuracy, what would happen if they tried to force the straits by Sea or Land in the event of war with the Ottomans. This information was well known yet the War Council ignored it ... and nearly everything the study predicted in 1906 happened in 1915.

Much appreciated!

Thankyou

Glad you enjoyed it

@@BattleGuideVTI Enjoyed it too. As someone that loves history, this channel needs more subs.

We are glad you enjoyed the video!

We are glad you enjoyed the video!

Thank you

What was it you particularly liked about it?

@@BattleGuideVT the story. The footage. Just seemed more in depth I guess.

Thanks we always appreciate feedback.

Thanks George... glad you enjoyed it.

Check out our Mons video. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mbRjl8yTp7ysmX0.html&ab_channel=BattleGuide

Glad you got value out of it Sean

He was Peter Lalor's Grandson

@@OldFellaDave thanks I remember reading it in a book called Digger.

Ben Türk'üm. Benim Dedem Çanakkale Savaşına katıldı ve sağ döndü. Evet unutmayacağız ve unutturmayacağız. Biz işgal için gelen herkes ile savaşmaya her zaman hazırız, en zayıf zamanımız da bile.

That is most unfortunate. Every dawn and other service I have ever been in my life had NZ representation and that includes services in country areas. This is a solemn day for both our countries. Commemorate in peace; Lest we forget

We always sing the NZ national anthem at the Wagga dawn service followed by the Australian anthem, hopefully they were just an exception and not an example

Had the same experience on the Gold Coast Australia ANZAC day 2003. My great Uncle died on Chunuk Bair. The fact the NZers weren't mentioned angered me. I respect both Australians , NZers and Turks who gave their lives

We're very fortunate where I am (southern Victoria, Australia) that we have an absolutely stunning vocalist singing the New Zealand and Australian anthems. Always, always New Zealand is given equal footing in the remembrance of Gallipoli as long as I can remember, from earliest school days to the present in every place I've lived. I'm so sorry your experience of ANZAC Day in/from Australia has been different. That's so wrong and disrespectful. 😢

Hope you enjoyed it mate.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! It's awesome to see viewers diving deep into the historical content.

This is the first of 6 videos on the subject

We specifically say "Australian and New Zealand Army Corps, or ANZACS as they became known"

​@@BattleGuideVT In the first sentence you said "thousands of Australian troops."

Correct, no New Zealanders landed at dawn. They came ashore later as we discuss in detail in the video.

Also read Hugh Dolan's book '36 Days - The Untold Story Behind the Gallipoli Landings'. What is important to note is that Hugh Dolan had a keen desire to understand the truth surrounding the events of 25th April 1915 which spurned the Anzac tradition as his Great Grandfather was engaged in that event. He says that like many Australians he had been raised to believe that the British had been in control of Australian troops; that the British sent the Australians to the wrong beach; and to a beach that they knew nothing about; and that the British sent the Anzacs to a murderous slaughter in the dawn of 25th April 1915. He had believed the popular rhetoric that was Lions (Anzac troops) were led by Donkeys (British Officers) and that the whole Gallipoli campaign was a bungled operation. He knew, of course, that because the Gallipoli campaign failed to achieve the objective the whole campaign has been severely criticised as being ill-conceived and poorly planned and executed. But he wanted to know if this was correct or even a fair assessment? And, does the evidence support this assessment? Most of the Anzac mythology was created using the diaries of Charles Bean, the Herald newspaper war correspondent. Charles Bean showed in his diaries that he was aware of some of the military intelligence that went into planning the Anzac landing, but he did not include it in his official history: which is the bible of Anzac mythology. That was partly because the military intelligence was kept secret until 1965. The result is that the success or failure of the Anzac landing has been judged on whether it achieved the targets outlined in the original British battle plan prepared by Sir General Ian Hamilton, the commander of the 80,000 Allied forces. Being a serving career military intelligence officer Hugh Dolan understood that knowing the plans for the Anzac landing would be crucial to fully appreciate what actually happened on 25th April 1915. What Hugh Dolan discovered overturned everything he believed and what he had been told could not be further from the truth. Hugh Dolan concludes his documentary by emphasising these points: 1. The British did not send the Anzacs to Gallipoli to be slaughtered. 2. Anzac casualties were comparatively light. 3. It was not a dawn landing for the Anzacs and the major landing was done under the cover of darkness. 4. The Anzacs landed on the correct beach (‘Z’ beach). 5. The landing was imaginatively planned by Australian Officers and was a successful operation. Hugh Dolan has stressed that if Australians want to properly acknowledge the events of the Anzacs at Gallipoli then they must get the record right and not perpetuates myths that may be popular. This is what Hugh Dolan has outlined in his documentary mentioned and in his book. Around 5am on 25th April 1915, the Australian Lieutenant General William Birdwood contacted Sir General Ian Hamilton to advise him that 5,500 Anzacs had already landed on ‘Z’ beach - and dawn wasn't until 5.20am. The Anzacs had landed under the cover of darkness. This was before Sir General Ian Hamilton had even commenced his planned British attack which was to commence at 7am after heavy bombardment from the British Naval guns. By the time the Australian war correspondent Charles Bean landed on ‘Z’ beach shortly after dawn on 25th April 1915, 8,500 Anzacs had already made it to shore. It is important to note that Sir General Hamilton planned for British troops to land on the southern part of the Gallipoli peninsula and for them to move northwards towards the forts protecting the entrance to the Dardanelles and for the Anzacs to land on the northern part of the Gallipoli peninsula and move southwards to the fort. The Anzacs were to land on beaches between two points - Fisherman’s Hut and Kaba Tepe and the whole sector was called ‘Z’ beach and was five kilometers long. Responsibility for planning the Anzac landing was with the Australian Major General William Bridges. Major General William Bridges was 54 years old and a professional soldier. His headquarters were aboard a converted cruise liner named Minnewaska which was anchored in Limnos Harbour about 2 kilometers from ‘Z’ beach. On 13th April 1915 Major General Bridges gathered his staff to plan the Anzacs landing on ‘Z’ beach. Major Charles Villiers-Stuart was amongst the staff gathered and as Intelligence Officer for Anzac Command it was his job to know everything about ‘Z’ beach. At that time he knew virtually nothing and the only information he had from air recognizance was that there were no Turkish guns protecting ‘Z’ beach which led to the assumption that it was unprotected. Major Charles Villiers-Stuart decided to go and have a look for himself. However, due to the ship’s distance from the shore and the five kilometer length of shoreline he was unable to see into the rocky terrain to determine if there were any guns protecting the beaches. As a consequence the ship was diverted to the island of Tenedos. Tenedos was the base for a squadron of the British Royal Navy Air Service. Commander Charles Samson of the Royal Naval flying Squadron was approached by Major Charles Villiers-Stuart and was asked to fly him over the Gallipoli Peninsula so that he could see what defences the Turks had. On 14th April 1915 Commander Charles Samson flew Major Charles Villiers-Stuart over the Gallipoli Peninsula and in particular the hills and gullies of ‘Z’ beach. What Major Villiers Stuart saw changed everything for him. He was able to see the full extent of the Turkish defences and this concerned him greatly. He sat in the back seat of the two-man biplane with a pair of binoculars and a 1/40,000 scale map. He was able to determine the strength and position of the Turkish forces on the ridges behind Anzac Cove. When Major Villiers-Stuart returned to his headquarters on board ship he studied his sketches and the notes that he gathered from his flight over ‘Z’ beach. He then made an accurate and detailed model of ‘Z’ beach. On this model he showed exactly where Turkish guns and tents for their troops were located. He knew how many Turkish soldiers were assigned to each tent so he was able to establish the number of Turkish soldiers who would be defending ‘Z’ beach and where they would be located. At the subsequent intelligence briefing, Major Villiers-Stuart told his superiors that Sir General Hamilton's assumptions about the northern beaches being relatively unprotected were wrong. ‘Z’ beach was defended by several batteries, barbed wire and entrenchments. Major Villiers-Stuart explained in detail the model he had created and the detailed map he drew of the Turkish defences to Major General Bridges. Major General Bridges became extremely concerned when he realised that his troops were going to get slaughtered by the 32 artillery barrels pointing at them when landing and then running up the beach. The original Hamilton plan had been for the Anzacs to attack at the same time as the British, about 7am. Major General Bridges then decided on something completely unorthodox and which had not been practised in modern military history. He proposed a plan to have his Anzac troops land differently to the way Sir General Hamilton had planned for his British troops to land. It was Sir General Hamilton’s plan to land his troops at daybreak after heavy bombardment of the hills and shores by the British Naval guns. In contrast to this, Major General Bridges opted for a surprise landing under the cover of darkness and before any naval bombardment. Major General Bridges’ plan was meticulous and carefully planned right down to the placement of carpet on the decks of the warships to muffle the sound of the men's hobnail boots. Velvet was put around the oarlocks of the rowing boats to also muffle any sound. Major General Bridges sought and gained permission from Sir General Hamilton for his new plan and to change his orders instead of landing and advancing across the Gallipoli peninsula to Maidos on the Dardenelles, his new objective was to land and draw the Turkish forces onto them, giving the British the breathing space to land the main attack in the south. He reasoned to General Hamilton that the naval bombardment would alert the Turks to the imminent landing of troops and as a result they would be fully ready to fire at the landing troops. It must be noted that the British flew 18 photographic missions over the beaches where their troops were going to land. Sir General Hamilton is reported as saying when he saw them that he expected to lose 50% of his troops during the landing. Unlike the Australian Commanders who altered their plans based on the photographic evidence they had, Sir General Hamilton did not deviate from his original landings plan. (This may raise serious questions but it must be understood that General Hamilton had a large fleet of battle ships at his disposal. He rightly would be expected to use the guns on these ships to bombard the Turkish positions with a view to knocking out as many of their guns as possible and also kill as many of the Turkish soldiers as possible before attempting to land his own troops. He could not use the guns on his battle ships once the landing of his troops was underway). Hugh Dolan produced a number of aerial maps drawn by Major Villiers-Stuart and they were dated 20th April 1915 in the Major's own handwriting. Concluding, it appears to me that Hugh Dolan has presented crucial and compelling evidence to completely justify the position he now holds. However, the traditional beliefs had been 50 years in the making before official documents were released and a nation had already been built based on those beliefs. I can't see them being changed now in the way Hugh Dolan believes they should be changed.

@@mikefairsea5898 Well written Mike, Hugh is a friend and a great person to sit and chat with.

@@mark703 Thanks. When you next see Hugh will you please thank him from me for his service to our country. I learnt so much from his book and I get angry when I read denigrating posts based on myth and ignorance. For information, I honour all people who fight to defend their country. My grandfather and a number of uncles were killed in France during WWI as soldiers of the British armed forces. My father served in WWII with the RAF. My eldest brother did National Service with the RAF and my youngest brother did National Service as a conscript with the Australian Army in 1968. I was called up in 1965 in the first intake of National Service conscription for service in Vietnam. Luckily for me I failed my medical examination. A classmate of mine from school was also called up and we met when we had our medical examinations. He passed his medical, went to Vietnam and was killed at the battle of Long Tan in August 1966 at the age of 21. It shook me as I realised that I could have been alongside him if I had passed my medical. So here I am at 79 years of age having had the opportunity to have lived a long and fulfilling life and having had the opportunity to benefit from the research done by experts.

The intelligence the British and Anzacs had was good as period documents prove. Its use, maybe not so good. Dawn was and hour earlier than that, so local time 04.20 hrs or there abouts

@@militaryhistorian Thereabouts - dawn was actually 5.27am and Sunrise was 5.56am.

Stupid question of the week - does/has the time of Dawn on April 25th in the area changed in the last 100 years? Would be a very simple matter to clear the confusion/disagreement ... :)

@@OldFellaDave If you are an old fella like I am you should be able to answer your own question by looking back over your own life and discount the effects that the introduction of daylight saving might have. I had two lengthy responses deleted before the very much abbreviated one above was retained. The short answer to your question is any change would be counted in milli-seconds and not hours. Confusion has arisen here because twilight had been ignored. Twilight precedes first light (dawn) and first light (dawn) precedes sunrise. To give an example here is the details of time for Gallipoli for 28 April 2024 when I wrote my original response. Twilight commenced at 04.08am; First light (dawn) occurred at 05.23am; and sunrise was at 05.52am. On 25 April 2024 first light (dawn) was 05.27am and sunrise was 05.56am. These time periods were obtained from the following website which you may access to confirm 'www.sunrisesunsettime.org/europe/italy/gallipoli.htm'. I am just an old guy and I am not an expert on anything. I found Hugh Dolan's material extremely informative and compelling. Hugh Dolan was a career Military Intelligence Officer. He had access to official government documents that had not been released for public knowledge until 1965, fifty years after the Anzac Day landing. By then much of the Anzac tradition had been 'set in stone' and many myths had been accepted as fact. Hugh Dolan believes the myths should be replaced by the evidence and facts but I can't see that happening. This is what evidence Hugh Dolan gleaned from the official government documents. 1. The British did not send the Anzacs to Gallipoli to be slaughtered. 2. Anzac casualties were comparatively light. 3. It was not a dawn landing for the Anzacs and the major landing was done under the cover of darkness. 4. The Anzacs landed on the correct beach (‘Z’ beach) and about which they knew a great deal. 5. The landing was imaginatively planned by and under the command of Australian Officers and was a successful operation. 6. Anzac troops were under the command of the Australian Major General William Bridges and it was his responsibility for planning the Anzac landing. Major Charles Villiers-Stuart, Intelligence Officer of the Anzacs, actually flew over the Gallipoli Peninsula on 14 April 1915 and in particular the hills and gullies of ‘Z’ beach. He was able to see the full extent of the Turkish defences and he was able to determine the strength and position of the Turkish forces on the ridges behind Anzac Cove. The Major made a detailed model of the hills and gullies of ‘Z’ beach about which he explained comprehensively at subsequent intelligence meetings. He also produced maps he had prepared showing the Turkish defences. These maps were dated April 20th 1915 in his own handwriting. Based on the evidence provided by Major Villiers-Stuart, Major General Bridges decided on a new plan to land his Anzac troops and he sought and gained permission from Sir General Hamilton for his new plan and to change his orders. His new plan was to commence landing his troops under the cover of darkness and not as originally planned at 7am which was to coincide with the landing of the British troops. Under the cover of darkness and before the dawn General Bridges had 4,500 troops ashore and the beach head had been taken in under twenty minutes. Around 5am on 25th April 1915, the Australian Lieutenant General William Birdwood contacted Sir General Ian Hamilton to advise him that 5,500 Anzacs had already landed on ‘Z’ beach. This fact is extremely important as this number had landed before dawn. Dawn wasn't until 5.20am. By the time the war correspondent Charles Bean landed after dawn 8,500 men had already made it to shore. A photo of the beach was taken after dawn and in daylight and this photo showed only one body lying in the sand. What many overlook, I believe, is Sir General Ian Hamilton assigned the Anzacs to land on 'Z' beach which he believed to be lightly defended and some twenty odd kilometres from the heavily defended beaches. He made the decision to have his British troops to land on the beaches which he knew were most heavily defended and where the most casualties would occur. It was a war and the case could be made that Sir General Ian Hamilton was prepared to sacrifice the lives of his own British troops to lessen the number of casualties of the Anzacs. Obviously this is never considered or even mentioned because it doesn’t align with the myth that Sir General Hamilton sent the Anzacs to be slaughtered to save his troops. I hope you found this interesting and informative. I will conclude by saying that I honour all people who serve and fight for their country.

Certainly not forgotten. I am in New Zealand writing this from an ANZAC service. The first sentence of the video references the initial landings, which were all Australian, the New Zealanders arriving later in the day.

NZ is basically Australia...

Where did the 'not losing their Britishness' come from out of interest? Would like to know more!

@@BattleGuideVT Well, that's not a direct quote, it's just the general ideology that the officers had. A couple years ago, I downloaded this app about the Gallipoli landings made by the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). One of the facts that I still remember was that, contrary to popular depiction, the Australians stormed the beaches in British-style field caps rather than their infamous slouch hats. I guess 'So they don't lose their British Pride' would be more accurate.

Yes, well intentioned Im sure, but also incorrect. TV companies like to add in these throw away segments. Literally noone would wear a hat to keep their Britishness. And why would Australians want to do that at all?

@@BattleGuideVT Apparently, the app was produced by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the ABC. I can't check the app to see what it says.

There are two long held myths/beliefs about that 1. The long repeated/remembered one was it was part of the Deception Campaign that they wanted everyone wearing the British Cap as the Australians and New Zealanders wore very distinctive headwear. The Ottomans (and German General) knew the Anzacs were coming as part of any British Invasion Force. Having everyone in Caps as the uniforms were very similar (at a distance identical) and might trick the Ottomans to keep a large body of their own troops in Reserve to wait for their landing if they think it's only British Troops landing at Anzac and Helles and 2. If you read the diaries and letters of the Australians at the time (I Won't speak for any Kiwi's as I have not studied their records and letters etc) there was a very high degree of admiration, even almost hero worship, by Australians towards the British Soldier and what they represented as a distinct part of the British Empire. The British Soldier was something to aspire to. Australians wanted to be regarded as good as a British Soldier. When issued the caps they felt a closer connection to the ideal British Soldier. Many chose to keep wearing the cap long after the landing. The distinct 'Australianess' and break more towards being 'Australian' did not really take hold across the AIF until the war progressed.

Right

Yes, when the Anzacs came to Gaba Tepe. The New Zealanders landed late morning in attempts to exploit the ground already captured by the Australian 1st Division

The Australian commanders in charge of the Anzacs had extremely good knowledge about what they would be facing when landing on Gallipoli. They had aerial maps of the area they were to land as well as detailed information of the Turkish numbers and where they were located. They were produced by Major Villiers-Stuart of the Anzacs and they were dated 20th April 1915 in the Major's own handwriting. The Major actually flew over the area on 14th April 1915 to ascertain what the Anzacs were up against. As a consequence of the Major's information the Australian Commander sought and obtained approval from Sir General Hamilton to alter the time of his troops (Anzacs) landing to commence under the cover of darkness. In fact, around 5am on 25th April 1915, the Australian Lieutenant General William Birdwood contacted Sir General Ian Hamilton to advise him that 5,500 Anzacs had already landed on ‘Z’ beach - and dawn wasn't until 5.20am. View the documentary by Hugh Dolan 'Gallipoli from Above' which was on the History Channel and read his book '36 Days - The Untold Story Behind the Gallipoli Landings'. Hugh Dolan uses information from official government documents that were not made public until 1965 (fifty years after the event). By then much of the narrative surrounding the Anzac Day landing had been accepted as fact and continues to be perpetuated as such. Unfortunately from my perspective it will continue to be that way and in the process shape the opinions of many people, and sometimes partly in a negative and erroneous way. What many overlook is Sir General Ian Hamilton assigned the Anzacs to land on 'Z' beach which he believed to be lightly defended and some twenty odd kilometers away from the heavily defended beaches. He had his British troops to land on the beaches which he knew were most heavily defended. It has been reported that Sir General Ian Hamilton was of the belief that he would lose at least fifty percent of his troops (British troops) in the landing attempt and this obviously bothered him. It was a war and the case could be made that Sir General Ian Hamilton was prepared to sacrifice the lives of his own British troops to lessen the casualties of the Anzacs. But that is seldom considered or even mentioned. I do understand that many people do not like to have to alter the beliefs that they have held for a long time. I have had to change what I previously believed to be factual for over sixty years. My present understanding is based on what Hugh Dolan has produced from the official government documents made publicly available in 1965.

And Hamilton was exposed as an incompetent fool. The very epitome of the upper class British twit of a general. I agree with Montgomery’s later excoriation of the WW1 Allied leadership. Lions led by donkeys.

Can you type that in German pal? The language you would be speaking if it wasn't for Churchill. Show some honesty and stop kidding yourself it was the English.

So true. There is more to come on the British, French and even Indian contribution, much of which are untold stories

I think it's because everyone expects British and French to fight because it was their war, and their countries were directly involved and threatened, but for the Anzacs, their countries were on the opposite side of the globe, and didn't have any other reason for fighting other than being part of the commonwealth. That makes their sacrifice a bit more memorable.

My family found out just a few years ago that our Grandfather fought at Gallipoli with the 10th Irish Div. (Royal Irish Fusiliers). My aunts and uncles didn't even know. A cousin got a copy of his service record.

Australians saw themselves as British. To them, it was their war. My 6 Australian Anzac ww1 relatives, 2 uncles were born in Scotland, 4 cousins were sons of Scottish immigrants. Today, I remember my cousin, Harvey George Rae, who landed at Gallipoli with the 11th Battalion at 4.30am. 25th April 1915 (wounded at 2.30pm). My uncle, John Hutchison Duncan, 4th Battalion, wounded at the battle of Lone Pine, 6th August 1915.

This is a story about the landings at ANZAC. It was int eh title of the bloody video. No doubt they will do a video n the Landings at Helles ... and we can come and whine about Aussies not being mentioned then as well right? Just because your country, the UK, doesn't care about this small forgotten part of its vast Military history - doesn't mean we Aussies and Kiwi's need to do it for you. We commemorate OUR history - not yours.