Anzac Day

[Muschu]

For WW1 and other records the best place is here:

http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/explore/defence/service-records/army-wwi.aspx

Go to 'Find and view a WW1 service record on line'

Excellent Lert. Many thanks. Found a grandfather who served in WW1 and who was left for dead, twice, on battlefields - only to be found alive among the corpses later. He acquired, not surprisingly, the nickname "Lucky".

Any idea, please, how extensive the records are if a full copy of service is requested?

With thanks

Rick

 

[Lert]

When you find the bloke you are looking for, click the 'view digital copy' then you can step through each page. In the case of the people I've looked for in my family there were 30-50 pages. I'm not sure what you get if you order a hard copy. I just save each page to my PC.

Of the 6 family members in my family who served o/s in WW1 only one came back, and that was after being shot, gassed then 10 months as a POW. The POW bit was what saved him in the end so maybe he was 'lucky' too..

 

[Tink]

Lest we forget

 

[Calliope]

WW2 Veterans will soon be just a memory.

WHERE once there were long lines of men marching in parades that stretched the length of our cities like rows of corn, now there are only a few of those who fought in defence of Australia, and the banners they march behind are not far apart.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-...arred-by-tragedy/story-e6frgdaf-1225858135523

 

[Sean K]

Great Anzac Day for me.

Went to the Dawn Service in Melbs with my bro and was lucky to be close to the front of about 40,000 people. Great Last Post less one note. Good speaches and band work. Please lose the Welsh choir for next year.

Marched with old friends behind the new RAAMC banner.

And got pissed in the Long Room watching Essendon destroy the Pies.

Ah well, can't win em all.

 

[Calliope]

By the time Rudd's Anzac centenary arrives in 2015 the number of vets participating who have fought in defence of Australia will be only a handful.

All the battles and skirmishes and interventions our forces have been involved in after WW2 have been for other reasons...usually political.

 

[Sean K]

By the time Rudd's Anzac centenary arrives in 2015 the number of vets participating who have fought in defence of Australia will be only a handful.

All the battles and skirmishes and interventions our forces have been involved in after WW2 have been for other reasons...usually political.

You're spot on.

No one whose served in the the Defence Force in recent years has done a thing. Just sucking money off the tax payer really.

And, WWI and II weren't political at all.



Oh dear, be calm kennas

 

[Calliope]

And, WWI and II weren't political at all.

:

Well if you think fighting the Japanese for the defence of Australia was political, perhaps you could tell me what your non-political alternative would have been. Surrender?

 

[Mofra]

Was interesting to read about some of the more recent Veterans who don't participate in ANZAC day, especially those who have come back from the Gulf or Afganistan. They simply don't seem to attack the same level of respect of other veterans, despite the courage under fire many have shown.

I know people I served with who fall into this group - PTSD is a very insideous disorder to cope with, and the lack of sufficient support services for some of these people is disgraceful.

 

[Sean K]

Well if you think fighting the Japanese for the defence of Australia was political, perhaps you could tell me what your non-political alternative would have been. Surrender?

What planet are you on Calliope? It's all political.

"War is the continuation of policy (politics) by other means."
- Karl von Clausewitz

You stated that everything after WWII was just political inferring it had no point.

You think us going to the Boar War and WWI were defending our country and not 'political'. You think WWI was not political?

WWI didn't have to happen and was the result of political alliances gone horribly wrong.

Blackadder had the answer to why WWI started, but I think Baldrick nailed it at 1.09

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfIwY4Ej9aM

 

[Sean K]

What planet are you on Calliope?

Apologies if I seemed to come over as mad; I'm obviously invested in the ANZAC thingy. Grandfathers and an Uncle all served significantly and it's never, ever, ever, a wasted venture for those that serve. Especially for me.

There are more deeper philosophical reasons for people joining the ADF, but most stand by the accepted (and expected) line that they are serving the Nation. ie, You.

I stand by that in the bigger picture, the military is an instrument of our culture. Our culture dictates political decisions which dictates our international political and military decisions.

In the short term countries are stuck in near term political expediencies and there are just pockets of forward thinkers that truly see the future. In the end, it's all politics.

This diatribe regarding future military (political) decisions could go on, but I shall leave it there. For now.

 

[Calliope]

This diatribe regarding future military (political) decisions could go on, but I shall leave it there. For now.

Of course. Your long winded diatribe goes nowhere. I asked you a simple question.

Well if you think fighting the Japanese for the defence of Australia was political, perhaps you could tell me what your non-political alternative would have been. Surrender?

 

[Sean K]

Of course. Your long winded diatribe goes nowhere. I asked you a simple question.

Your question?

Well if you think fighting the Japanese for the defence of Australia was political, perhaps you could tell me what your non-political alternative would have been. Surrender?

Again, you've missed the point. It's all political and the military is the extension of politics when the coffee and biscuit round table discussions fall over. Surrender would also have been a political decision. I think you are missing the link between Defence and Politics. In the US, the President is the Commander and Chief of the Defence Forces. In Australia, the Minister for Defence is our boss. Although at one stage, I think John Howard started taking over just before the East Timor intervention.

All international conflict, and avoidance of, is political, Calliope.

Tell me what is not.

Your original intent was to denigrate anyone who had served post WWII saying we were just political tools inferring a negative connotation and meaning our service was less important than those who had truely served during 'non political' conflicts like anything before WWII.

By the time Rudd's Anzac centenary arrives in 2015 the number of vets participating who have fought in defence of Australia will be only a handful.

All the battles and skirmishes and interventions our forces have been involved in after WW2 have been for other reasons...usually political.

I made the point in regard to this that The Boar War and WWI were political for Australia. How were those conflicts directly defending our country? The only way we were defending our back yard then was that we were so heavily reliant on the UK and we had some many links there. We were effectively an extension of British Army. An Army controlled by The King.

Korea, Malaya and Vietnam were much closer to home in defending our national interestes. As was East Timor and The Solomans.

You need to start looking at this issue in a more logical fashion Calliope.

 

[Calliope]

Your question?

You still have no answer.

Your original intent was to denigrate anyone who had served post WWII saying we were just political tools

I said nothing of the sort.

inferring a negative connotation and meaning our service was less important than those who had truely served during 'non political' conflicts like anything before WWII.

I implied nothing of the sort . That was your inference.

I made the point in regard to this that The Boar War and WWI were political for Australia. How were those conflicts directly defending our country?

I made no reference to pre-WW2 wars, Boar(sic) or otherwise.

There are more deeper philosophical reasons for people joining the ADF, but most stand by the accepted (and expected) line that they are serving the Nation. ie, You.

So you joined the the ADF to serve me.

You are obviously very young and naive. I used WW2 as a point of reference because I was involved in that one. I was in the Navy in the SW Pacific war theatre. At reunions during the last 64 years we have often discussed why we joined up ( many of us at 17, because the Navy was the only service that would take us at that age.)

We didn't join to serve king and country. It was a big adventure and we all hoped the war wouldn't be over before we were old enough to get involved. A lot us (and there are not many left) thought it was the best time of our lives, and we regarded ourselves as a band of brothers.

You need to start looking at this issue in a more logical fashion Calliope.

And you need to grow up..and instead of trying to put me down you should stick to the truth.

 

[IFocus]

Your question?


Again, you've missed the point. It's all political and the military is the extension of politics when the coffee and biscuit round table discussions fall over. Surrender would also have been a political decision. I think you are missing the link between Defence and Politics. In the US, the President is the Commander and Chief of the Defence Forces. In Australia, the Minister for Defence is our boss. Although at one stage, I think John Howard started taking over just before the East Timor intervention.

All international conflict, and avoidance of, is political, Calliope.

Tell me what is not.

Your original intent was to denigrate anyone who had served post WWII saying we were just political tools inferring a negative connotation and meaning our service was less important than those who had truely served during 'non political' conflicts like anything before WWII.


I made the point in regard to this that The Boar War and WWI were political for Australia. How were those conflicts directly defending our country? The only way we were defending our back yard then was that we were so heavily reliant on the UK and we had some many links there. We were effectively an extension of British Army. An Army controlled by The King.

Korea, Malaya and Vietnam were much closer to home in defending our national interestes. As was East Timor and The Solomans.

You need to start looking at this issue in a more logical fashion Calliope.

Kennas I always thought the Governor General was commander in chief of the armed forces is he / she not really in the chain of command?

 

[Tatts]

I also thought that the Governer General was Commander in Chief of the defence force.

 

[Sean K]

I also thought that the Governer General was Commander in Chief of the defence force.

The Queen is actually, with the GG her representative. But in Australia, we all answer to the Minister for Defence first. It's not a civilian organisation, we are part of the government answerable to, and serving, the people. Even Calliope.

Young and naive. lol

I answered the question Calliope, it's all political.

Thank you for your service mate.

 

[Tatts]

The Queen is actually, with the GG her representative. But in Australia, we all answer to the Minister for Defence first.

You had me wondering who was CIC so googled the role of GG and i found this:
Under Section 68 of the Constitution, the Governor-General is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Defence Force, although in practice he or she acts only on the advice of Ministers of the Government. The Minister for Defence is responsible for Australia’s defence policy.
From this site
http://www.gg.gov.au/governorgeneral/category.php?id=2

So technically she is CIC but in reality it is the Minister for Defence.

 

[Tatts]

Kennas, is that you on the right in the picture?
If it is, what are the two medals on the right, one is for serving in Afghanistan (i think) but not sure on the other.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Lest We Forget.

Anzac Day 2011.

Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives. You are now living in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side here in this country of ours. You, the mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace, after having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well. (M.K. Ataturk, 1934)

gg