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'
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.
You're spot on.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.
And, WWI and II weren't political at all.
:
What planet are you on Calliope? It's all political.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?
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.What planet are you on Calliope?
This diatribe regarding future military (political) decisions could go on, but I shall leave it there. For now.
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?
Your question?Of course. Your long winded diatribe goes nowhere. I asked you a simple 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.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?
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.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.
Your question?
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?
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.
You need to start looking at this issue in a more logical fashion Calliope.
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.
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.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.
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)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?