Greatest last stands in history for a worthy cause

[Fooshie]

Britain exhausts itself fighting Germany, after easily crushing pathetic Ottoman forces. Conclusion? Turkey brought down the British Empire to its knees(took another 30 years for the effects to take place but waevs).

Heil Turkey!

[war300]

(click to show/hide)

for me that's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallipoli_Campaign

Knowing the condition of the Ottoman army.


Tsarist Russia collapsed after this war.

Also Ottoman Empire and  English Empire ended after this war.

There are also weird things that happened during the war.

1-) Seyit Ali carried a 257 kilogram shell and loaded it into the artillery which he fired. The bullet entered from the chimney of the ship Ocean and the ship was torn in two and sank. He also shot the ship Queen Elizabeth.

2-) A group of pinned down Turkish soldiers disappeared in a "fast cloud"

3-) A group of Anzacs disappeared in a "fast cloud".

You're right.

So are you.

words

The British Empire didn't end after WW1...

I would not debate with this. Both Russian and British hegemony "ended" after the failed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallipoli_Campaign   It was the trigger.

An age ended at that time.

An if the Turks had lost that war, there would have been no single Turkish person alive left in Anatolia today.

I agree a hundred percent, dude! I'm all for it...

Britain exhausts itself fighting Germany, after easily crushing pathetic Ottoman forces. Conclusion? Turkey brought down the British Empire to its knees(took another 30 years for the effects to take place but waevs).

Heil Turkey!

So what? Do you know that the Ottoman won this war in what conditions? Gallipoli is a saga. Gallipoli wars were collision of iron and meat. Invincible armada of pitiful crusaders lost this war. Crusaders saw the power of faith. Any of arrogant crusaders didn't expect a result like that. Duration of WW1 was lengthened. Great Britain government spent an important part of its resources for this reason. The Ottoman victory over the Allies at Gallipoli renewed Turkey's visions for the empire. The last Ottoman stand in Gallipoli frayed allies forces. This victory became a sample like the Turkish War of Independence for the captive nations all around the world. Tsarist Russia withdrew from the war etc...

Are you still waiting for consequence?
Heil to you!

[Fooshie]

Ottomans lost the war and collapse, they did not by any means win anything.

Losing every single battle, giving up all conquered territory and collapsing internally is the opposite of winning, you nationalistic ****.

Furthermore, Russia withdrew from the war with Germany due to internal problems, no one there gave 2 shits about Turkey's involvement


P.S pesevenk, believe.

[war300]

Ottomans lost the war and collapse, they did not by any means win anything.

You're wrong. This victory became seeds of Turkish Independence War for freedom in later years. I wonder how to tell WW1 in your history books.

Losing every single battle, giving up all conquered territory and collapsing internally is the opposite of winning, you nationalistic ****.

We didn't say WW1 was a victory for us, we're talking about Gallipoli. Check your understanding. I am not nationalist. One final thing, where did you learn to be so polite?

Furthermore, Russia withdrew from the war with Germany due to internal problems, no one there gave 2 shits about Turkey's involvement P.S pesevenk, believe.

Hah, what were you trying to say here? Awesome. 

If you wonder so much, I'd say; the embattled Russia was waiting for aids which would come from Allies. This was solution of internal problems in a way. But this important aid couldn't deliver to the adress, therefore it led to the Bolshevik revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution_of_1917


To sum up, Gallipoli was an important and remarkable point of the last stand. No one can deny that. You on the other hand, believe whatever you want. It does not concern me.

[FrisianDude]

Ottomans lost the war and collapse, they did not by any means win anything.

You're wrong. This victory became seeds of Turkish Independence War for freedom in later years. I wonder how to tell WW1 in your history books.

That doesn't actually counter what he said. He said the Ottomans lost the war and collapsed, which is true. The Allies then partitioned the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish War of Independence was against those allies, against that partitioning, that's true, but the Turkish war of independence was not a war which put the Ottomans back in power; the Ottoman empire was therefore, destroyed. The Turkish nation which rose after the war of independence is a successor state, rather than the same Empire.

[Barry_bon_Loyale]

30,000 men were left for dead and the other French generals in France didn't have the guts to blame Napoleon for it.

Not quite the case, Napoleon left because of the highly volatile situation in France.  He didn't leave his soldiers for dead at all; he left them as an occupation force and left command in the hands of Jean Baptiste Kléber.  So no, he didn't abandon his men for dead.  Not to mention, they were winning the vast majority of their battles there anyway, sometimes quite lopsided victories.  It's not as if the French were doomed or something - they frequently made quick work of the Mamluks and the Ottoman Empire.

Theres a reason people think he is an antichrist

No real reason - we mainly have Nostradumbass to thank for that. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Camar%C3%B3n

Hear, hear!  (No personal bias). 

[MorningRain]

Seems like ancalimon has been breeding...

[Lord Tim]

30,000 men were left for dead and the other French generals in France didn't have the guts to blame Napoleon for it.

Not quite the case, Napoleon left because of the highly volatile situation in France.  He didn't leave his soldiers for dead at all; he left them as an occupation force and left command in the hands of Jean Baptiste Kléber.  So no, he didn't abandon his men for dead.  Not to mention, they were winning the vast majority of their battles there anyway, sometimes quite lopsided victories.  It's not as if the French were doomed or something - they frequently made quick work of the Mamluks and the Ottoman Empire.

That's exactly what Napoleon said.
Isn't it remarkable how the campaign in Egypt failed, though Napoleon would the situation was under control.

[Fooshie]

You're wrong. This victory became seeds of Turkish Independence War for freedom in later years. I wonder how to tell WW1 in your history books.

A Turkish nation has nothing to do with the defeat of the Ottomans, who were destroyed during the war. What are you getting at?

We didn't say WW1 was a victory for us, we're talking about Gallipoli. Check your understanding. I am not nationalist. One final thing, where did you learn to be so polite?

Essentially, they suffered catastrophic casualties defending a beach with almost no cover against an equal enemy and fail to relieve forces to actually defend the rest of the Empire. A total victory!

Hah, what were you trying to say here? Awesome. 

I have no idea what you're trying to imply.

If you wonder so much, I'd say; the embattled Russia was waiting for aids which would come from Allies. This was solution of internal problems in a way. But this important aid couldn't deliver to the adress, therefore it led to the Bolshevik revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution_of_1917

Are you seriously suggesting pumping supplies into the Russian Empire(through Turkey as there were apparently no other options, like the ******** baltic?) would somehow solve all internal problems Russia was suffering from and the people would just suddenly settle down and think the whole thing through? You're delusional beyond belief.

[Barry_bon_Loyale]

That's exactly what Napoleon said.
Isn't it remarkable how the campaign in Egypt failed, though Napoleon would the situation was under control.

Hmm... let's take a look, shall we?

Losses:
-Battle of the Nile
-Siege of Acre

Victories:
-Battle of Alexandria
-Battle of Shubra Khit
-Battle of the Pyramids (major lopsided victory)
-Revolt of Cairo (should you count that as a battle, but it could be based on the losses)
-Battle of El Arish
-Siege of Jaffa
-Battle of Mount Tabor (major lopsided victory)
-Battle of Abukir
-Battle of Heliopolis (major lopsided victory)
 Occurred after Napoleon's departure

The British didn't have land success until 1801, and still ended up losing the war.  The forces of Egypt and the Ottoman Empire proved to be a joke against the French.  Look at Mount Tabor - the Ottomans outnumber the French 6 to 1.  Ottomans losses?  6,000.  French losses?  2.  Based on that track record, Napoleon had every reason to believe the situation was under control.

And for the record, Kléber was vocal in the fact he disapproved of Bonaparte's departure.  He was also vocal about the fact Bonaparte saved his ass more times than a general should have to. 

I can back up what I'm saying.  You haven't.  Get the picture?   

[war300]

That doesn't actually counter what he said. He said the Ottomans lost the war and collapsed, which is true. The Allies then partitioned the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish War of Independence was against those allies, against that partitioning, that's true, but the Turkish war of independence was not a war which put the Ottomans back in power; the Ottoman empire was therefore, destroyed. The Turkish nation which rose after the war of independence is a successor state, rather than the same Empire.

I do understand what you mean. I just want to say that; are the nation who defended Gallipoli and the nation who found Republic of Turkey different? Empire turned into a new state but nation was still the same. 
 

Seems like ancalimon has been breeding...

What a nice words. These days it's hard to find politeness. And I don't think so. Ancalimon has interesting ideas however, he flies higher sometimes.

bla bla bla... (words)
...Are you seriously suggesting pumping supplies into the Russian Empire(through Turkey as there were apparently no other options, like the ******** baltic?) would somehow solve all internal problems Russia was suffering from and the people would just suddenly settle down and think the whole thing through? You're delusional beyond belief.

Then why didn't Allies pump supplies into the Russia from Baltic? Allies couldn't help the Russian empire therefore empire collapsed. Need not more words. Allies had won the WW1. What then? (I think you know what happened later.)

I won't debate with you about this.

[ancalimon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3E_OcZXRVk

To have an idea about what British would have had accomplished.

[FrisianDude]

That doesn't actually counter what he said. He said the Ottomans lost the war and collapsed, which is true. The Allies then partitioned the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish War of Independence was against those allies, against that partitioning, that's true, but the Turkish war of independence was not a war which put the Ottomans back in power; the Ottoman empire was therefore, destroyed. The Turkish nation which rose after the war of independence is a successor state, rather than the same Empire.

I do understand what you mean. I just want to say that; are the nation who defended Gallipoli and the nation who found Republic of Turkey different? Empire turned into a new state but nation was still the same. 
 

Hm, fair point. I think the difference between the Ottoman Empire and Turkey is probably big enough to count, but not really very big. The Ottoman dynasty DID end there. Hmm.

[MorningRain]

bla bla bla... (words)
...Are you seriously suggesting pumping supplies into the Russian Empire(through Turkey as there were apparently no other options, like the ******** baltic?) would somehow solve all internal problems Russia was suffering from and the people would just suddenly settle down and think the whole thing through? You're delusional beyond belief.

Then why didn't Allies pumped supplies into the Russia from Baltic? Allies couldn't help the Russian empire therefore empire collapsed. Need not more words. Allies had won the WW1. What then? (I think you know what happened later.)

I won't debate with you about this.

What he was trying to say there, was that even if the Allies pumped massive supplies into the Russian Empire, it wouldn't have made a lot of difference. The Russian Empire at that time was very, very backwards. Serfdom was abolished, but only officially, on paper. Pumping supplies into the Russian Empire to save it from collapsing and revolution would be similar to throwing as much money as possible in a bottomless pit. In other words, the collapse of the Russian empire was inevitable. (It actually even began to start in 1905, before WW1. The hardships of WW1 were just the trigger that lighted the fuse...)

[war300]

Anyway. If collapsing of an empire/a state makes the last stands invalid, we will rename them. I say allright.