Miscellany II. [conclusion]

This is coolbert:

From the wiki entry on Long Tan:

"The Australian soldiers were carrying a light load, approximately five magazines, and after nearly three hours of combat ran low on ammunition . . ."

Australian troops at the time carried the FN FAL rifle. Fired a 7.62 mm NATO round. A normal combat load would consist of five magazines, all loaded, one in the rifle and four carried in two ammo pouches.

[ammunition resupply was dropped on the embattled Aussie soldiers from helicopters passing overhead!!]

"The ammunition was still inside its packing crates. The tired soldiers had to break open these crates and load their magazines from boxes of ammunition. Magazines were considered part of soldiers’ weapons and issuing was strictly controlled . . . [after] Long Tan . . . combat personnel on operations started to carry more supplies, including more ammunition . . . Ammunition was later resupplied in magazines, and the issuing of magazines was relaxed"

It was then necessary to break open the crates containing fresh ammo, distribute the rounds, and then each individual troop had to reload his magazines by hand, one round at a time. Difficult - - NO - - very difficult to do when under severe pressure, hand and body shaking from the adrenaline rush, fine finger movements difficult under such circumstances. WHAT IS EASILY DONE ON THE FIRING RANGE DURING TRAINING IS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE IN COMBAT!!!

[the FN FAL, as with the U.S. M14 rifle, used a twenty round magazine.]

Better solution is to issue a full magazine, loaded in advance, vastly improving the ammunition resupply problem.

There too, is peril in such a system? Full magazines [mags], loaded with twenty rounds in advance, being issued to the troops as an ammunition resupply, exchanging empty mags for full ones on the battlefield.

You would not want to leave a full mag, spring fully compressed, lying idle for an extended period of time. A "shelf-life" exists for such a mag? The elasticity of the spring is lost and deformity occurs with prolonged compression and could potentially be a serious source of jams? PRE-LOAD MAGAZINES JUST PRIOR TO ISSUANCE TO THE TROOPS IS THE WAY TO GO??

[a magazine IS a mechanical mechanism. Albeit a very rudimentary mechanism, but nonetheless, an integral part of an assault rifle when inserted into the magazine well. Magazines, when not properly cleaned, lubed, and EXERCISED at regular intervals, can be a source of jams??]

A simple solution to a problem, if not correctly implemented, can cause difficulties of a different nature not even originally contemplated!!

coolbert.

Body Count.

This is coolbert:

"Long Tan - - What Happened?"

"a heroic victory at the Long Tan rubber plantation made headlines across Australia and America. A newspaper editorial even said:"

"it ranks with some of the great stands in military history."

"The Americans subsequently awarded the company the Presidential Unit Citation for 'extraordinary heroism in operations against an opposing armed force.'"

"The Battle of Long Tan is arguably the most famous battle fought by the Australian Army during the Vietnam War. August 18–19, 1966."

Australian forces in Vietnam, engaging a much superior enemy force, emerging victorious, inflicting very heavy losses on the NVA/VC, with minimal loss to themselves. The type of engagement that makes headlines and for which medals are awarded.

"Even though newspaper editors and military chiefs were very impressed with the Diggers, exactly what happened at Long Tan is an issue of contention . . . 108 Diggers were able to defeat 2500 Viet Cong. [???]"

That the Aussies fought with great courage is undeniable. That they were awarded the U.S. Presidential Unit Citation and were worthy of same is also undeniable. THE NUMBER OF ENEMY KILLED IS WHAT IS AT QUESTION. BODY COUNT!!

"The action occurred when D Company of the 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (6RAR) . . . encountered the Viet Cong (VC) 275 Regiment and elements of the D445 Local Forces Battalion."

"There have been accusations that the Australians exaggerated VC and NVA casualties . . . The official Australian count is 245 Communist dead and 150 wounded. The number of NVA/VC killed and wounded was about twice the initial radio report of 188 killed or wounded from Lieutenant-Colonel Colin Townsend. (War Diary) . . . US forces later claimed to have captured documents indicating 800 killed and 1,000 wounded"

The claim has been made, ever since the height of the Vietnam War, that the U.S. military, and presumably the Australians as well, exaggerated, embellished, falsified, and downright lied about the number of enemy killed on the battlefield.

Is this so??!!

Many years ago now [over thirty years], I spoke to a discharged U.S. Army infantry officer [Michael K.] whose task [among many] was to determine enemy body count in the aftermath of a battlefield clash with North Vietnamese/Viet Cong [NVA/VC] units.

An American officer, cruising the battlefield, in the aftermath of a combat action, counting, and trying to determine, as best he could, HOW MANY ENEMY SOLDIERS HAD BEEN KILLED!!

There WAS a certain specific, well-thought-out protocol to determine enemy body count in Vietnam. THIS WAS NOT a helter-skelter, willy-nilly procedure that tended to inflate, deliberately or otherwise, the numbers of enemy soldiers killed. A protocol that went as follows:

* Each enemy dead body found on the battlefield counted as one killed-in-action [KIA]. [DOES THIS REQUIRE ANY FURTHER ELABORATION!!??]

* Each large blood smear counted as one enemy killed-in-action [KIA]. The inability of the NVA/VC to provide quick and appropriate medical care for their wounded meant that such a large loss of blood more or less meant death, even with the absence of a body!

[there was a certain significance to finding a large blood smear on the Vietnam ` battlefield.]



"During the Vietnam War, soldiers reported that shooting an enemy soldier with the M-16 did not kill as quickly as the old 30 caliber weapons. Instead soldiers would follow a massive trail a blood a few feet away from where the enemy soldier had been hit to find him dead from massive blood loss."

* Each large body part found on the battlefield counted as an individual enemy soldier killed-in-action [KIA]. Each foot, hand, leg, arm, or head found counted as a separate enemy dead. Again, the inadequate medical care available to NVA/VC personnel probably meant death for any individual losing a hand, foot, leg, or arm. As for the head taken off, you decide for yourself.

At this point, I interjected, “how do you know that finding a hand, foot, leg, arm and head on the battlefield is not five enemy killed-in-action but is rather the same individual blow into smithereens??”

"smith·er·eens - - pl.n. - - Informal - - Fragments or splintered pieces; bits"

The answer [from Mike K.] was - - “well, you don’t’ know, but in lieu of a better way to determine things, that is what you go with!!”

Can anyone fault this protocol?

Well, someone has. See the comments of an Australian Vietnam veteran [and veteran of Long Tan.], Terry Burstall:

"When I returned to the battlefield the day after the battle, there were bodies lying all through the area ... Would a shell-shocked digger count an arm, a trunk and a leg scattered over several metres as one body or three bodies? Nobody knew or cared at the time, and certainly not the people doing the counting ... Looking back I don't really think that I would have seen more than 50 bodies and I spent three days in the area."

But, from the web site of Ray Smith, read this:

"on April 3rd, 1995, on the 20th anniversary of the end of the Second Indochina War, the North Vietnamese Communists finally admitted their true casualties. While the U.S. Command had officially stated that we killed about 750,000 NVA and VC, the Communists declared, in an official press release to Agence France, that we had actually killed 1.1 million NVA soldiers."

"a practice of adding estimates of the number of 'probables' (i.e., "probably killed, no body recovered") to the count of 'confirmed' killed. While it is certainly possible that some commanders choose to report the sum of these two numbers rather than separate figures, I doubt whether this was a systemic practice based on personal experience."

[a confirmed would be an actual body. A probable would be a large blood smear or a major body part found!!]

"There was a standard formula for estimating enemy wounded, based on statistics gathered from World Wars One and Two that basically said that two men were wounded for every one killed."

[Actual figure for American troops in Vietnam and Soviet troops in Afghan was roughly about 350 wounded for each 100 dead - - Bert.]

This particular item within the wiki entry of course immediately caught my attention:

"The reverse slope that D Company [the Australians] used to defend their position meant that the VC found it difficult to use their heavy calibre weapons effectively; the VC could only engage the Australians at close range."

The use of the reverse slope defense again. The preferred means to establish a defense. From both WW1 and WW2, the experience of all combatants was that a defense using the reverse slope was the most effective. You would kill more of the enemy in this situation than under any other circumstance. I hope that they still teach this technique at the U.S. Infantry School??!!

Body count in Vietnam! Was it all a lie? Certainly the official records of the communists would seem to suggest - - NO!!

You decide!

coolbert.

Why We Fight?

This is coolbert:

"The diggers motivation to fight"

[Australian soldiers are referred to as "diggers". Supposedly a reference to the entrenching that took place at Gallipoli [digging in!]! But a term historically much older, referring to miners from the 1850's? "The widespread use of the term came to the forefront during the First World War. During this time the word 'mate' became synonymous with the word 'digger', which had its origins in the gold digging fields of the 1850s. During the Gallipoli campaign the term 'digger' was re-introduced as a formal greeting towards a fellow soldier. The Anzac troops spent so much time digging trenches, the idiom 'digger' was re-invoked."]

What motivates young men to join the military voluntarily, even in a time of war, and furthermore, VOLUNTEER TO GO "OVERSEAS' TO FIGHT IN THAT WAR, KNOWING FULL WELL WHAT THEY ARE GETTING THEMSELVES INTO!!!???

Here is one take on the subject, from the Australian perspective: [Chester Wilmot "Tobruk 1941"]

"the Australians were volunteers. They understood their own position. But why were the Australian volunteers there?"

[Australian troops stationed OVERSEAS during both World Wars were STRICTLY volunteers!! Conscription was used to fill the ranks, but those Australian troops deployed in combat outside of Australia were STRICTLY volunteers! Actually, the wiki entry on this topic is not quite totally clear!!]

According to Wilmot, these would have been the reasons you might have gotten if you asked a "digger" - - "why do you fight?" But NOT the correct reasons?

* "I wanted a bit of fun"

* "I was fed up with my job"

* "all my cobbers were joining up and so I went along too."

[Cobber : friend]

Here are, according to Wilmot, the CORRECT reasons the Australian troop fought as a volunteer in both World Wars:

* "I believe in a fair go"

* "I wanted to be with my mates"

[Mate : buddy, friend]

* "I like being able to say to a copper, 'That's all right, copper, you got nothin' on me'"

* "I want to say what I like when we're having a beer at the pub"

* "I want to do what I like with the few quid I've got in the bank"

* "because women and kids are being bombed in London and shot in Prague"

* "I didn't join out of patriotism"

* "I was looking for what I'd lost"

* "the feeling of a lot of mates all working together"

Mate : buddy, friend [mate ship is a particularly strong Australian cultural concept. NOT unique to Australia, but stressed as being of importance. NOT just ordinary friendship, but a non-familial relationship between two men, strong in nature "It's a term that implies a sense of shared experience, mutual respect and unconditional assistance."]

"Military context

Mate ship is regarded as an Australian military virtue . . . Mate ship is often invoked as an important element in . . . Australian military prowess"

* "for some other reason that making dividends for the shareholders."

[ I am part of something larger and doing so without ulterior motives!!]

NOT necessarily strong patriotic motives or a desire "to see things in the world set straight"!! Enlistment and volunteerism in time of war is a complicated subject NOT subject to aphorisms - - that explain it all?!

"aph·o·rism - - n. A tersely phrased statement of a truth or opinion; an adage. A brief statement of a principle."

coolbert.

The Digger.

This is coolbert:

More so than the soldier of any other modern army, the Australian troop is most easily recognized at a distance? Distinguished by his wearing of the famous slouch hat!

"The slouch hat: Trademark of the Australian Army"

"Perhaps no other object has been so widely associated with Australian identities as the 'slouch' or 'digger' hat."

"It's a brown slouch hat with the side turned up, and it means the world to me,Its the symbol of our Nation, the land of Liberty. And as soldiers they wear it, how proudly they bear it for all the world to see."

"A BROWN SLOUCH HAT"
J Albert & Son, Sydney, 1942

"The Diggers of 2 World Wars just made it famous and it is now recognised as 'ours'."

OURS! YES indeed! The "Digger" is the Australian soldier. A colloquial expression the result of the Gallipoli campaign [World War One] Aussie troops entrenching themselves had to "dig"!!

A hat worn according to strictly formulated regulation. NO casualness here.

* The side turned up.

* The chin strap.

* The bash [indentations in the crown]

* The rakish tilt with which the hat is worn.

The slouch hat LOOKS COOL!! No doubt about it! Gives the Australian soldier a distinguished, manly, and again, COOL appearance. Looks very sharp!

Seven parts to the web site article. Read it all.

COOL!!!

coolbert.

Comportment!

This is coolbert:

Here are several instances from World War Two [WW2] where American soldiers, stationed in the Australia, DID NOT comport themselves in the best manner possible.

(1) "The Brownout Strangler"

Eddie Leonski. American soldier and serial killer [the term was not in usage at the time] who took it upon himself to terrorize the city of Melbourne by strangling Australian women.

"Edward Joseph Leonski (December 12, 1917 – November 9, 1942) was an American serial killer who committed his crimes in Australia. Leonski is known as the Brownout Strangler"

Caught, tried, convicted, hung. With all dispatch.

This "affair" was made into a pretty good made-for-TV movie: "Death of a Soldier".

"Leonski confessed to the crimes and was convicted and sentenced to death . . . MacArthur personally signed the order of execution . . . Leonski was hanged at Pentridge Prison on November 9, 1942"

"the trial of Edward Joseph Leonski trial was unique in Australia's legal or civil history. 'It was the first time that any person has ever been tried in this country by a military tribunal for a crime which violated civilian law.'"

[it was too a violation American military law. Crimes however, committed off-base, against "foreign nationals", while actually on foreign soil.]

The Leonski Case was unique in that NO DUE PROCESS EXISTED AT THE TIME FOR TRYING IN AUSTRALIA COURTS AN AMERICAN SOLDIER ACCUSED OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. NO STATUS OF FORCES AGREEMENT [SOFA], PROTOCOLS, LEGAL OR STATUTORY COVENANTS HAD BEEN AGREED UPON BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED STATES!

General Mac Arthur, obviously to "assuage" public sentiments in Australia, saw that justice of a swift and certain nature was carried out. Leonski swung from the end of a rope, and that was that!!

(2) "The Battle of Brisbane". American and Aussie soldiers, allies in the war against Japan in the Pacific, fighting it out in the streets in Brisbane. Rioting of a vicious nature, all the result of the proverbial "misunderstanding" between two soldiers, BOTH OF THEM AMERICANS!!

coolbert.

"Grenades - - More!

This is coolbert:

More on grenades as used by both sides during the Gallipoli campaign [1915].

Hand grenades [called "bombs" by the British forces} were used extensively in warfare for the first time by all combatants during World War One [WW1].

At Gallipoli, because of the terrain [?], trench lines of the adversaries were often quite close to one another. Yards [??] in some cases. There WERE frenzied hand grenade exchanges between Australian and Turkish troops.

"Johnnie Turk" having the advantage in the case of grenade exchanges as they had an almost super-abundance of the weapons on hand, whereas the Aussies did not??!! Australians would pick the grenades up and try to throw them back before they exploded.

Cruising the web, came across the wiki and other sites devoted to the Battle of Lone Pine. Caveman warfare of the most desperate and brutal type. Battle to seize a stretch of roofed-over Turkish trenches. GRENADES, BAYONETS [on the end of a SMLE rifle], HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT!!

As for the use of grenades:

"Hand grenades were the weapon of choice and the close quarters meant that some of them would travel back and forth up to three times before exploding."

"Seven Australians were awarded the Victoria Cross at Lone Pine"

MOST VICTORIA CROSSES WON IN ONE ENGAGEMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OR ROARKE'S DRIFT DURING THE ZULU WAR!!!!! Such was the nature of the fighting at Lone Pine!

Go to the Australian War Museum web site to see an interesting diorama on the Lone Pine Battle. The flash version is outstanding, zoom OUT when you start to see the entire diorama, including the roofed-over Turkish trenches!

As I have said before, Gallipoli represents a "coming of age" rite for the Australian nation. NO LONGER merely a colony or dominion of the British Empire. NOW, after Gallipoli, a nation-state producing soldiers of the highest quality, possessing formidable elan'. As seen at Lone Pine.

coolbert.

Grenades Anyone??!!

This is coolbert:

While surfing the web for material on Gallipoli and the periscope rifle, came across this incredible stuff.

"A feature of the fighting at Quinn’s [Quinn's Post. A location held by the Australian troops during the Gallipoli campaign!] was the bombing [grenade throwing exchanges between adversaries in closely adjacent trenches]. In the early days the advantage here lay with the Turks as the Anzacs possessed no grenades while the Turks had a seemingly endless supply of cricket-ball shaped bombs . . . If a man was quick enough, Turkish bombs [grenades] could also be picked up and thrown back. The Turks, however, soon began cutting their fuses shorter and one Australian had his hand blown off before it was realised what was happening. Another method of dealing with the bombs was to throw a thick overcoat over them to stifle the explosion or, if you had real grit, fall upon the bomb with a half-full sandbag."

Right! Infantrymen are taught in AIT that if an enemy grenade lands in their midst, try to pick it up and throw it back before it detonates!! Is that still SOP?? As for throwing a heavy overcoat over the grenade or falling on the grenade with a sandbag, well, the current hand grenades are too powerful for those methods to be effective??

coolbert.

Bugi Men III.

This is coolbert:

Before there was the Regional Force Surveillance Units [RFSU], there was NAOU!!

"The 2/1st North Australia Observer Unit (2/1 NAOU) was an Australian Army reconnaissance unit of World War II. 2/1 NAOU was formed in May 1942 to patrol remote areas of northern Australia and provide warning to the Northern Territory Force of any Japanese landings"

"The 2/1st North Australia Observer Unit conducted horse and vehicle mounted patrols across northern Australia with the goal of observing and reporting on enemy movements on land, sea and in the air. These patrols were conducted in extremely harsh conditions, with little or no support or resupply - so this unit needed men who were very resourceful, independent, motivated and positive. Many of the soldiers from the NAOU later went on to join Z Special Unit"



Australian horse troops from World War Two! Looks like a formation from the era of the Boer War [1900]. From the time of "Breaker Morant" [Morant was a Australian stockman who made a living "breaking" wild horses]. White Aussies armed with what appears to be the SMLE rifle. Called "Nackeroos" [a jackeroo is an Aussie cowboy]. These are men in the mold of "Crocodile Dundee". Tough, hardened men, innured to hardship, accustomed to the terrain, climate, able to forage if necessary. Expert horsemen, trackers, etc.

"Many of the soldiers from the NAOU later went on to join Z Special Unit."

Right! Men already with military experience. Highly motivated soldiers with initiative. ONE OF WHICH WAS A SIXTY ONE YEAR OLD [various ages are given!] OFFICER WHO WORE A MONOCLE!!! Men who, if necessary, can operate ON THEIR OWN!!

"a 61-year-old Australian civilian, Bill Reynolds"

coolbert.

RFSU.

This is coolbert:

Here is an Australian reserve military unit that performs a similar function to the Canadian Rangers. Regional Force Surveillance Units.

"The Regional Force Surveillance Units (RFSUs) are specialised units of the Australian Army responsible for patrolling northern Australia. The RFSUs regularly conduct operational patrols during peacetime, and the reservists who make up 90% of the RFSUs personnel carry out most of their training during these patrols."

Similar mission to that of the Canadian Rangers:

* Reconnaissance and surveillance.

* Showing-the-flag.

[done without actually being seen. You show-the-flag by having an armed presence protecting your contiguous territory and exercising the right as a sovereign to use force if necessary!]

Guarding and protecting the sparsely inhabited and extremely remote, unforgiving Northern Territories of Australia. Rough, rugged terrain, replete with dangerous animals that CAN KILL AND EAT YOU! [Saltwater crocodile]

"The RFSU's are unique and unconventional units whose mission is to conduct long range reconnaissance and surveillance patrols in the sparsely populated and remote regions of northern Australia. Unlike most Australian Army units, the RFSUs are on a permanent operational footing, conducting real patrols with real world objectives during peacetime."

BUT, IN CONTRAST TO THE RANGERS, THE RFSU CARRIES OUT THEIR MISSION IN A CLANDESTINE AND SURREPTITIOUS MANNER. RATHER THAN WANTING TO BE SEEN, THE TROOPERS OF THE RFSU DO NOT WANT TO BE SEEN.

"To be effective, RFSU patrols must remain completely undetected, so bushcraft skills, particularly camouflage and concealment, are very important to the RFSU patrolman."

Bushcraft. The ability to live in a wilderness, survive and thrive. Northern Australia is some of the harshest terrain on the planet. Six months of dry, followed by six months of wet! As late as 1941, the largest city in all of the territory was Darwin, total population 5,000 isolated people. Forbidding and remote for the most part!

"a high proportion the RFSUs' personnel are Indigenous Australians"

Aborigines. Persons that are accustomed to the terrain, climate, know how to forage if necessary. Both RFSU and Canadian Rangers are comprised primarily of "Natives" ideally suited for the task.

"this land provides, and you need not be beholden to any man!!" - - Caleb - - "The Highlander".

Used to counter drug smuggling and the movement of illegal aliens. Primarily from Indonesia, but not exclusively so. THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR THE AUSTRALIANS, RIGHT NOW, AS WE SPEAK. BOTH DRUGS AND ILLEGALS FILTERING SOUTH FROM INDONESIA POSE A SIGNIFICANT RISK TO AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY. MUST BE COUNTERED!

And in the case - - worst-case scenario - - of an armed invasion of the Northern Australian territories by a hostile foreign power, the RFSU will form the nucleus of a guerrilla warfare movement. Already the RFSU are trained by the Australian SAS. Special Air Services. Active duty Aussie Army troops that specialize in guerrilla warfare and counter-terrorism.

coolbert.

Dominions.

This is coolbert:

During both World Wars of the previous century one thing the British could rely upon was the resources of Empire. Resources, natural, and manpower that the British may have lacked in the home island could be made up by contingents from the Empire.

Among those contingents were troops from the "white dominions". The nations of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. The British historian John Keegan speaks about the magnificent contingents of the dominions. Troops who were of physical stature, bearing, robustness, elan, and initiative. The British found themselves hard pressed to match with forces from their own home island troops of such quality as were from "overseas".

And a case can be made that from the engagements that these "white dominion" troops fought in during the First World War [WW1], nation-states were born. Came of age from what were once colonies of England, to dominions, and then matured into independent, adult entities in time of war.

Each dominion during WW1 endured a special traumatic battle that stood out as being a turning point in it's relationship to the rest of the Empire and England in particular.

1. For Canadians, the place is Ypres [pronounced "eep", as in sh-eep], for the South Africans it was Delville Wood, for the Australians and New Zealanders [ANZAC] it was Gallipoli.


It was at Ypres that the Germans used poison gas for the first time. It was released by the Germans at a juncture in the trench line separating the French and the Canadians. At the first whiff of gas, the French and their colonial forces bolted and took off. But the Canadians stood their ground, and held the line, EVEN THOUGH THEY LACKED ANY PROTECTION AT ALL AGAINST THE POISON GAS!!! Some person in the Canadian trenches passed the word to urinate on a handkerchief and hold it over your nose. This evidently was supposed to neutralize the effect of the poison gas. And perhaps it did to some extent. But casualties were almost universal. Reports from the front read:

"Then on Thursday the Germans suddenly threw in that attack its asphyxiating bombs, which will doubtless become famous in this war. It succeeded in breaking the line of French near Bixschoote, although not to such an extent as the Germans claim in today's communique."

"Twice in the day that followed the Germans tried trench vapor on the Canadians, who made on the right of the French position a stand which will probably be remembered as one of the heroic episodes of this war. In both cases the wind was not favorable, and the Canadians managed to stick through it."


2. Kept as a reserve unit at the start of the British Somme campaign in 1916, the South African Brigade, newly arrived, and untested, was thrown into battle at a place called Delville Wood to replace British troops. First attacking and then defending, the South Africans made themselves known in a big way. But at great cost to themselves. The statistics speak for themselves:

Of 3,153 men from the Brigade who had entered the wood on 14 July 1916 only 755 came out again."

3. And as was well demonstrated in the Mel Gibson movie "Gallipoli", the landings and subsequent stalemate on the Turkish peninsula of Gallipoli had a great and lasting impact upon the people of Australia and New Zealand. ANZAC [Australian New Zealand Army Corps]. The performance of the ANZAC's at Gallipoli is the stuff that legend is made of:

"The Australians rose to the occasion. They did not wait for orders, or for the boats to reach the beach, but sprang into the sea, formed a sort of rough line, and rushed at the enemy’s trenches. Their magazines were not charged, so they just went in with the cold steel, and it was over in a minute for the Turks in the first trench had been either bayoneted or had run away, and the Maxim guns were captured." - - Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett.

"The distant conflict of the Great War as World War I was known at the time had an enormous impact on Australia, a small nation of fewer than 5 million people at the time. The war had a major impact on everyone in some way. It helped bring about economic change. Political events became bitter and controversial. Reputations were made and lost.

Through it all, Australians responded to the call to enlist and went to fight. Their story is an important part of understanding the history of Australia and its people in the 20th century."


And this great tradition of military service by the "white dominions" continued during the Second World War [WW2] also.

All throughout WW2 each of the "white dominions" contributed in a significant and disproportionate way to the defeat of the Axis powers.

* The Canadians had an army land at Normandy on D-Day.

* The South Africans fought with distinction during the desert campaigns in North Africa. The South African Air Force were the only ones to successfully air drop supplies to the beleaguered Polish resistance fighters during the Battle of Warsaw in 1944.

* Australian troops distinguished themselves both in North Africa and in the Pacific Theatre. The Australian General Blamey was the signatory for the British Empire during the Japanese surrender on the battleship Missouri to end WW2.

It is interesting that the only combat soldier of the British Empire to twice win the Victoria Cross, the Empire's highest decoration for valor, is a New Zealander. Read about this man by clicking here.

For these "white dominions", war, and specifically WW1, had a profound effect upon their psyches. It was if they had been teenagers taking their first steps into the adult world, realizing who they were and what they could do. "We are somebody people, look at us and respect us!!"

And the military tradition continues to this day. There is an informal military alliance called ABCA. Australian-British-Canadian-American. Works in an informal way around the world. Probably much of it's work goes unheralded, when it does occur, but is still out there. Such as in East Timor. Australian troops backed up by American logistic support. This thing goes on!

coolbert.