Yes Gallipoli was a ridicules action, thanks to that dreadful fool Churchill. I wonder who was responsible for more deaths, Hitler or Churchill.

God protect us from fool orators, Hitler, Churchill or Obama, they always lead to catastrophe for the ordinary folk.

Yep orators are dreadful people, but no where near as bad as the horrible little bits of garbage who don't want to honour those who fought & died so we could be free.

If you can't honour your betters, who set you free, for gods sake shut up & go away, into some hole where you belong.

Hasbeen has spoken, though what war was he participating in; is the question ??

Doesn't matter which war you were involved in Boer war to WW11, Churchill would be there, trying to get people killed.

Christianity is not the only religion that has at its core the sacrifice of a young male prophet-type figure in the prime of life (often born of a virgin and having ‘son of god’ credentials), who lays the foundation for the salvation of the world, is ritually killed and then ascends back to heaven.

To name a few …
Adonis and Prometheus (Greece), Beddru (Japan), Buddha Sakia (India), Quexalcote (Mexico), Bremrillah (Druidic), Indra (Tibet), Krishna ( Hindu), Odin and Thor (Nordic), Zoroaster and Mithra (Persia) and Osiris (Egypt).

It’s also no coincidence that many of these guys were ‘born’ around the time of the northern winter solstice – late December.

The prevalence of male-sacrifice-salvation at the centre of so many religions and pagan belief systems is borne of the need to exalt the otherwise needless mass deaths of young men in endless, but futile, wars between various warlords of the ancient, medieval and, now, modern world.

The importance of the male-sacrifice-salvation myth is to prime young men with the sense of war as the noblest and most spiritual experience a man can ever have – regardless of how much it screws him over physically and mentally.

The male-sacrifice-salvation myth propagates the cult of masculinity as an object of worship. According to this all-pervasive ‘death’ cult, to fight in a war is to render oneself a ‘somebody’; to die in a war is to render oneself a saint.

Has, you'll probably enjoy this.
Some years ago, a bright young thing trying to get a handle on war, and the reasons men volunteered to fight them; decided to visit a veterans home, to interview the last remaining Boer war veteran.

Anyhow, she rocked up, was announced and shown into a room where a spritely old centenarian, wanted nothing else but to talk.
I sherved with Winston don't you know, he said, trying to retain a grip on very loose dentures.
And putting them back in with the standard remark, "he was getting around with the worsh shet in town".

Anyhow, she brought him back to the topic, with a, you served with Winston?
Yesh, he replied, I wash in his Calvary unit, and fought not only the Boersh, but the Zulush ash well.
I remember one particular day, when a round grazed me 'ead, and temporarily robbed me of my facualitiesh.
Any'ow, when I came round, I found meshelf alone and laying on a large rock, with the shound of battle moving away.
Then shuddenly, I wash confronted by a large male lion, who shtood up on 'is 'ind legsh, and with unsheathed clawsh extended, roared in my fash.
And proceeded to demonstrate the lion, with unusual vigor for someone as old! Followed by a long pause.
So what happened then, asked the young cub reporter?
To which the old timer replied, I disgraced meshelf!
What, when the lion roared in your face, inquired the cub?
No, Jesht now, when I tried to demonstrate the lions action, replied the now ashen faced old timer.
The nurses will fix that, replied the now intensely interested cub, how did you escape the lion?
I didn't, replied the old timer, it killed me!
But you're still alive, replied the cub, finally catching on that she'd been taken for a ride.
You call this living, replied the oldster; who then broke out into uproarious laughter, followed by oops, oops and NURSH!
Have a couple for me, Rhrosty

I think the author has the wrong end of the stick.

Anzac Day has always been about what a stupid bloody waste war is. The ADF has a policy that people from the same town are not to be put in the same unit, and it stems from having entire australian towns wiped off the map in WW1.

If Anzac Day is a celebration of militarism, then this is a recent development and it is being done deliberately by the usual suspects. The way forward is the way back - to recognise the chest thumping for what it is, and to return to contemplation of the loss of good young men (and women, these days) at the order of foreign higher-ups who didn't give a damn about them.

And let's spare a thought for the foreigners, invaded and defending their own lands as best they can against all the imperial might of the west, being bombed and mown down. Is having our boys in there, painting targets for the drones really what we want our country to be about? Anzac Day absolutely is the right time to ask.

Lest We Forget.