As per usual the heads of state will make sure they have the best seats in the house to honour the war dead on Anzac Day, the very people who are sending off to battle more young people to be killed in their wars, but it is not me in the firing line, when in actual fact it should be.
How on earth can Abbott remember the war dead in Gallipoli and cry crocodile tears and lay a wreath in remembrance when he himself and others in Governments are the cause of the war dead, past and present.

This is a thoughtful piece. I particularly like the idea that when "we stand unquestioningly at ANZAC Day services, we do not honour the fallen. We give our political leaders the leverage to use our warranted emotions against us".

It seems to me the myth of ANZAC is that citizens rallied to the flag when war broke out without warning when in fact, Australia had been preparing since 1911 with the creation of there Govt Clothing factory and the small arms and ammunition factories. Staff work on the expeditionary force went on over three years to get that first convoy away quickly.

The legacy of ANZAC is a a repetition of committing Australians to wars started by big imperial powers against countries that posed not real threat to us.

Greg, you have come precisely to a problem with Anzac Day by pointing out its mistaken use as some kind of national inspirational symbol.
It's not. It's anything but.
Instead, it's a shameful reminder of how those in whom our country places its trust to lead, to build, to develop, to inspire us to become better off economically and attitudinally, fail us constantly.
Legendary analyst Carl von Clausewitz made the shrewd comment that war is an extension of politics by other means.
You are so right when you point our the industrial/miltary block's ability to manoeuvre governments into sustaining wars, winnable or otherwise.
I am not saying that these power groups were responsible for Australia's mistaken decision to support England's invasion of Turkey.
But the trick of combat glorification has been use ever since then to justify the failure of Australian politicians to abandom war as a first reaction to diplomatic failure, and get down to careful, tedious, long-term relationship building to ensure that our young folk are not killed off in our mad quests for miltary supremacy.

Another thing which I find intensely disturbing about the celebration of this horrific tragedy is the circus-like entertainment surrounding anything to do with it. It is treated like some kind of sporting grand final where millions of gullible followers are conditioned to enjoy participating in the bland jingoism of the day.
It is a day of shame and reverence, not one of festivity.

"I often wonder how many people actually know what they're standing outside for, or the full consequences of our national reverence on such a day." (the author)

I dectect a whiff of the put down, even a little sneer, in that sentence. When people say such things, they could mean that they do really think what they say, for reasons best know to them, but it usually means that they have a low opinion of anyone who doesn't know what they know.

Suffice to say, it is none of the author's business. It's what the individuals paying their respects to the fallen think that matters. They have made a good start by turning up early in often bitter conditions, in my book.

The don't need to be insulted. Hell, the man's never met "an Australian who can fully articulate what is meant by 'they sacrificed themselves for us'".

So, Gallipoli was a horrible mistake on the part of stupid Australians politicians acceding to the wishes of even more stupid Poms. There was no benefit. But why cannot people take a moment to think about the poor young men who were slaughtered.

No benefit? OK, ignore our dead. And insult their relatives.

The world's still a rotten place despite the sacrifice, Greg? Spot on. But it's through no fault of the men and women who have been killed in horrible ways - none of this 'dying', 'gave their lives', 'made the supreme sacrifice' rubbish - to protect us from Nazism and Communism and now Islamism. (That not a benefit?)

We've had a pretty good run since WW2; now, with what looks to the biggest threat ever, Greg want's us to hang up the gloves. He even hung his up because of the war on terror. (see bio).

Tony Abbott has gone to Gallipoli. He will make a speech that is stirring - for him.

On that ground, at that time, Tony will be an ANZAC By Association (ARSE) for all of us...

Sounds to me like Greg failed in an attempt at an army career, & is all bitter & twisted because of his failure.

Thanks everyone for your compliments and for reading.

"The world's still a rotten place despite the sacrifice, Greg? Spot on. But it's through no fault of the men and women who have been killed in horrible ways"

No. Its not their fault. Its the fault of those of us who unquestioningly support wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"none of this 'dying', 'gave their lives', 'made the supreme sacrifice' rubbish - to protect us from Nazism and Communism and now Islamism. (That not a benefit?)"

If people had refused to fight in the First World War, the suffering and death that laid the ground for Nazism and Communism wouldn't have happened. To the 800 kids killed http://www.amnestyusa.org/sites/default/files/asa330132013en.pdf in drone strikes from 2004-2008, we probably are the Nazi's, the Communists or whoever.

"We've had a pretty good run since WW2; now, with what looks to the biggest threat ever, Greg want's us to hang up the gloves. He even hung his up because of the war on terror. (see bio)."

The biggest threat, undoubtedly is climate change. The second biggest is US led wars of aggression. To 1.3 million Iraqi's, Afghans and Pakistani's, we're the terrorists. Hang up the gloves? Great idea when you're only killing yourself.

Wrong Greg Rolles

In depends on the wars. Some are for national survival and some, like Iraq and Afghanistan, are Elective for Australia.

If Australia refused to fight the Japanese in World War Two I'm sure we all would learn to love Samurai Swords. It would have left the US to do all the fighting for us.

More historical evidence. If Russians refused to fight the Nazis I'm sure you'd be proud of the German "Living Space" where 150 million dead Russians used to be.

If you're thinking of "better to live on your knees than die on your feet" (variation on "Better Red than Dead) - Hitler types still kill those on their knees.

Pete

HASBEEN...I reckon you're right on the money there !

I can well imagine the result of a long and protracted diplomatic effort by the South Koreans and their allies in the face of the swift invasion of their country by North Korea.
Only the timely intervention of the USA and their friends stopped the invasion and that only after the South Korean territory had been reduced to a fast shrinking area in the far south of the country.

Maybe we did it for the oil?
The fishing rights?
The agricultural land?
An air base or two? (saved the flying time from Japan).

I like to think that the UN stepped in because a small country had been unjustly invaded, but then that's only me justifying my own participation.

I won't be marching on ANZAC Day or taking part in any related activities as it has become something of a media and commercial circus; think I might go and hunt a few foxes, I've got a .220 Swift that needs a tryout.

Four hundred thousand dollars plus would be far better spent on the living and not the hype surrounding this year's Anzac Day, as an eighteen year old in 1954 one was conscripted into the army by Menzies so he had plenty of machine gun fodder if the Korean War and Russian Cold War eventuated into much bigger events, like the young lads who went off to Anzac Cove, France and Belgium we really did not know what we were there for, to be killed never ever entered our heads, one was there to learn how to kill people but who were the people, we were nave like the young men clamouring to board a ship to take them to a far off country to fight someone, but never knowing that they would never ever come back home to Australia, all under the guise of the slogan "Fighting for King & Country," King of all things, every one is going so let's hop on board, adventure awaits us.
I will be marching on Saturday with the Nasho's and at the same time remembering my Uncle killed in WW1, he was killed because of the stupid British Empire, not for any other reason, the British Empire has faded into obscurity now, but we are now facing American,Australian and other Countries Imperalism which will eventually lead to war, still the next lot of eighteen year olds when called up will not wonder why they have been called up, they are not so stupid now as we were back in 1954 and also the lads of WW1, let's hope they see reason.

Ojnab,

"....as an eighteen year old in 1954 one was conscripted into the army by Menzies so he had plenty of machine gun fodder if the Korean War and Russian Cold War eventuated into much bigger events, ...."

Beg to differ, though National Service was introduced in 1951 it was only for short term training and National Servicemen could not be sent overseas, conscription for service outside Australia didn't come in until during the Vietnam war and all those then serving in the CMF were offered the choice of signing up under the new terms of enlistment or of taking an honourable discharge.
Having an intimate knowledge of what was going on in Vietnam I elected to take my discharge.

Thanks Hasbeen. I won't be contributing much more to this forum. I have failed in many things, jobs and projects. I would simply ask that you focus on the reasons politicians give for sending our troops to war and think of me whatever you want.

Peter Stanley, a historian at ADFA (where I used to go, but he didn't teach when I was there) has written extensively on why Australia was not actually under threat in WW2. The idea that Australia could again face a physical invasion is strategically laughable. What else could we be doing with our people's lives and resources instead of invading other countries. Why, inspite of scores of lives lost and billions of dollars spent, has the terrorist threat increased?

We can do better.

Hi Greg Rolles

Don't be downhearted. You have succeeded in making the chatteratti of OLO think and debate - which is more than most article writers do.

Its true what you say about recent wars. Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Yemen are Elective. They have more to do with Great Powers and Oil than terrorism.

Even the Falklands (War of 1982) is increasingly about undersea oil.

So cheer up Rollsy. You know what they say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBiLNN1NhQ .

Cheers

Pete

Is Mise laws can soon be changed if the Korean War had got worse, if for instance we were not being trained for war purposes, what and the hell were we there in the first place for, to learn knitting and not to kill people. I understand if you joined the Navy and Airforce training could take place out of Australia, sorry, we were there for the Menzies war machine if need be to be killed as all those in WW1, you were not in camp at that time and we were repeatedly told that war was imminent within two years and we would be on our way to protect Australia.
I agree with you on the Vietnam side with lottery being the order of the day, stay home or go to war, but as mentioned you were not there in 1954 so you do not know the truth only what you may have read on a Google.

No personal offence taken Pete. I appreciate you reading and giving a response.

Greg do not give up, as in one post I stated 1954 about conscription, but then I was told that from 1951 onwards we would not be sent overseas, what utter rubbish, for goodness sake Governments lie, what is said today may not be the same as tomorrow, if you believe what politicians say you must have rocks in your head, keep up the good work and make us think.

Thanks ojnab.... appreciate it. I won't give up. Too much good in the world (Including Monty Python). But arguing on forum threads... I'm trying to do other stuff to!

Ojnab,

What don't you understand about "I like to think that the UN stepped in because a small country had been unjustly invaded, but then that's only me justifying my own participation."

Note the phrase "....my own participation."

I was in the Royal Australian Regiment from 1953 till 1955 and was on active service in Korea in 3RAR.

I'll say it again National Servicemen/CMF could not be sent overseas, their terms of enlistment precluded it and those terms were a legally binding contract, that is why during the Vietnam War those who were enlisted under the terms that didn't allow service outside Australia had to be given the option of signing new terms or taking a discharge.

Wars are all about making money and expanding the empire. Central Banks finance both sides of our wars and we get taxed to pay them and die for BS. After the wars these multi-national corps get paid again for the rebuild.Ever wonder why the 0.01% own just about everything?

They dropped more bombs on Vietnam than the whole of WW2.The Gulf of Tonkin incident ,the excuse to escalate the war was contrived by the USA.It never happened.

Arjay, yes it's all about expanding the Empire, the last half century that of the CCCP, the Middle Kingdom and the Caliphate. War is one of that little things where it takes only "One to Tango", or as that Luminary of the Left said "..., but war is interested in you" (Leon Trosky).

What benefits did the West accrue from the Korean War,
apart from South Korea being free of Communist domination and becoming an economic success and supplying many high quality manufactured goods on the world market?

If it's all about achieving economic advantage, oil etc., I'd like to know.

Sorry to have to say this, Greg. But you now have add your piece to your admitted failures. You are probably a decent and sincere bloke, but your responses to my comments - particularly the one claiming that climate change is our greatest threat - just don't cut the mustard. If people really believed that natural events were the greatest threat to them, they would come to the conclusion that life wasn't worth living. You could have saved time by simply rueing the unfortunate necessity of war periodically to prevent truly evil people and doctrines from taking out freedoms away.

Our way of life is worth living and, sadly, we will always have to protect ourselves from those intent on taking it from us.

Is Mise, I beg to differ,
National Servicemen were given the option at call up, to volunteer for any service anywhere overseas if war occurred, most Nasho's volunteered .
The Korean armistice was signed in 1953 and no new threat developed during that decade, so the basic roll of Nasho's, was as reserves, having viewed my roll up call ending in 1959, from Canberra at that time it states nothing about me not going to war.
Having spoken to other Nasho's they also state that we were Menzies war fodder if war increased, mainly Korea.
I do not wish to continue this argument of right or wrong, but being a Nasho meant we were available to be used if need be for the war machine of politicians.

Ojnab,

"National Service, 1951–59 – Fact sheet 163

In the context of the intensification of the Cold War in Europe, Communist insurgency and success in South-East Asia, and the declaration of war in Korea, the Menzies government sponsored the National Service Act 1951. The legislation provided for the compulsory call-up of males turning 18 on or after 1 November 1950, for service training of 176 days. Trainees were required to remain on the Reserve of the Commonwealth Military Forces (CMF) for five years from initial call up. Men could nominate the service in which they wished to be trained. Those nominating the Navy or the Air Force were considered only if they volunteered for service outside Australia.[NOTE!] The first call-up notice was issued on 12 April 1951.

Between 1951 and 1959 over 500,000 men registered, 52 intakes were organised and some 227,000 men were trained."
http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/fact-sheets/fs163.aspx

I was a Nasho in 13tn NS Battalion at Ingleburn (1952) and I was never asked to volunteer for anything other than doing the hut's washing once a week.(I had my hand up first!!)
We had Lightburn washing machines and it was a grouse duty, finished the washing by 1000 hrs and then on picquet at the clothes line till 1600. Lunch was brought from the Mess and one could relax and read books all day.

Brief history of money in the context of war and oligarchs. Banking arose from the craft of goldsmiths. People became tired of carrying their gold and silver around so goldsmiths offered storage and gave people paper certificates instead. Soon people were trading paper certificates instead of silver and gold.

The goldsmiths soon realised that no one ever collected their gold and soon began issuing more gold certificates than gold in their vaults.This was the beginning of fiat money and the rise of bankers as being the most powerful people on the planet.

The Rothschilds were already extremely wealthy but the Napoleonic Wars really made the Rothschilds. Nathan Rothschild spread a rumour that Napoleon had won against the British.Nathan Rothschild so the story goes,had the latest communication in carrier pigeon thus knew the out come first and spread rumours that the British had lost and began selling stocks. The market collapsed and the Rothschilds bought good stocks for pennies on the pound.

Ever since this time bankers have made huge profits backing both sides of war and often engineering the inception of these wars in the background.

What a wonderful sight to see Prime Minister Abbott walking around Gallipoli looking as though he has just pooed his pants, crying crocodile tears for all those brave young men who died 100 years ago, he having sent another 300 soldiers with quite a few of them to their possible deaths in Iraq., it is time all politicians joined the front ranks , they are great at sending every one else to their possible early deaths, instead of being armchair generals join the lads instead, and face death with them, we all can lay wreaths and look sad.
I and many others are sick to death of all the hype being portrayed by the media and TV stations, let's hope 2016 Anzac Day will return to the respect of all those brave young people who lost their lives in a war that was the making by the elite in various countries.
When will we wake up.

Well my Great Grandfather was a Lighthorseman and fought at Gallipoli. He was promoted to CO on the battlefield, after his CO was shot and he lived to tell the tale.

Now not take away from his valor and accomplishments fighting for this country, I still have a hard time seeing any so-called soldier as anything else other than a paid mercenary.

Unless your country is directly attacked and you are fighting in defense, you are just a paid mercenary fighting the battles of the rich.
You are just a paid shill fighting someone else's battle.
Someone else who sits far from the battlefield, sipping port and smoking a cigar and who's own children are not in the line of fire.

I reckon the real ANZACS would roll over in their graves if they could see whats happened to this country. They'd wonder what they fought for, and all the bigwig politicians sit up there trying to gain politically from it every year, when none of their kids will ever have to fight in a war they cause.

The fact that Tony Abbot is an English citizen means Australian Armed Forces are still being lead to their deaths by the British, just like 100yrs ago.

Armchair Critic,

"Unless your country is directly attacked and you are fighting in defense, you are just a paid mercenary fighting the battles of the rich.
You are just a paid shill fighting someone else's battle.
Someone else who sits far from the battlefield, sipping port and smoking a cigar and who's own children are not in the line of fire."

I was a "paid mercenary" ('paid' is unnecessary, as by definition a mercenary fights for pay) in Korea and keep asking all the critics what was wrong with other countries coming to the defence of South Korea.

No one so far has been able to tell me who profited from the vast Korean oil fields or reaped great financial gain from control of their padi fields.
Perhaps their gold, silver and tin were the attraction?
Or their diamond mines?
Maybe the USA wanted to get in on the tourism value of their mild winters.

Armchair Critic, my thoughts exactly, people like Abbott, Gillard and others should join the front line, they would run if they had to, wreaths and all, what a sight it would be

No one so far has been able to tell me who profited from the vast Korean oil fields or reaped great financial gain from control of their padi fields.
Perhaps their gold, silver and tin were the attraction?
Or their diamond mines?
Maybe the USA wanted to get in on the tourism value of their mild winters.

Well come on all you people that believe that all war is for profit, expansion etc.,give me some answers.

Who profited greatly from the UN's actions in Korea, apart from the South Koreans?

All that they got was freedom from Communist domination and the freedom to build good cars.