Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest Blunders: Gallipoli Campaign vs Tsushima (Round 4-Semifinals)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greatest Blunders: Gallipoli Campaign vs Tsushima (Round 4-Semifinals)

    Gallipoli Campaign 1915-1916



    Why?
    This bold plan devised by Winston Churchill was intended to force the Ottoman Empire out of WW1 by a daring coup through the Dardanelles against its capital Constantinople .
    It should have been executed till the end with speed, daring and bravado; however British commanders executed it hesitantly and timidly, giving the Ottomans army ample time to react. The operation grounded down into a stalemate, leading to severe loss of life amongst Allied, in particular Anzac, personnel. Eventually the Allied troops were evacuated and the operation aborted.

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


    Battle of Tsushima May 27-28, 1905



    Why?
    Tsushima, a naval battle in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05, was a massive, humiliating disaster for the Russians. In a very one-sided action, the Russian fleet was almost totally annihilated with minimal loss to the Japanese. Although the outcome – against a superficially strong but actually rather weakened and ineffective opponent – may have been somewhat misleading to Japan, Tsushima was nevertheless instrumental in changing the balance of power, both real and perceived, in favour of Japan and to the great detriment of Russia. Aside from the enormous and far-reaching political consequences, Russia’s naval power had declined to the status of a very minor player, while Japan was now established as the sixth strongest naval power in the World.

    Japan sought to secure its sea lines of communication with the Asian mainland, to support a campaign in Manchuria. This required the neutralization of the Russian Pacific Fleet which led, between February and August 1904, to a number of engagements between the two navies and a siege of the Russian Naval base at Port Arthur. By the end of this period, the Japanese had gained the upper hand. With the situation in the Far East rapidly deteriorating, the Russians formed a second Pacific Squadron from the Baltic Fleet and sent them to the contested area. The objectives were to relieve the siege of Port Arthur, link up with remaining elements of the Russian Navy in the region and then overwhelm the Imperial Japanese Navy. This would be co-ordinated with defensive land actions, to delay the Japanese advance into Manchuria sufficiently until Russian reinforcements could arrive by the Trans-Siberian railway. The Russians sailed on 15 October under the command of Admiral Rozhestvensky.

    This was a very long voyage, especially as they had been denied access to the Suez Canal and had to go around the Cape of Good Hope. By the time they had arrived in Indochina in April/May 1905, Port Arthur had already fallen so their orders were changed to proceed to Vladivostok. Rozhestvensky chose a route through the Tsushima strait, between Japan and Korea, hoping to slip through the Sea of Japan to Vladivostok without being detected. This hope was dashed by a chance encounter in the early hours of 27 May and by 1.40pm the Russians were met in the strait by the Japanese fleet under Admiral Togo. The Russians were in very poor shape for battle after the long voyage and their morale was low. Furthermore, Japanese levels of skill and training were higher and they had better range-finding equipment. Togo succeeded tactically as well, with bold maneuvering. Action continued through the night and into the next day. The Japanese completely outclassed the Russians, who lost all of their battleships and most of their cruisers and destroyers, for a Japanese loss of three torpedo boats. By the evening of 28 May it was all over.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima
    http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/...p/tsushima.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_War



    _________

    BoRG
    59
    Gallipoli Campaign 1915-1916
    52.54%
    31
    Battle of Tsushima 1905
    47.46%
    28
    Last edited by Salinator; 03 Jul 10, 18:11.
    Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

    Prayers.

    BoRG

    http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

  • #2
    Gallipoli for me.
    History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon. Napoleon Bonaparte
    _________
    BoRG
    __________
    "I am Arthur, King of the Britons!"

    Comment


    • #3
      Gallipoli had marvelous planning, and could have worked with better leadership. The debacle with the Russian fleet was ill-concieved and avoidable up to the last minute. The Russians F***ed up big time, not to mention the Gallipoli campaign ultimately had no effect on the outcome of the Great War. Tsushima, by contrast, rocked the world, and made Japan a Great Power.
      How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
      275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

      Comment


      • #4
        Tsushima. To send your fleet all the way around the world for nothing but a sacrifice is a much larger blunder than putting men ashore on the enemy's coast then not advancing.
        "The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made."
        — Groucho Marx

        Comment


        • #5
          I think Gallipoli was a blunder from the get-go and would have failed regardless of the quality of leadership. It was arguably, IMO, the greater of the two blunders, if considered only within itself. On the other hand, I see Tsushima as having greater consequences for the powers involved; particularly Japan in the long term.

          I'm having trouble with this one. How long have I got left to decide?
          "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
          Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Wolery View Post
            Gallipoli had marvelous planning, and could have worked with better leadership. The debacle with the Russian fleet was ill-concieved and avoidable up to the last minute. The Russians F***ed up big time, not to mention the Gallipoli campaign ultimately had no effect on the outcome of the Great War. Tsushima, by contrast, rocked the world, and made Japan a Great Power.
            I have to agree with this. At least with Gallipoli there was some element of surprise - with Tsushima there was none. The Russians let the entire world know their intentions and the Japanese were given weeks to prepare for a battle in their own waters. In addition, even though Gallipoli was a failed campaign, it was theoretically brilliant. There was nothing brilliant with the Russian plan.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Panther3485 View Post
              I think Gallipoli was a blunder from the get-go and would have failed regardless of the quality of leadership. It was arguably, IMO, the greater of the two blunders, if considered only within itself. On the other hand, I see Tsushima as having greater consequences for the powers involved; particularly Japan in the long term.

              I'm having trouble with this one. How long have I got left to decide?
              Think of it from a historical stand point with out the national trimmings.

              Tsushima

              For all the reasons already posted.

              Gallipoli is one of the bigger blunders, but head to head with Tsushima it has to come in second.
              "Ask not what your country can do for you"

              Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

              you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

              Comment


              • #8
                Tsushima. For the reason that it was a hugely influential event, a milestone if you will.

                Gallipoli was one of many failed offensives during the Great War.
                "Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way." - Christopher Hitchens

                Comment


                • #9
                  I guess then, another two questions I'll ask myself:
                  1. Realistically speaking, did the Allies in WW1 have an option not to undertake the Gallipoli landings?
                  2. Realistically speaking, did the Russians have an option not to send a fleet east to confront the Japanese?

                  Preferably, the questions should be answered based on what the protagonists were able to know at the time, rather than with the gift of 20/20 hindsight we all have now.

                  If the answer to either of these is 'no', then that one is the lesser blunder. If the answer is the same to both, then the questions do not help me very much.
                  "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
                  Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Panther3485 View Post
                    I guess then, another two questions I'll ask myself:
                    1. Realistically speaking, did the Allies in WW1 have an option not to undertake the Gallipoli landings?
                    2. Realistically speaking, did the Russians have an option not to send a fleet east to confront the Japanese?
                    Preferably, the questions should be answered based on what the protagonists were able to know at the time, rather than with the gift of 20/20 hindsight we all have now.

                    If the answer to either of these is 'no', then that one is the lesser blunder. If the answer is the same to both, then the questions do not help me very much.
                    These are very good questions. I think they help explain how Gallipoli was an even bigger blunder.

                    1) The campaign was totally unneeded. The attack on the Ottomans was not going to accomplish much, even if successful. And the Ottomans were pretty well keeping to themselves before this. The result would not effect the trench warfare continuing in Europe. End result not clearly defined. Campaign not clearly defined. Execution of same: disastrous!

                    2) Although corollaries could be drawn between my argument for Gallipoli and the Russian response to the Japanese... I think the campaign was needed. Port Arthur had been attacked and the Russians had no fleet left in the East. So, they had to do something. Now, I'll admit that planning, execution, etc. was as poor as Gallipoli if not worse. But ultimately, the Russians didn't stand a chance even if everything had gone right. The Allies in the Dardenelles had at least a chance to succeed, if they had executed better.

                    In the end, the size of the blunder makes the decision for me. Half a million people dead, versus 5,000. Gallipoli is a greater blunder by many orders of magnitude.

                    As a further point, the Allies lost almost as many ships in their first run into the Dardanelles as the Russians did in Tsushima.
                    History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon. Napoleon Bonaparte
                    _________
                    BoRG
                    __________
                    "I am Arthur, King of the Britons!"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm inclined to think that the Russians were under a greater compulsion to send that fleet, than the Allies were to carry out the Gallipoli landings. I think Gallipoli was more avoidable than Tsushima, given what the protagonists knew or were likely to be thinking at the time.
                      "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
                      Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Definitely. All nationalities aside, the Russians had to do something, even if it was the wrong thing to do.

                        There was no real reason to go for the Gallipolli landings. More avoidable, less point, a longer series of blunders and far higher casualties make that the greater blunder in my eyes.
                        Captain Khryses, Silver Star Omnilift Wing

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          This is a tough one, I'm going with Gallipolli based on what has already been stated - yes the Russian plan was poor, the OPSEC was poor but it needed to be done there was no way they could not reinforce the fleet.

                          Gallipolli was simply unneeded bloodshed in a Great War sideshow.
                          Кто там?
                          Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
                          Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by skoblin View Post
                            I have to agree with this. At least with Gallipoli there was some element of surprise - with Tsushima there was none. The Russians let the entire world know their intentions and the Japanese were given weeks to prepare for a battle in their own waters. In addition, even though Gallipoli was a failed campaign, it was theoretically brilliant. There was nothing brilliant with the Russian plan.


                            Forcing the opening of the Dardanelles brilliant. Please. for what purpose? Churchill at his finest. A blunder. Just as much as other imagination from the great man. When it comes to military adventure nobody beats Sir Winston, not even Hitler. Hitler was at least on the rare occassion right, Winnie, never,
                            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Got to go with Tsushima. For the reasons Skoblin and Half Pint stated earlier.
                              Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X