Australian supermarket shuts website in Anzac Day furor

[lvr181]

1915....relevant today...how?

get over it

And why is it not relevant? I guess you are a person who has never fought for anyones' freedoms? Many gave their lives so that idiots like you have the freedom to make your obnoxious comments

So I would suggest you get over it and get a real life.

And, yes, I am an ex serviceman and proud of it.

I would be quite interested to know how killing Turkish people protected even one Australian person's freedom in the 2nd decade of the 20th Century.

Because they sided with Germany! Remember? They signed an alliance with Germany in 1914. Therefore becoming an ally of Germany and an enemy of Britain and its allies.

[Tep]

1915....relevant today...how?

get over it

And why is it not relevant? I guess you are a person who has never fought for anyones' freedoms? Many gave their lives so that idiots like you have the freedom to make your obnoxious comments

So I would suggest you get over it and get a real life.

And, yes, I am an ex serviceman and proud of it.

I would be quite interested to know how killing Turkish people protected even one Australian person's freedom in the 2nd decade of the 20th Century.

Because they sided with Germany! Remember? They signed an alliance with Germany in 1914. Therefore becoming an ally of Germany and an enemy of Britain and its allies.

The causes and course of WWI are a fairly standard part of received wisdom. This was not my point. I take issue with your reference to people's 'freedoms' and asked how any one Australian person's freedom was ensured by killing Turkish people. This phrase is now part of the political lexicon, used by the American right and boosters of the national security industry and the national security state. There were entirely different concepts working during period that encompasses WWI and entirely different reasons for killing Turkish people in 1915.

With the exception of WWII, are there any instances of our 'freedoms' being protected by Australian military involvement overseas. I do not accept the general, now discredited argument for involvement in Vietnam nor the questionable military adventurism in the middle east of recent times. The removal by PM John Curtin of Australian forces from Allied Command to fight Japanese forces in PNG in response to Churchill's self serving Brisbane Line concept is probably the closest that I can think of where Australian forces directly protected our 'freedoms' but there is now new thinking and research that indicates that the Japanese never had any intention of invading Australia. I will leave the historians to debate that point.

I support the ANZAC tradition. I support the concept of a national defence force under civilian control. I have strong links with the armed services, both past and present. I do, however, believe that most of the overseas military adventures have served wider geopolitical purposes and not, except with very few exceptions, protected anyone's 'freedoms'. I am allowed to have this opinion. Just like the person you attacked is allowed to question the relevance of 1915 to today's issues and challenges.

People can follow the ANZAC formula. Good for them. Others can choose not to. Good for them also.

[craigt3365]

An off topic post has been removed from view. Please stick to the topic.

[MaxYakov]

what's yank constitution got to do with ANZAC Day?, I would have thought

but this is all stuffed up anyhow... even Wiki got it wrong by typing Anzac, where ANZAC always has to be, always was, and always will be presented in CAPITALs as it is a Protected acronysm

Sorry, Mate. Australian law identifies it as the word "Anzac", not an acronym: Australian Law C201400072

And, since it protected by law, one wouldn't want to be getting it wrong, right?

Edited April 17, 2015 by MaxYakov

[tifino]

well, that makes it clear, as far as the current query goes anyhow.

My viewpoint is from what was impressed into our head during Recruiting, and the following 24 years of Service, and another 20 years later in the R.S.L...

the Law was re-written by civvies - so whadda they know?

but thanks for the Link there MaxYakov. Now know where the errors aka confusions are stemming from now

But, the story does get twisted, depending where one gets his story from...

The RSL always uses ANZAC Day, as it commemorates the actions and sacrifices of the actual troops themselves, who, on the ground were known as the ANZACs.

The Victorian HQ of the RSL, the building is known as Anzac House. The Anzac term being used as they are not an element of the actual forces that were on the ground back there in 1915.

I'd say the following Link http://www.anzacwebsites.com/general/anzac-capitals.htm will answer any real tangental question about ANZAC v.s. Anzac, so lets go back to bashing Woolies

Edited April 17, 2015 by tifino

[asean]

Anzac is a biscuit

[Jingthing]

I happened to visit the Gallipoli battle area with a group of Australians. Before that, I had no idea.

[Scott]

Numerous off-topic posts and replies removed.

[NumbNut]

it took you 8 months to reply ?

He unlike you needed apropriate time to reflect.

In a couple of monthes the day is with us again to reflect again.

Anyone who is interested in the ANZAC phenomenon and how it has developed over time to this present day should read a book called 'ANZAC's Long Shadow', written by an ex Aussie Army officer who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and has been at the sharp end:-

http://www.blackincbooks.com/books/anzacs-long-shadow

Here's a review of the book by The Guardian:-

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/21/anzacs-long-shadow-the-cost-of-our-national-obsession-review

In short, he is damning of the 'industry' that ANZAC has allowed to become, and he should know. Aussie's who have recently served will no doubt be aware of the issues raised in this book, but it came as a bit of a wake up call to me I must admit.

Would be interesting to hear some Kiwi's take on this.

[lostboy]

1915....relevant today...how?

get over it

And why is it not relevant? I guess you are a person who has never fought for anyones' freedoms? Many gave their lives so that idiots like you have the freedom to make your obnoxious comments

So I would suggest you get over it and get a real life.

And, yes, I am an ex serviceman and proud of it.

I would be quite interested to know how killing Turkish people protected even one Australian person's freedom in the 2nd decade of the 20th Century.

Cultural icon or sacred cow. Looking at the hysterical comments of a few in response to this issue leads me to believe that a cultural icon has now become distorted. Those who are loudest on this issue have no claim to a larger share of the ANZAC tradition than any other Australian or New Zealander, irrespective of whether they served or not. It is part of our shared heritage. It has been given to us by those who came before us. No one person has the moral right to require anyone to feel a certain way about this tradition. Each person will respond to the tradition in their own way. This includes Vietnamese Australians. This includes war veterans. This includes Muslim Australians. Everyone.

I will not bore people with my own connections to the ANZAC tradition nor what it meant to me growing up as an Australian. I certainly would not attempt to dictate to anyone they way in which they should respond to the tradition. It seems to me that if our cultural icons are now being claimed by the lunatic fringe to promote some cultural stereotype and create division in society and hatred towards minorities, then it has become a sacred cow, ripe for slaughter.

Nobody need to prove their patriotism on this issue. Every town in Australia, large and small has a war memorial. Most of us have participated in dawn services and marches on ANZAC Day at some part of our lives. We all share in this tradition and nobody gets to tell anyone else how to interpret the tradition.

There has been no "perfectly right" war!

ANZAC day recognises those who paid the sacrifice for something that was believed in at the time - not a belief in retrospect.

I do not agree. Memorial and Remembrance Days, like Anzac Day do not honour ideology but the individual sacrifice. The last surviving veterans from WWI passed away just a few years ago. It has passed into history. Those living today are entitled to make of this historical event what they will.

Joshstiles asks how the events of 1915 are relevant today. I do not look to the traditions that honour the sacrifice of the soldiers in WWI to answer that questions. WWI set the scene in many ways for the 20th Century. It marked the dividing line between the rule of the aristocratic elite that inherited wealth and power and was a step in full democratisation and the extension of universal suffrage. The disproportionate number of dead in WWI came from the lower classes who were used as cannon fodder by ignorant generals fighting the last war which to them was the Franco Prussian War of 1870. They ignored the lessons from the American Civil War, which was the first conflict to introduce many of the technologies used in WWI such as barbed wire and prototype machine guns and the Russo Japanese War of 1904 where an upstart country using technology defeated a country ruled more like the l'ancien regime than a modern 20th century country.

Lots can be discussed about the significant and implications of WWI. There is room for dissention. In fact there needs to be revisionism and critique to draw more lessons from such a horrific and horrible experience. You wish to keep your traditional sacred cow. Fine. But others have the right to question and challenge.

[harrry]

Anzac was politiciced by I believe Hawke and subsequent Prime Ministers as a vector to forge an Australian Identity. I feel this was wrong but it is not my decision to make.

[chuckd]

The countries "Veterans Day"

How bloody insulting it's called "ANZAC DAY" Who wrote this, an American? Aussies and Kiwis are very proud of the name and trying to Americanise it with the term Veterans Day is totally disrespectful to those that proudly called themselves ANZACS.

The author of the article is one Rod McGuirk. His biography is well hidden on the internet but it seems he is the Canberra correspondent for the Associated Press and has worked for them since 2004. Prior to this he was employed as a reporter for the Gold Coast Bulletin.

His education is from the Queensland Institute of Technology.

Here is a link to the Associated Press Australia for those not talented enough to find it themselves. Contact the AP with your outrage.

https://aap.com.au/Contact

I seriously doubt he is an American.

[Sandy Freckle]

Excuse me..., on a slight tangent......, apart from the service up at Kanchanaburi..., Is there a service close to Bangkok this year ?

I can't make it up there this year..., I was also wondering if there was a place where people gathered during the day..., but down in the city ?

Edited March 31, 2016 by Sandy Freckle