Spidge, I do believe you are jumping the gun to think your answer is the "only" correct one when the questioner has yet to answer in the affirmative. I also thought such terms as 'Chocko' etc when used to describe a nations citizens is not allowed on this site as such terms when used to describe said citizens are derogatory and possibly bigoted. The term Chocolate Soldier was a term that was widely used by the AIF, Regular Army troops and others to describe the AMF or Militia who were pre war part time soldiers When used to describe the AMF (militia) there have been several definitions of this term, however i believe the following is the closest to the truth regarding the original statements of Chocolate Soldier. C&P'ed from Diggershistory.org/ What is a choco or chokko? This was a derogatory term given to the partly volunteer partly conscripted Militia by the all volunteer AIF in WW2. It was from the term 'Chocolate Soldier' which was to indicate a soldier with a 'pretty' uniform but no intention of doing any real soldiering. It was unfair, in many cases untrue and was hated by the men of the CMF, many of whom were unable to join the AIF for age or enlistment standards reasons but who were able to volunteer for or get conscripted into the CMF. Many CMF soldiers transferred to the AIF when age allowed them to, but they stayed with their existing unit. If the required percentage of men in a CMF unit volunteered for the AIF that unit was allowed to become an AIF unit. Yes we may say that Australian troops were the predominant Infantry in Tobruk during most of 1941. i believe that is what I have allready written.
This is exactly what i am talking about the fantastic stand by the 39th at kokoda in 1942 ,no insult to others who had a nickname of chocolate soldiers until they proved themselves.I did not know any other nation had that nickname just our Australian reserve troops Cheers Tony
I have no problem with you or anyone on this site. I feel that both of us have taken some of our writings out of context. "Quote Spidge" As you can see by my answer to the question, it was based on "Choco's" meaning Italians - I have never heard of the AMF referred to by that name. "End Quote" "Quote Spidge" Cobber, what are you talking about? You have taken my post out of context and should ask the question of me before you condemn it. I said that my answer was based on the fact that I had never heard of the word Choco in relation to the AMF. I was not claiming my answer to be the only one. "End Quote" As can be seen above it appears that you statment was based on Chokos meaning Italians. It certainly looked as if you are claiming the right answer, when as I said that the questioner had yet to answer in the affirmative. The question if asked in a similar way would also be derogatory towards Italians of the present and of the past. However i also feel that if the person asking the question meant Italians he would of worded the question with the word Italians in it, not Chocko's as this is known world wide as a derogatory name towards Italians. DFC is not not quoting some writings from the past! "Quote Spidge" We can use a quote by someone in the 40's or 50's that called our enemies "Japs" - Are we supposed to change it to "Japanese" - No - because that was the wording at the time. Anyone responding would use the word Japanese not Jap. If I said the "Japs" are still killing whales - that is certainly derogatory because it is speaking of present day. "End Quote" . It is very easy to change words that are no longer acceptable" from quotes and writings from the past. Quote Cobber Yes we may say that Australian troops were the predominant Infantry in Tobruk during most of 1941. i believe that is what I have allready written. "End Quote' Quote Spidge" Yes and I am agreeing with you - Do you have an issue with me agreeing with you? "End Quote" This is possibly one of the writings that have been misinterpreted by the two of us. Peace out Regards Cobber
Sorry I should of written more. 42nd street, it was fight on land by a Allied force in the Mediterranean theater of ops . If I give the location I will all but give the answer, however I will relent and give the location if no one gets the answer in next couple of days. Cheers Cbr
It was the southern line from Suda Bay held by the Australian 2/7th, 2/8th and New Zealand Maori battalion?? where it met the Malaxa Escarpment which was 42nd street. On the 27th May they attacked the advancing Germans from cover and killed hundreds however they could not hold the position against advancing Mountain troops and withdrew. The 2/7th was eventually captured/surrendered. Mum always said if dad was not hit at Tobruk 2/8th, he would probably have been killed there.
Good one Spidge, however you have only given the location not the answer to the question which is, "42nd Street was made famous for what kind of fighting"?
From what I have read it was a counter attack like a last stand charge. Shooting yelling and screaming and scaring the Germans so much they ran in retreat. Pretty much like a Bonzai charge (in reverse) from a concealed position.
man thats so'oo close, just a little bit more information The past two answers are right as that is the kind of fighting that happend their that is for sure. Yet i am after just a touch more information I double checked it via google and the answer i am looking for was up front and not hard to find.
Charged with bayonet not much else left and rifle butts etc cheers Tony Yes that's right. yes it was 'bayonet' I was looking for, and yes most of the above was right as they did advance yelling wildly that's the 2/7th 2/8th Victorian Btns and the 28th Maori Btn. As said on German radio they were not expecting such attacks especially when they saw the Aussies with those old wryly smiles on their faces and Maoris with tongues out and yelling Maori war cries while they did the grizzerly business. The above along with info in above posts combined, scared the bejesus out of the Germans apparently. Aussie CO of force got a beating by the Germans as they thought many of the dead had been bayoneted after being wounded, However after checking the bodies they realized that none of the Germans had been wounded before bayoneted any wounded had been taken prisoner or left alone.
Well sounds funny after all theses years but a deadly business at the time ,sounds like it was a great tactic you would probably only get away with once Cheers Tony
