Gallipoli was an abject failure in nearly every conceivable way. "Czarist" Russia surrendered, essentially, to the Germans in 1917 and collapsed under the weight of internal revolution thereafter...if anything, the failure at Gallipoli hastened that process.
-----------------------------
The fundamental objective of the Gallipoli Campaign was to force the Ottomans to
divert troops from the Crimea, then threatening Russia; the secondary objective being
to force the Ottoman Empire out of the War.
Gallipoli commenced in Feb 1915 and Czarist Russian signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk
in Feb 1918, which kept Russia fighting Germany till then.
That required Von Hindenburg and a million German soldiers to defend Berlin which is
but 40 miles from the Russian border, as Poland did not then exist; for 3 years longer.
This prevented them from overwhelming the French on the western front.
By that measure Gallipoli was an obvious success notwithstanding the needless casualties.
The campaign failed tactically because of British Commander Sir Ian Hamilton's ineptitude,
and not of Winston Churchill, which Sir John Keegan noted in his epic "First World War".
Never leaving his ship stateroom, Hamilton did not survey the landing sites which was disastrous.
As a result, the ANZAC forces came ashore on lateral beaches of some 250 meters in length which then rose sharply at an angle of some 30 to 45 degrees representing hillsides filled w/Turkish machine gun nests and snipers. The consequence were casualties of 200 thousand w/45,000 dead.
Also, Gallipoli had nothing to do w/the overthrow of the Czar.
As for Trump/Churchill, any similarity is ludicrous fantasy of those who get history from comic books.
