81 replies to this topic

[DKO]

How did this topic go from the Darwin bombing to whether or not the US will defend Australia?

Anyway some decent links if anyone is interested:

Darwin Bombing wiki

Attack on Sydney Harbour

[Eldorado]

DKO, on 29 February 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How did this topic go from the Darwin bombing to whether or not the US will defend Australia?

Anyway some decent links if anyone is interested:

Darwin Bombing wiki

Attack on Sydney Harbour

Thank you.

Anyone remember The Sullivans tv soap?  I learned more about the ANZAC from that than I did from school.  lol

[Stardrive]

DKO, on 29 February 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How did this topic go from the Darwin bombing to whether or not the US will defend Australia?

Debate drift. It's an inherent side effect of open discussions.

[Antilles]

DKO, on 29 February 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How did this topic go from the Darwin bombing to whether or not the US will defend Australia?

Anyway some decent links if anyone is interested:

Darwin Bombing wiki

Attack on Sydney Harbour

A senior mod has been discussing this topic and didn't mind that the focus of the topic changed. I just thought I'd point that out to you.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Antilles, on 28 February 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:

Australia joined the United Kingdom in WW2 not because it had been attacked, but because Australia was going to defend the UK from Germany. Again.

When Singapore fell, the UK abandoned the Far East and it's soldiers there were left to become Japanese POW's. Australia realised the threat facing it from Japan and turned to another country facing the same threat - the US. Both countries had a very good reason to become allies and that alliance has lasted. Australia always was and remains a strategically important country because of its physical position in the southern hemisphere- for one example, the US missions to the Moon were monitored by many large satellite dishes located on the eastern Australian seaboard. It's fair to say that the Apollo missions would have been in question if not for Australia's agreement to assist NASA.

That assistance continues today in military and other areas. Australia is a stable democracy with a prime position and friendly people. Why would the US actively attempt to undermine the A/US alliance?

Simple answer - they wouldn't.

How else exactly could the UK have remained in the far East without Singapore and Hong Kong? You do know that British forces were fighting in Burma right through to 1945? Is this what they teach now, then, that they "abandoned" Australia, and that it was Australia that defended the Uk from Germany?

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

SamDavies, on 29 February 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

Umm   . GOVERNOR GENERAL

Really Governer General is a courtesy title, just like the Queen is nominally C-in-C of the entire UK Armed forces, and Colonel-in-Chief of various regiments. No one, though, would seriously expect her to go riding into battle in the turret of a Challenger 2, like Boadicea, or Boudica for the politically correct. Approving nominations for Governor general is just like givign "Royal Assent" to government bills and things; no one seriously expects her to have any real opinion on the matter, although I bet that when it comes to political experience, she could actually knock any "democratic" "Elected" "Politician" over with her little finger.
Have you seen the Queen's little finger? It's something to be reckoned with, I can tell you.  

Edited by 747400, 01 March 2012 - 01:53 PM.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

tigger, on 29 February 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

at the end of the day sam.. the australian people do not elect the prime minister. they vote for the party to lead the country.

Case in point, the entire fracas involve the Liar and the Lemon - who voted for them? The people in their electorates voted for them to be in Parliament. But leadership of this great nation was done by the infamous Faceless Men.

[DKO]

Antilles, on 01 March 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

A senior mod has been discussing this topic and didn't mind that the focus of the topic changed. I just thought I'd point that out to you.

I noticed, but she posted one comment to reply to another comment. She didnt trail off to a different subject.

[tigger]

Wearer of Hats, on 02 March 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

Case in point, the entire fracas involve the Liar and the Lemon - who voted for them? The people in their electorates voted for them to be in Parliament. But leadership of this great nation was done by the infamous Faceless Men.

fair shake of the sauce bottle... you wouldn't happen to be ruddy would you  

[Eldorado]

LOL @ "fair shake of the sauce bottle".

[Taun]

tigger, on 02 March 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

fair shake of the sauce bottle... you wouldn't happen to be ruddy would you  

I love 'listening' to Brits and Aussies 'talk' to each other... I can recognise every word, and still have no earthly idea what the heck is being discussed...


It's probable the same for you 'listening' to us though...

(no offense intended if "Brit" or "Aussie" is considered less than respectful)

Edited by Taun, 02 March 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

The Lemon and I were born in the same hospital you know.

[libstaK]

DKO, on 02 March 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

I noticed, but she posted one comment to reply to another comment. She didnt trail off to a different subject.

Quite right, that said - back on topic folks

[SamDavies]

DKO, on 29 February 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How did this topic go from the Darwin bombing to whether or not the US will defend Australia?

I thought the subjects went hand in hand. I live in/just outside Darwin and there is much talk about the USA increasing troops here during the next five years and whether Asia will see this as a threat. And whether such a small presence would deter a repeat of the Bombing of Darwin.

So It is a case of when Darwin is bombed again, will USA really be able to do anything this time as Australia’s ally or due to the different situation we are now faced with regarding war tactics and which countries now have military might that did not have power during WWII. Will they have no choice but to pull out troops from Australia as well as not send fighter jets to Australia’s defense due to trying to cope with the huge treats towards USA now that it has the tiger by the tail in so many parts of the ME.

So for someone in Darwin it’s bombing in future has a lot to do with whether USA will defend Australia in the future. IMO, USA would like to but just will not have the resources to do so.

But totally on topic, all countries know that Darwin on its own would be helpless in the event of another war. All our coastlines are vulnerable and take a lot of time to get to except through the Top End of Darwin. Not enough troops to go around. If major parts of Australia were bombed the army would be called up to help the civilians and that would further deplete Australia’s troops regarding their role to fight off the enemy. Like in WWII any troops will be limited on their ability to defend. Sure hopefully they will be a lot more armed and prepared then WWII but still not enough numbers. Time will tell. As for me I just keep living out bush. Again, I say, with one road out of Darwin and a population of 80,000 this place is a death trap.

[SamDavies]

Taun, on 02 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

I love 'listening' to Brits and Aussies 'talk' to each other... I can recognise every word, and still have no earthly idea what the heck is being discussed...


It's probable the same for you 'listening' to us though...

(no offense intended if "Brit" or "Aussie" is considered less than respectful)

Thanks, Taun. Brit, Aussie and just to add, POM, are fine to use. They are not disrespectful at all. Much of British humor lingo flies over the heads of some Aussies and Americans. I've lived in both worlds having British parents who moved to Australia in 1972 when I was 3 1/2. I watched heaps of the British comedies aired in Australia and lived with my Grandparents in Bournemouth for two years from age 9-11 attending British school.

I feel most Australians understand the lingo of Americans more than the Brit lingo, but I may be wrong as it depends where one lives in Australia. And of course what someone does and doesn't watch on TV.

Sorry this is off topic but just thought I'd make it clear that Brit and Aussie not in the least bit offensive.