Originally posted by Underbelly

That is rubbish. He's making it up. "Warmonger" talk. We all know China would have great difficulty in taking a small island like Taiwan, let alone a vast land like Australia.

Impossible to take Taiwan. Those mountains of shoes are too much for just one army.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by Jbird]

I don't think Australia would have anything to worry about as the whole planet would be screwed by fallout. I believe that if a joint attack were put into motion on the scale you described, the U.S. would authorize the use of nukes. Seeing as China has a army that is basically the same size as the population of the US it would be a dire battle for the US. Plus any preemptive nuclear strikes on the US by Russia would be devastating as well.

Originally posted by cruzionIt wasn't the Russians who defeated Napoleon and Hitler, it was the god awfull weather.

Originally posted by UnderbellyStalin dug half a hole in the USSR's grave by culling all his best military men, the planners and generals. The USSR were trying to rebuild while Germany were on an all out attack. The USSR were lucky in a way as the winter hit the German forces hard, but also Germany couldn't touch the USSR's industrial complexes. Once Russia was able to replenish her army, Germany was doomed.

That's what I said. But also the fact Stalin purged all his military top brass. Thousands were killed including many national war heroes. It was Stalin's paranoia and hunger to stay in exclusive power that almost cost the Russians. The Russians were a shambles when Germany attacked. The winter slowed Germany down at Stalingrad and Russia were able to regroup its army and it was able to churn out tanks and planes for the counter-offensive.

Originally posted by cruzionDidn't Russia lose more troops than the entire rest of the world combined? That says nothing about their skill, just how numerous they are.

Originally posted by UnderbellyRussians were tough. They sacrificed more manpower than anybody else. A country like America even gets a fraction of those figures in losses and the population won't stand for it.

That's what I said also. It doesn't say anything for their skill, but rather Russia's willingness to sacrifice many men. As I said if that many Americans died, and the general population in America heard about it, they'd be scared and demoralized and demand a diplomatic solution and an end to conflict. In Russia and China it is different. They would be willing to sacrifice millions to achieve objectives.

Ok this thread rocketed off without me while i was offline, had to catch up on what you all said, got to say you all make very good points....

But I see the general agreement here is that Australia would in fact side and actually fight alongside the US when called to war...


[edit on 26-2-2008 by Vimes]

[edit on 26-2-2008 by Jbird]

Well i personally think they will take part in a war such as the one you speak of. I also think they might take a very large role because of where they are sitting. But i also would like you to know we as in the U.S would never "make" its allies do something. It quite funny how people hate the U.S when we do so much for the world.

Oh i wasn't really pointing fingers to you brother i was simply stating that it is usually used as that sort of term. As for Bush yes im really not happy with him either but i do have faith in my leaders or "The U.S Government". I truly believe that nothing will happen "war/military" wise till after the next elections unless of course the whole Kosovo issue explodes into a invasion which is most likely.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by Mr.x211]

I agree but with all the tanks stationed on their new border, i highly doubt it. Is it me or am i the only one who thinks that if a major war or threat such as Nuclear came to our "U.S" soil or any of our allies our "the U.S" would use what we have in our arsenal such as things we don't even know we have. I mean i doubt a modern high tech government "military,political might' such as the U.S would let someone or something run over it. Anyways i do think AS would help the United States in such a issue.

Look at the stats of The US military power

Aircraft: 18169

Global Tank Power Armored Vehicles: 29920

Artillery Statistics of the World Artillery: 5178

Global Missile Defense Statistics Missile Defense Weapons: 35324

Infantry Support Weapons Statistics Infantry Support Weapons: 2441

Naval Strenth of the World Naval Units: 1866

Merchant Marines Strength of the World Merchant Marines: 446


And this is just what the US military ADMITS to having in their arsenal



Australia


Aircraft: 471
Global Tank Power Armored Vehicles: 645

Artillery Statistics of the World Artillery: 385

Global Missile Defense Statistics Missile Defense Weapons: 36

Infantry Support Weapons Statistics Infantry Support Weapons: 947

Naval Strenth of the World Naval Units: 56

Merchant Marines Strength of the World Merchant Marines: 52


And then China


Aircraft: 9218

Global Tank Power Armored Vehicles: 13200

Artillery Statistics of the World Artillery: 29060

Global Missile Defense Statistics Missile Defense Weapons: 18500

Infantry Support Weapons Statistics Infantry Support Weapons: 34000

Naval Strenth of the World Naval Units: 284

Merchant Marines Strength of the World Merchant Marines: 1775

Exactly brother this is why i have so much faith in my government and this is why im not exactly scared of another nation threatening us with Nuclear arms.

Yea i am almost sure it doesn't state everything.

Originally posted by MuLongQun
Did you ever see Steve Irwin try wrestle a Drop Bear? No, because they are to cunning and vicious and even he didn’t want to try.

Drop Bears are stealthy as they climb trees and wait for passer by’s and then “Drop” on them and maul them to death… Yes very dangerous…..

[edit on 26-2-2008 by Jbird]

You forgot to add how the drop bears like to drop on the tents of beautiful foreign tourists.

Oh... and they have a strange attraction alcohol, especially "Bundy"...