Australia's Role in World War III, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 05:53 AM by Mikey84

To be part of World War 3 and survive it a country would need to have balls, something Australia lacks.

Our government bends over for places like Indonesia and China anytime they drop the soap. Our government is even afraid to tell Japan off for the whaling for fear they "might not like us".

If World War 3 broke out I doubt Australia would even be noticed, before or after. Australia is not as significant as it thinks it is.

Mikey.

[edit on 26/2/2008 by Mikey84]

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 05:56 AM by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by Mikey84
To be part of World War 3 and survive it a country a would need to have balls, something Australia lacks.

Correction....balls is something the Australian government lacks.....not all of us

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:03 AM by Vimes

reply to post by Mikey84

It is a good point, it's all up to the government, but if you read any previous comments in this thread you would have noticed we talked about the connection, and political ties between the US and AU, and that if the US goes to war, then AU goes to war, just as it did with Iraq/Afghanistan....

[edit on 26-2-2008 by Vimes]

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:09 AM by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by Vimes
reply to post by Mikey84

we talked about the connection, and political ties between the US and AU, and that if the US goes to war, then AU goes to war, just as it did with Iraq/Afghanistan....
[edit on 26-2-2008 by Vimes]

Yeah but there is a different government now. Hopefully we wont send any more of our troops over to fight another countries war when there is no need for us to to be there. Its fine if civilians are being killed and we go as peacekeepers....like in Kosovo, but hopefully we avoid an all out invasion of a country, like in Iraq

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:12 AM by Vimes

reply to post by OzWeatherman

Well that remains to be found out...If this kosovo or even Iran deal blows out of proportion and the US gets involved in a military conflict you can bet the US will ask it's allies to support them, thats when we will find out if our new government is as new as we think it is...hopefully it is...

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:31 AM by Wally Conley

I think that if China does attack the U.S., and WWIII breaks out, that barring anything unforseen, Australia would side with the U.S. I also think that if WWIII broke out, China, realizing it would need more POL supplies than it has at the time, would sweep into Southeast Asia much as the Japanese did to grab the POL supplies in that area of the Pacific, as well as depending on countries such as Iran for what it needs it's war machine to run on. Australia, supported by U.S., U.K. and other Commonwealth forces would be used in a type of Southwest Pacific Theatre like in WWII. While I admit that, at the present time anyway, the Chinese Navy is not the threat that the Japanese Navy was, they have been making great sides in modernising it over the past decade, and will continue to do so, much as the Japanese did in the years before WWII. And they have also made great strides in strengthening their missile technology over the past several years as well. As of the present time, the have only a few missiles that are capable of hitting the West Coast of the United States. Between 2012 and 2015, they will have many, many more missiles capable of not only doing that, but of hitting the East Coast as well. So I believe that a WWIII type situation could develop sometime during or after the 2012-2015 time frame. And this will give the Chinese time to also gain more Allies and prepare diplomatically, economically and militarilly for what China would have to do in a situation like WWIII. WWIII could then break out sometime between 2015 and 2020.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:43 AM by Vimes

reply to post by Wally Conley

Ok, but let's look at it this way, China spends $60 odd billion a year on defence, where the US spends $500 billion a year, China would have to drastically increase it's military budget first before attempting to attack the US, what I can't figure out though, is that if the US spends that much a year on it's Military, whats there REALLY to show for it ??

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:52 AM by Wally Conley

Just to point out one thing I neglected to in my first post, most of what China spends on it's military budget goes for weapons procurement, not pay for it's soldiers. This is the opposite of the U.S. military budget, where a good portion of the budget goes for pay and benefits for those who are in the military budget. Another thing to point out is that in China, you don't have labor unions driving up the cost of the weapons systems that they either manufacture or buy, like they do here in the U.S., or even Asutralia. Your point does hole some water, though, I have to admit that. I just should have been a bit more specific in my first post to this thread. It would have avoided any issues with it.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:58 AM by Vimes

reply to post by Wally Conley

Thanks for clearing that up, i admit i did not know that the military budget included pay for it's soldiers and all that, that would take a big chunk out of it...

Well, all i have to say then is, is that if the US, well not the US but the Bush administration wants to keep on being so aggressive towards "terrorists"
their going to have to have some huge backup plan, cause they can't take on the entire middle east and china and russia

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 09:01 AM by cruzion

Most people don't like their governments, that's just the way it is. they're government. Thing is your talking about consessions and pandying to other Asian countries, but that's diplomacy. Once diplomacy is failed, THEN it's the military that does the negotiations, if you know what I mean. A very different Australia, both in intent and action. As I see it, the biggest threat to Australia is the influx of illegals, and the rising extremist attitude from the countries to it's north. Not china or japan or russia.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 12:35 PM by Mr.x211

Guys, there is something you don't understand when it comes to World War. If something to that scale breaks out its going to involve the entire world in some way and all nations will be called upon. Like the other member said its who will be with who brothers.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 12:39 PM by Mr.x211

As for Pine Gap im sure its just some sort of defense facility or radar and communications facility.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 03:50 PM by cruzion

I think world war is defined as a war that is fought on all 5 continents. Europe, Africa and Asia were obvious, for WW2, not so obvious was the Americas. I believe because of naval battles above the Atlantic plate, between American and German navies, you count the Americas, but what about Australasia? As far as I was aware, there was no battles near Australia, right? Unless the Australasia plate encompasses some action between America and Japan? Clarification would be welcome. Perhaps world war os classified as such because of countries involved belonging to all 5 continents. It would be great if someone could clarify that definition too.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 03:56 PM by Wally Conley

reply to post by cruzion

Port Arthur, on the Northwest Coast of Australia, was bombed by the Japanese Airfrce a few times during WWII. That counts. Plus New Guinea, near Australia, was the scene of some fighting as well.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:39 PM by Mikey84

Originally posted by cruzion
I think world war is defined as a war that is fought on all 5 continents.

You do know that there are 7 continents, don’t you? 6 of them have people who permanently live there.

Mikey

[edit on 26/2/2008 by Mikey84]

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:41 PM by resistancia

reply to post by Wally Conley

Port Arthur is on the island of Tasmania, which is a state of Australia. Tasmania is situated due south off the Aussie mainland. I do not know of any other Port Arthur in Australia, or the Northwest of Oz....perhaps you mean some other place Wally ???

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:45 PM by Mikey84

reply to post by resistancia

Maybe he is thinking of Port Headland? in WW2 Japan bombed Darwin, and also Townsville, Katherine, Wyndham, Derby and Port Hedland were targeted.

Maybe that’s what he’s talking about?

Mikey

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 06:50 PM by resistancia

reply to post by Mikey84

Ah...yes mikey you may be correct with regard to Port Headland (Hedland ?) . I am aware of the bombings by the Japanese in that region of Oz. That must be where Wally meant.

thnaks and cheers
res

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 07:26 PM by Sky watcher

reply to post by Underbelly

Well Germany was invading them. If Canada or Mexico invaded the U.S. you would have tens of millions of Americans kicking butt. We had to send our men overseas all over the place and we were and still are the only country that can pull that off.
Russia is in such bad shape most of their troops have no socks with WW2 boots. China can only defend her land, She cant move all those troops anywhere. India has put them in their place before and would again.
The U.S. super carrier is the most deadly ship on the sea. It is also defended at all cost by her fleet of the most feared ships and subs know today. China backed down from threating Taiwan when we sent two carrier groups steaming her way. We have stuff in our bag of tricks that they cant even think of yet should they want to get down and serious and I'm not talking about some little proxy war, I mean full on war. Look at what Japan did to China if you want to throw the man power thing into that equation.
America always looks bad in these proxy wars like the ones we are in now because we are to nice and hold back allot. If the U.S. ever needs to pull the gloves off someone is going to get a beat down of historical, No biblical proportions and the Aussies would be right there with us. They are the nicest bunch of people you could ever meet and they are some of the toughest. Politicians get to call the shots to a degree, In all out war its the military alliances that win out and the U.S. U.K. Canada, Australia and France are like brothers when it comes to the military. They will never be separated and will back each others play when one gets in real trouble. The troops and generals wont have it any other way and neither will the people.

reply posted on 26-2-2008 @ 07:49 PM by Knights

Originally posted by Sky watcher
[In all out war its the military alliances that win out and the U.S. U.K. Canada, Australia and France are like brothers when it comes to the military. They will never be separated and will back each others play when one gets in real trouble. The troops and generals wont have it any other way and neither will the people.

The French?! I'm sorry but they aren't much of an ally in my eyes. My history may not be tip top but weren't they supplying the Argentinians with Exocet missles during the Falklands war?