That's it! We're done! PM Bends OVER for Obama!

page: 4
86
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by AussieAmandaC
 


60 years later and still aligned .Yep it's hard to find good help. The big question is .if you dont want U.S troops in the NT ,what country do you want there in the event of war? I have never been worried about an invasion by a foreign army ,but war is human nature and inevitable.
Like i said, pick a side and go with it ,There is no option to choose nothing.




posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
just wait it is the Cuban missle crisis all over again only we are Russia, Australia is Cuba, and China is the USA ...



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by AussieAmandaC
 


I honestly don't know why we need to have troops over there, unless you Aussies really want them. It's not like you are under direct military threat or anything. Too small of a number of troops to really matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't get why???

At the very least, I hope we are moving them from some other country, not deploying even more troops overseas.


I would be thinking to guard a mobile launch platform...probably first strike one that is on the drawing boards as we speak.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by meanmanolo
 


What ? Talk about paranoia .No ones going to be shooting anyone and there is no link to some protesters in a tent in Melbourne. I know this is ATS but nothings changed .has anyone even been to Darwin ? Theres always joint military activity going on .Look at this from 2009
www.smh.com.au...
CHINA says it will consider a call from Australia and the US to carry out three-way military exercises in the interests of peace and stability.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by steveknows
 




"Australia and Britain were very close, mainly due to the fact that Britain founded Australia, and Australia considered them their "mother country". However in World War 2, the relationship started to change, and it started with the British Prime Minister Churchill diverting Australia's 6th and 7th Divisions to reinforce their own troops in Burma when Australia needed them for their defense due to the Japanese advance. This was done without consultation, but eventually, Australian Prime Minister Curtin, managed to get the troops back. This caused some of the changes between Australia and Great Britain. Another reason is because Britain could not help Australia when they needed them most, even when Australia helped Britain when they needed it. This caused PM Curtin to publicly appeal to the US for military assistance, and this was done on 27 December, 1941 (I think). The US came immediately, as they were also eager to drive back the Japanese who bombed Pearl Harbour. The US commander Douglas MacArthur arrived in March the next year and became Supreme Commander of all Allied Forces in the South-West Pacific, and Australia became his headquarters for command. The US military assistance was vital in driving back the Japanese, and they were considered as saviors by Australians. However, as time wore on, the relationship began to sour, with Australian commanders resenting MacArthur's arrogant manner and the way he deployed Australian troops and undervalued their efforts. Sometimes, fights would occur, which occasionally became serious, resulting with deaths. However, the US did help Australia drive the Japanese back and win the war. The original relationship between Britain and Australia resumed, but with Australia being more cautious and independent."

Read more: wiki.answers.com...'s_relationship_with_Britain_and_the_US_change_during_World_War_2#ixzz1dwAF2uJW

Gallipoli also comes to mind
Which Aussie history do you suggest I read relevent to my post ?

edit on 16-11-2011 by Timely because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-11-2011 by Timely because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by steveknows
 




"Australia and Britain were very close, mainly due to the fact that Britain founded Australia, and Australia considered them their "mother country". However in World War 2, the relationship started to change, and it started with the British Prime Minister Churchill diverting Australia's 6th and 7th Divisions to reinforce their own troops in Burma when Australia needed them for their defense due to the Japanese advance. This was done without consultation, but eventually, Australian Prime Minister Curtin, managed to get the troops back. This caused some of the changes between Australia and Great Britain. Another reason is because Britain could not help Australia when they needed them most, even when Australia helped Britain when they needed it. This caused PM Curtin to publicly appeal to the US for military assistance, and this was done on 27 December, 1941 (I think). The US came immediately, as they were also eager to drive back the Japanese who bombed Pearl Harbour. The US commander Douglas MacArthur arrived in March the next year and became Supreme Commander of all Allied Forces in the South-West Pacific, and Australia became his headquarters for command. The US military assistance was vital in driving back the Japanese, and they were considered as saviors by Australians. However, as time wore on, the relationship began to sour, with Australian commanders resenting MacArthur's arrogant manner and the way he deployed Australian troops and undervalued their efforts. Sometimes, fights would occur, which occasionally became serious, resulting with deaths. However, the US did help Australia drive the Japanese back and win the war. The original relationship between Britain and Australia resumed, but with Australia being more cautious and independent."

Read more: wiki.answers.com...'s_relationship_with_Britain_and_the_US_change_during_World_War_2#ixzz1dwAF2uJW

Gallipoli also comes to mind
Which Aussie history do you suggest I read relevent to my post ?

edit on 16-11-2011 by Timely because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-11-2011 by Timely because: (no reason given)


What's that got to do with what I said? the Australian divisions were pushing the japs back before the U.S got into full swing.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by daggyz
Blah Blah Blah.

Without the US Australia would be talking Japanese. How is it that Australia raises idiots in this modern age is beyond undertsanding. All the information in the world and insanity pervates all areas of humanity.

Want to know why she accepted it? use that little ball of grey stuff.. hang on maybe it is small. Just think about it is all I say. You'd be the first to wimper in tyour pillow like a babay if in 210 years you were invaded. You'd be so scared you'd fail to enlist.

Please grow up.

Now watch this be deleted because it is the only honest thing on ATS today


Thanks for your input there slick. As lame as it may be



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Know this ...

If Iran falls, there will be a war (economic, political, and even military) for energy resources from Australia to Africa to Japan and everywhere in between.

And that war will happen even if Iran is not taken offline. It will just take longer to unfold.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by steveknows
 


Mainly to do with my point that the US has historically been a more fair minded ally than Britain.

I do take your point, though we were stretched and tiring when the US got involved.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Here's the fact. Not one person here on ats knows what's actually going on.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Be worried Australia. Ask questions. DEMAND answers. Our Government just ignores us, sends us form letters that say nothing or arrests us. I mean those who actually go to a Senator's office, not just OWS. Maybe you can have better luck because this is NOT a good sign for any of us.

The United States managed a very short notice FULL WAR deployment capability with prepositioned equipment and supplies in the Saudi desert for over 10 years. That didn't require combat troops sitting there to babysit the stuff, and that was in a nation that has been known to ..ahem...shift loyalties, in times past.

Australia is among the VERY best and most loyal allies America has ever had. I'm thinking about what some of the Aussie military has done..pilots especially..in places like Vietnam and the Middle East. Never a better friend... So why the heck would we need actual troops when Australia could surely store goods for us and we'd then be able to man everything in the time it takes to fly men down there? Yeah... this isn't a positive development.
edit on 16-11-2011 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by steveknows
 


Mainly to do with my point that the US has historically been a more fair minded ally than Britain.

I do take your point, though we were stretched and tiring when the US got involved.


I've not once ever denied that, I know that in our darkest hour Britain let us down. And when I say Britain I don't mean the people but the policy makers of the time. And I do not devaluate Americas role in the defence of Australia. We just weren't the defenceless push over some people and Hollywood have made out.

The japs said themselves that we were the first to cause them to retreat.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
So how does it feel in the land down under? To know that your leader and government can't escape the 'Elite' progressive movement towards WWIII and an emerging NWO...

I wonder if all 'trash' talking will become null and void once it becomes apparent that the people of the world haven't been given too many options of means towards eliminating this from coming into fruition.

Yall want a way out? Find solutions... We've found ours, Ron Paul. Although, that only gets us so far...

Maybe a little 'Thrive' movement is in store, or some 'Zeitgeist' movement on an international scale will become more important as people find the need to escape what the ignorance of the mass' has allowed to come into being.

Either way, have fun...


Certainly feels very crowded here today
like the way you think...

Thrive

go straight to page 8 and copy and send if you want, bet most will, better be quick some of it is gone already
and what does that tell you...
xx
a



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AussieAmandaC
 


What,you didn't think the United States is going to let you guys turn into a part of teh Asia-pacific region, right? As far as we're considered, you're part of "the west" and like all men of Numenor, your place is under the shining city on a hill, Washington.


(Seriously I can't be the only one who gets Tolkein on the brain when I hear people talk about "the west," am I?)

Basically.. .yeah. The president peed on your trees and said "this is mine."



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Be worried Australia. Ask questions. DEMAND answers. Our Government just ignores us, sends us form letters that say nothing or arrests us. I mean those who actually go to a Senator's office, not just OWS. Maybe you can have better luck because this is NOT a good sign for any of us.

The United States managed a very short notice FULL WAR deployment capability with prepositioned equipment and supplies in the Saudi desert for over 10 years. That didn't require combat troops sitting there to babysit the stuff, and that was in a nation that has been known to ..ahem...shift loyalties, in times past.

Australia is among the VERY best and most loyal allies America has ever had. I'm thinking about what some of the Aussie military has done..pilots especially..in places like Vietnam and the Middle East. Never a better friend... So why the heck would we need actual troops when Australia could surely store goods for us and we'd then be able to man everything in the time it takes to fly men down there? Yeah... this isn't a positive development.
edit on 16-11-2011 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)


There's a message being sent. Exactly to who and the reason why is just guess work. I don't think it's a late developement. The liberal PM we had had plans to build two super carriers which was boohood by the current government when they were the coalition.

You don't want to build two super carriers unless you see a reason for it in the future.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Our election was rigged anyway...
edit on 17/11/2011 by Devestator because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by AussieAmandaC
 

No we dont like this..
But like the Americans, there isnt not to much we can do..

It dont matter who we vote for, they will all screw us, without the common curtsy of using lube or giving a reach around. Lmfao



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by steveknows
 

What in the name of all that's Holy would Australia DO with 2 Super-Carriers?? I'm not sure I fully understand the need for the sheer number the U.S. has, but we've accepted the role as peacekeeper of the High Seas
so whatever... Australian ones though? Oh I sure hope your nation remains resistant to that. You really don't want to wake up one morning with a Navy capable of playing world Cop. You'll find the world doesn't ask, it DEMANDS you do it every time someone calls 911.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Good.. I've always wanted to visit Australia.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Anybody else find it coincidental. that this increased " warm fuzziness " between our leaders, is happening at the same time that Ju-liar announces a backflip regarding the supply of uranium ( for peaceful purposes only) to India ?





new topics

top topics



 
86
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join