Why Did The UK Abandon Australia??, page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 01:27 AM by Mkoll
reply to post by CrimsonKapital



I think that it is a travesty and a great betrayal by Great Britain, especially considering the loyalty they showed in the past. Loyalty needs to go both up and down the chain and in this instance Great Britain failed to reciprocate. I don't know enough about what the British force dispositions and what their needs were in that time period to say whether or not their abandonment was justified in a realpolitik sort of way, but I do know that in the end it worked.

How close did the Japanese get to an invasion of Australia?
edit on 4-5-2012 by Mkoll because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 01:37 AM by CrimsonKapital
reply to post by Mkoll




The Japanese were less than a dozen or so kilometres from Australian soil. Australian bushmen untrained, unarmoured, with inferior weapons and outmatched by 30 to 1 managed to defeat the Japanese invading force.

Also today marks the 70th anniversary of the Battle of the Coral Sea which was a major engagement that ended the Battle for Australia.
edit on 4-5-2012 by CrimsonKapital because: (no reason given)




reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 02:12 AM by Grifter81
reply to post by CrimsonKapital



Great Britain didn't abandon Austrailia. We were unable to do much defending due to our diminished fleet.

When Japan attacked the Americans at Pearl Harbour and Europe at Singapore we found ourselves unable to sustain a war on two fronts. Meanwhile the USA positioned themselves around Austrailia after a retreat from the East Indies.

Once their battle line was drawn the USA became the defenders of Austrailia and New Zealand.

We didn't abandon Austrailia, we were just unable to defend her as we would have liked. This is also why Austrailia enjoys a good relationship with the US. Lasting alliances.


reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 02:24 AM by HumanCondition
reply to post by ollncasino




On the one hand it could be argued that it was a gamble that the Japanese would not invade mainland Australia.

Think they would take that gamble if it was their necks on the line?


reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 02:38 AM by CrimsonKapital
Originally posted by Grifter81
reply to
post by CrimsonKapital



Great Britain didn't abandon Austrailia. We were unable to do much defending due to our diminished fleet.

When Japan attacked the Americans at Pearl Harbour and Europe at Singapore we found ourselves unable to sustain a war on two fronts. Meanwhile the USA positioned themselves around Austrailia after a retreat from the East Indies.

Once their battle line was drawn the USA became the defenders of Austrailia and New Zealand.

We didn't abandon Austrailia, we were just unable to defend her as we would have liked. This is also why Austrailia enjoys a good relationship with the US. Lasting alliances.


Wrong, America did NOT begin sending a substantial amount of men and equipment until late 1942. Meaning for almost 2 years Australia was under siege with little help from America and NO help whatsoever from Great Britain.

Australians became the defenders of Australia, we were the last hope in the Pacific fighting the Japanese almost on our own.

Also why was the UK sending the Soviet Union HUGE amounts of military equipment, when Australia needed them more than anything, shouldn't those weapons or at least some have been sent to help the Australians?


reply posted on 4-5-2012 @ 02:42 AM by Grifter81
Originally posted by CrimsonKapital
Originally posted by slaine1978
I don't know the history of this very well but im sure the uk
did not abandon you.
you got to remember it was a world war maybe the british forces
couldent send reinforcements because they were fighting in europe.

im sure we never abandoned you it just a case of we couldent get the reinforcments to you.

and im also sure that if austrailia was under threat now in this day and age we would be there for you
and so would most of the commonwelth.


You also have to remember the Battle of Britain ended in october in 1940, the Battle for Australia began in 1941. So Britain was not under threat at this time like Australia was, they could have sent help but they chose no to.
Australias best fighting force the AIF was fighting for Britain in North Africa at this time, when Australia was under attack the British stubbornly refused to allow them to return to defend their homeland.
When Australian PM John Curtin announced they would be returning home, Winston Churchill called US, AUSTRALIANS TRAITORS!!!
Could that be any more ironic??


I think your underestimating the toll the Battle of Britain took on the UK. You should read some war history. It will answer all of your questions.

Had Britain not pulled back at the time they did the whole war might have been lost. The descision was made to stay in the North Atlantic and concentrate on Germany and Northern Europe. A war on two fronts was unsustainable. This, ultimately, was Hitlers downfall. An overstretched force cannot win.

You were not abandoned. Britain was (probably still is) legally bound to defend Austrailia under the Imperial Defence Act. The descision to pull back would NOT have been taken lightly.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Attention ATS, This Is Important
  Posted 9 days ago with 33 member flags
Labor Day Has Been Canceled
  Posted 8 days ago with 21 member flags
Nine Myths About \'Socialism\' In The United States.
  Posted 7 days ago with 20 member flags
Asking for help around here......
  Posted 16 days ago with 19 member flags
Are You All Deranged?! Women Want Rape? o_O
  Posted 19 days ago with 15 member flags
I am tired.
  Posted 11 days ago with 12 member flags
Namaste = pretentious
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Gays have the right to marry and always have
  Posted 4 days ago with 10 member flags

ATS Live North America is broadcasting in 32 minutes.
Today's Show: ATS Live:162: Tornados! Murder! Cover Ups! Obama-Gate! WOW!