posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:23 AM
First off all S&F
I think it would depend on the circumstances leading up to, and during the war as to whether or not Europe should help the USA in a WW3 event. That
being said, i think it would be hard for many of the European countries and indeed Australia to knock back the USA and side with China, as the USA is
heavily based in Europe and Australia.
I think Australia has already signed it's soul over if you know what i mean. We have US Spy bases over here (some are classed as US territory), so it
would be difficult to stay neutral, let alone side with China.
As for WW2, the USA did sweep in to take all the glory, but they did help in certain situations. This being said, most of the work was already done by
the allies. This is doubly so in the Pacific, where Australia had already repelled the Japanese advance southward. Also, it should be noted that there
was a high amount of discussions happening at the time, whether or not an invasion and occupation of Australia would be feasible. Obviously, it never
happened, but there is some evidence to state that the Japanese put deep thought into the possibility:
Mr. Sato indicated that the Japanese Navy was responsible for the implementation of plans to invade and occupy Australia.
He indicated that he was always at the nerve centre of the Japanese Navy.
Mr. Sato indicated that there was a Japanese Invasion Force of many troop transports and warships heading south from Japan to make a beach landing
half way between Townsville and Brisbane. Mr. Sato claimed that the air raids on Darwin, which had started on 19 February 1942, were "a feint to
destroy shipping and planes".
Mr Sato had stated that the Japanese had realised that it would have been too difficult to move a large force south from Darwin and had then decided
to attack the Queensland coast midway between Townsville and Brisbane. He indicated that communications were good and the population was sparse in
that area of Queensland. The city of Brisbane was reportedly the first objective of this so-called Invasion Plan of Australia. It was believed that
Brisbane could be taken quite readily with a minimum of cost and resistance. Sydney was the next objective and was to be attacked by land and
amphibious forces. They then planned to move on to Melbourne, but by this time, they anticipated that Australia would have surrendered.
Things changed when orders were issued for the Japanese forces to take Milne Bay and Port Moresby. The Japanese were not willing to risk another
operation in Australia while their supply lines were in peril. Again, according to Mr. Sato, the Japanese campaign in New Guinea used up all the
forces originally intended for the invasion of Australia. Mr. Sato indicated that the Japanese had initially thought the Australian forces would be a
pushover in New Guinea. This they abruptly found not to be the case.
Despite this underestimation of the Australians fighting ability, Mr Sato indicated that the Japanese believed that Australia could be persuaded to
become neutral. The Japanese propaganda machine turned itself to achieving this goal.
This would indicate that they gave it serious thought, and the reason why the plan was scrapped was due to the fact that Australia defeated the
intended Japanese invading party in New Guinea.
Following the publication of this article on 1 January 1946, Mr. J.B. Chifley, the Prime Minister of Australia wrote to General Douglas MacArthur,
the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers in Japan on 21 January 1946. MacArthur immediately ordered an investigation by his military intelligence
group. Mr. Sato was interrogated by US military intelligence in the presence of Major R. L. Hughes of the Australian Service Mission.
Sato indicated that the newspaper had misquoted him.
After being tortured by MacArthur, Sato, ended up stating that the newspaper misquoted him
Not at all surprising...
edit on 2-6-2012 by daaskapital because: link