Australians Losing Faith In the United States.

You better check your financial facts. The US finished the war with about double the wealth that it started with.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

blatham wrote:

finn said

Quote:

If Howard is thrown out of office, it will hardly be because of his ties with the Bush Administration. Local politics trump national, and national trump global.

Why pretend a rule of thumb is an axiomatic truth? The measurements of decline in Blair's popularity in Britain run parallel with the Iraq war and not with job stats in Shropshire.

Well,for a relatively small European nation, sending over 5,000 troops to Iraq, and having about 200 of them losing their lives sort of makes The War local.

Not, in any way, to denigrate the contribution of Australia, but its troop strength has been around 1,500 of which only two have died and not from direct combat.

Not the sort of numbers to drive citizens from both sides of the spectrum to try and ditch Howard.

History will tell and unfortunately we will all be long dead and unable to gloat when it does tell, but if I can lay a long term bet for my great-grand children, it would be that history will favor the Blairs and Howards who sought to align their nation's interests and fate with America.

Howard will be dumped due to domestic issues, the main one being the erosion of worker's rights.

I didn't say anything about war profiteering. I don't know who you are responding to but it's not me. But you must surely be able to understand that it could be a sore point, particularly for the British, who fought Hitler from day one out of principle, and finished the war virtually bankrupt, while the US only entered the war when their own interests were threatened, and finished the war awash with wealth.

Well, I don't agree that the British fought Hitler "out of principle," while the US only did so to protect its interests. I have tremendous respect for the courage and principle of the British people, but let's face it, their interests were also at stake...far more so that those of the US.

Britain was a major European (and global) power and had been enmeshed in the bloody politics of Europe for hundreds of years. Arguably, their defeat of Germany in WWI (with the help of Americans) and the odious conditions they and France imposed on Germany after victory contributed to the rise of Hitler and a hyper-nationalistic Third Reich. Surely they are not responsible for WWII nor did they deserve the suffering it unleashed upon them, but it's difficult to imagine any scenario, short of complete surrender to Germany, that would have shielded them from the War. Not so America.

If it is a sore point with them that they lost fortune and empire in addition to many lives as a result of WWII, I can sympathize with them. That they might look on with sour grapes that all America lost were lives, would not be endearing, and I suspect the suggestion sells them far short in any case.

Let's not forget, as well, that there are literally hundreds of millions of people who were quite happy to see WWII spell the end of the British Empire and that includes many who were not living in British colonies, and quite a few Brits.

As for Bush, for an American who has actually travelled beyond his own borders, you are not very well informed. There IS almost worldwide and universal repugnance for George Bush and his policies. But as stated, if you read the posts made, that feeling does not extend to America as a whole.

That I do not agree with your opinion hardly certifies me as uninformed. There certainly is a widespread distaste for Bush, and by extension America, and the reasons for same run from the valid to the ridiculous, but the sentiment is not universal and it will not trump, in an election, local concerns. The reason for this, quite frankly, is that very many of the people who abhor Bush and/or America do so not for the lofty sense of awareness imagined by blatham, but for far baser reasons; reasons that are not about to supercede their ability to get a job, or walk their streets without fear.

Because wild-eyed crowds in the streets of Islamabad might call for the destruction of Wilso, wouldn't prove Wilso was such a bad guy.

(And considering some of your comments in this forum about Islamists, the scenario might not be that far-fetched :wink: )

That distaste for Bush is what gets on some of our nerves with you U.N. type clowns. He's not my favorite either - but he's fighting the good fight. One that will either be fought now, or later, at a much higher price.

It still would not have the capacity to secure any site it occupied. And uneducated farmers from Indonesia? It would be little more than a rabble, without the discipline or co-ordination to achieve much of anything.

Wilso wrote:

It still would not have the capacity to secure any site it occupied. And uneducated farmers from Indonesia? It would be little more than a rabble, without the discipline or co-ordination to achieve much of anything.

I believe that was the consensus toward the thirteen colonies as well...it wasn't a cake walk for sure, but in the end we prevailed.

-----

I agree with my brethren...I strongly doubt "we the people" would hesitate for an instant, in defending Australia from an aggressor.

*) The weight of a red kangaroo ranges from 18kg up to 90 kilograms. Males are larger than females usually 65 kg Females rarely exceed 30 kg
*) Height ranges from 74-140cm two metres The tail of a red kangaroo (used for jumping) ranges in length from 64cm to 1 meter Lifespan in the wild is thought to be around 15 years

There is no doubt that WWII jump started the American economy, and maybe FDR, that titan of the Left, even took that into consideration when he committed American lives to the savior of Asia and Europe, but it takes an incredible cynicism, flying in the face of a flood of other indicators to believe that the motivation of FDR and America for entering the War was profit.

Plenty of wild boar shooting to be done in Queensland. Their meat is a big export industry to Germany.

If the United States hadn't entered world war 2 Japanese would be the Australian national language.

Quote:

There is no doubt that WWII jump started the American economy, and maybe FDR, that titan of the Left, even took that into consideration when he committed American lives to the savior of Asia and Europe, but it takes an incredible cynicism, flying in the face of a flood of other indicators to believe that the motivation of FDR and America for entering the War was profit.

In relation to the last part of this quote - That's not the case. Most cases of US involvement in war in the last century have been for profit.

I've no doubt that there were many motivating factors for entering the War.

Now, while most cases of US involvement in war has been for economic reasons, WW1 & 2 may be slightly different...so I don't personally hold the opinion that the US entered the war for profit...and in saying that, I certainly believe the US did everything it could to profit out of the war...which for some is only a short step away from believing the US entered the war for profit.

Quote:

If the United States hadn't entered world war 2 Japanese would be the Australian national language.

Quite probably.

Would you care to explain your what point you are trying to make?

For example, without further explanation I can only presume your statement is posted for some reason like the following "I saved your ass...now, I may or may not have done that for my own benefit, but now that I have saved your ass, I demand that you never mention anything that I do that could be construed as bad or wrong ... no matter how bad or wrong it is, not even 60 years later dude, for I would find such display to be the worst kind of ingratitude."

...which sentiment I've seen posted numerous times before.

Feel free to correct it if the above sentiment is incorrect.