Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Okay okay okay... | |
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 17:20:21 12/04/04 Sat In reply to: Ian (Australia) 's message, "Thanks for noticing, Steph" on 23:34:31 12/03/04 Fri There might be a point to make about Australia not being a meaningful ally because its small population makes its contribution more moral support than anything else. Goodness, given that British military support to the USA is something which the Americans might appreciate in terms of solidarity but don't really need, then how much more true must this be of Australia? This is not, however, my personal opinion, but I do believe that it is true that this undrewrites a lot of American military strategy: help from abroad is an unnecessary luxury, so it's nice to have it but not essential. In this context, the most important feature of both British and Australian support for the USA is not that it makes much difference to the US military's ability to prosecute wars: it is that it brings home to Americans who their real allies are. Notwithstanding the Polish contingent in Iraq, who makes the most noise about the justice of American foreign policy? Why, Messers Howard and Blair, of course. In this context perhaps I should revise my statement to the effect that the English-speaking world is the only bloc on which the USA can rely for alliances. I suggest that this is not a coincidence, and that the US can not be seen as an entirely separate creature from CANZUK. Not one of the immediate family, certainly, but not entirely unrelated either... and this, I think, was the burden of my remarks. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: The thing that most irked me about that recent Michael Moore film ... | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:00:13 12/04/04 Sat ... was the fact that he made out as if the Coalition of the Willing was just the USA plus a bunch of irrelevant little countries that no one should care about. I.e Bush (portrayed as a complete and corrupt idiot) and basically no one else. Whatever people may think about the moral worth of our respective leaders (and about Bush's intelligence), no one ever accuses Howard and Blair of being idiots. Pretending that the UK and Australia were not involved in the war was thus a very low trick. The war may not have been very different without Australia's commitment. We sent a small number of high quality troops to operate behind enemy lines and clear the way for the invasion. They did an excellent job and have been universally praised, but there were not many of them. Without the UK, however, Bush would really have been on his own, and that would have to have played differently to the US public. Surely people would have said "hang on, no one is coming with us on this - doesn't that mean that we should ask a question or two?" [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |