|
|
|
|
|
| [ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: You don't learn all of the truth about 1812 either | |
Author: Jim (Canada) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 20:30:42 12/02/04 Thu In reply to: Frank (US) 's message, "American history teaching are to blame" on 20:20:54 12/02/04 Thu [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: US members | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:31:52 12/02/04 Thu I still don't understand why we have American members, or rather why we have Americans who wish to join as I have no problem with it myself. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: American members | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:38:06 12/02/04 Thu I think input and interest from anyone is very helpful, regardless of what country they live in. The fact that Americans are taking an interest in something that is not proposed for them shows that it has merit with a wider audience. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: US members | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:52:43 12/02/04 Thu If the FCS were ever to expand beyond the realms of the crown, then the USA would be the logical direction for that expansion. Not necessarily ideal or popular with many people here, but more logical than expanding into, say, Vietnam, Cambodia, or Yemen. We must remember that the 'Anglosphere' is in vogue in the USA among intellectual conservatives - and while the Anglosphere and the FCS are not the same thing, it would be misguided in the exteme to deny that they are both manifestations of the same basic motives: co-operation between countries which for reasons of history share common values. Our relationship with the USA is no different in nature from our relationships between each other: it is different only in degree. Obviously, Britain has stronger ties to Australia and New Zealand than to the USA, but that does not mean that we have no ties with the USA. It follows logically that Americans have ties with us. Why should it seem so peculiar that Americans should be interested in the FCS? Indeed, I can imagine that some Americans would be more interested in the FCS than many in CANZUK: the USA is particularly susceptible to identity crises, with no real allies except for Britain, which they have been taught to revile as the Great Bogeyman from which America was lucky to escape. On the other hand, why should a Canadian be interested? They know who they are: firstly, they are the descendents of British colonists, and secondly they are not blasted Frenchmen. That is a sufficient self-definition for anyone, and needs no political ties to reinforce it. Compare with the Americans: who are they? Their ancestry is so mixed, and perhaps most importantly there is no large, close-knit foreign population like Quebec within the USA against which to contrast oneself. Look across the Atlantic, America: some of us still love you! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: "no real allies except for Britain" | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 01:26:33 12/03/04 Fri I'm not sure whether you are saying that Australia is not a real country or just not a real ally. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: That was tactless of him | |
|
Author: Steph (U.S.) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 05:02:25 12/03/04 Fri This American is VERY appreciative of our Australian allies. Australia is the only country that fought with us in every major war we were involved in during the 20th Century and some of us have not forgotten. Cheers Steph [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Australians were in Vietnam? | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 14:33:23 12/03/04 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Vietnam | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 14:57:53 12/03/04 Fri Country Participation at Height of Involvement Losses USA Over 540,000 troops Approximately 50,000 Australia 8,300 troops and advisors Approximately 500 dead New Zealand 534 soldiers One battalion under Australian (1st Brigade) command at any one time. 37 KIA A Brief History of the Australian Forces in Vietnam http://www.vietvet.org/aussie1.htm [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Yes | |
|
Author: Paddy (Scotland) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:22:26 12/03/04 Fri That is apparently why the naval Ensign was changed - because the Australians were flying the flag of a power that was not engaged in the theatre of war. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Canada was in Vietnam too...look it up... | |
|
Author: Brent (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 05:57:06 12/05/04 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: here 'tis... | |
|
Author: Brent (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 06:03:25 12/05/04 Sun INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR CONTROL AND SUPERVISION SOUTH VIETNAM. Authorized in January 1973 to monitor the cease fire in South Vietnam, supervise the exchange of prisoners and to ensure no build up of military equipment. Canada ceased operations in July 1973. http://www.img.forces.gc.ca/commelec/Brhistory/anxa_e.htm [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Thanks for noticing, Steph | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:34:31 12/03/04 Fri I'm sure Ed knows I was just having a go at him, but he does have a point. Australia is certainly a determined ally of the USA (especially under the Howard government), but it is quite reasonable to argue that we don't count as a real ally in terms of our ability to make a serious difference on the ground. Vietnam is definitely within the region that Australia has a big stake in, but the war split our society as it did America's. The 1949-1972 conservative government came to an end in part because of the unpopularity of the war. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Okay okay okay... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:20:21 12/04/04 Sat 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. [ Post a Reply to This 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 ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: Canadians are interested in the FCS because they fear American domination and quite rightly so | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 03:12:36 12/03/04 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I'm sure Australians would feel just the same if we were neighbours of the USA | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:11:51 12/04/04 Sat [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: So they want English domination instead? | |
|
Author: Huh? [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:53:07 01/25/05 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
|
Forum timezone: GMT+0 VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB: Before posting please read our privacy policy. VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems. Copyright © 1998-2012 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved. |