Printable View
I posted a reply yesterday, but for some reason it didn't work. Go figure.
The reply was short, just a thank you for clarification. For the record, most people I know don't like "our" foreign policies either. I enjoy this sight and learn a lot, ...... even a little about woodworking!
Dusty,
Your post worked and is still there. Welcome to the forum. As previously stated, most things that my seem crude to you are only said in jest and you will take a little while to get used to the Aussie humour. Hang about and you will enjoy your time.
Dan
I'm wading in here real late on this topic bit thought I'd have a poke in here before I hit the sack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturdee
I have to fully agree with Surdee on the above and that is a big gripe for me about Americans, but there are good blokes on both sides. And don't give me the wooha that they're the saviour for the whole world or that Bush or any president is the leader of the free world, then you really get me going.
And the baseball World Series, I thought it's only teams in America playing, don't remember seeing China or Greenland playing, so what gives? Or is that part of the "we are the world" thing?
And Wongo, what's wrong with Queenslanders mate? :D
I've made some posts in the past which I've apologised to the bloke I directed it to. But at the end of the day let's all have fun in our shed stuffing up perfectly good bits of wood and help each other out make the stuff ups a bit better, and along the way we can share our Aussie humour beyond the shores of this great brown land.
Mate, I love this country! And let's ditch the national anthem for what I think it should be instead, "Great Southern Land" by Icehouse. :)
Waldo.
"And the baseball World Series, I thought it's only teams in America playing, don't remember seeing China or Greenland playing, so what gives? Or is that part of the "we are the world" thing?"
I was once told that the series was initiated and sponsered by a newspaper called "News of the World" and known as "the World". The "World Series" is named after the paper, so the story goes.
Hopefully, one of the Yank members will be able to confirm, or deny, my information.
G'day RobertWa,
Hey thanks for that. That puts to bed something that bugged the heck out of me, and all based on a perception rather than fact. :)
And anyone watch Planet of the Apes tonight? At the ending Buck Rogers got back home to find it over run by monkeys. Nice twist. It is isn't it, true I mean? And so much body hair on them too. :D Looked a bit like Zed.
An example of how you don't necessarily need an army to control other countries. When Britain and France invaded Suez in response to Nasser's nationalisation of the canal, it took them about a day to occupy Suez, and basically were finished by teatime. The US, this was when the senior and very bent Kennedy's anti English influence prevailed, forced Britain to withdraw by threatening huge financial penalties (can't quite remember what, something to do with the gold standard and war loans I think)
The Poms packed up and went home. The US was determined to finish off the remnants of Empire and to filled the power vacuum created.
Not saying what they did at Suez was right or wrong, but it was an enormous change in the way the world worked, led to the fall of Eden (who was quite ill too) and not one shot fired - by the Seppo's that is, any only a few by the Eygptians too.
Thats a bit like the Vic bike race, the sun tour, is that sponsered by the Herald Sun or Suntour the Jap gear people??Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert WA
Bodgy
That's an interesting summary of the Suez crisis. Is it possible that the US may have had an eye on what the Soviets were doing in Hungary at the same time?
Driver, absolutely. The timing was really bad for the Poms, Frogs and of course Hungarians. THe Seppos couldn't just condemn Stalins invasion and subsequent slaughter of the Hungarians whilst the FrogPoms were doing a similar thing in Eygpt - without the brutality.
Whilst the Seppos couldn't get a security council vote, as the FrogPOms had seats and thus vetoes, they did get a General Assembly vote up 65-4 condemning the invasion.
This wasn't what caused the withdrawal tho. That was the big financial stick. I've read all of Churchills biographys' and one on Eden, and thats were the info comes from.
Partly US distaste for Empire and colonies, often expressed by their Sec of State John Foster Dulles (of CIA fame) but also an opportunity to finally stuff an old rival. Which they did. Eisenhower was originally onside with the PomFrogs and Israelies but was talked around by the Sec of State.
A bit ironic really as the US had its own 'colonies', ie Philipines, Guam and other Pacific Islands, Okinawa, West Germany etc.
The following quotes are interesting:
At the same time, ffice:smarttags" /><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com[IMG] /><st1:City w:st=[/IMG]Suez</st1:City> was the last occasion when the European powers might have withstood and brought down a <ST1:place w:st="on">Third World</ST1:place> dictator who had shown no interest in international agreements, except where he could profit from them. Nasser's victory at <st1:City w:st="on">Suez</st1:City> had among its fruits the overthrow of the pro-Western regime in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region>, the Egyptian occupation of the <st1:country-region w:st="on">Yemen</st1:country-region>, and the encirclement of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><ST1:place w:st="on">Israel</ST1:place></st1:country-region> which led to the Six Day War - and the bills were still coming in when I left office.
As I came to know more about it, I drew four lessons from this sad episode. First, we should not -get into a military operation unless we were determined and able to finish it. Second, we should never again find ourselves on the opposite side to the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region> in a major international crisis affecting <st1:country-region w:st="on"><ST1:place w:st="on">Britain</ST1:place></st1:country-region>'s interests. Third, we should ensure that our actions were in accord with international law. And finally, he who hesitates is lost.
Margaret Thatcher
The events of October 1956 nevertheless helped to renew momentum for European integration. <st1:country-region w:st="on">Hungary</st1:country-region> reminded western Europeans of the nature and proximity of the Soviet regime; <st1:City w:st="on"><ST1:place w:st="on">Suez</ST1:place></st1:City> made them resentful of American tutelage. Inspired by Monnet and the Belgian economist Paul-Henri Spaak, “the Six” drafted the Euratom Treaty for a joint nuclear energy agency and the Treaty of Rome to expand the coal and steel community into a full-fledged Common Market. The treaties were signed on March 25, 1957, and went into effect on Jan. 1, 1958. The European Economic Community provided for internal and external tariff coordination, free movement of labour and capital, and a common agricultural pricing policy. Integration theorists hoped that international economic institutions would sustain a momentum leading to political unity as well.
Encyclopedia Brittanica
It's fascinating how these events change the course of history.
Aplogies to members who are not interested, I do tend to go on.
ffice:office" /><O:p></O:p>
I thought you didn't like using those things. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bodgy
Cut & paste from MS office product gotchya.:D
My Mum was born in Hobart, lol so I have 1 and 1/2 heads anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang's son
When AFL went down there they made a loss cos they sold only one family ticket..........Crowd was 8,000.
Next time they wised up and charged per head?
Aussie can make fun of themselves if there is a joke in it....
Speaking of jokes? The New Zealand cricket team springs to mind? and the Poms in Pakistan? Or heaven forbit that silly round ball game which is past a joke.......
Wasn't me, it was Mr Gates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Rogers
Funny thing I selected 'clear formatting' before posting and also hit the 'no format' button on the Forum editor.
Well spotted Cliff, like a dingo onto a dead roo. Life is a series of paradoxes.
Bodgy
I don't want to drag this on for too long but it's worth pointing out that this thread is entitled "American Bashing" and your first post - using the example of the Suez crisis - bashes away pretty hard. It implies that the US motives for applying pressure to the British and French sprang from Joseph Kennedy's well-known anti-British sentiments and a desire to dominate the world stage. Incidentally, Kennedy was a Democrat and Eisenhower a Republican. Did Kennedy really have that much influence with the President?
Your second post - a bit more measured, I reckon - acknowledges my point: that the Americans had a very real concern about the Hungarian invasion. They were able to take the moral high ground with the Soviets in the UN because they had actively pressurised Britain and France (and Israel) over the invasion of Egypt.
Whilst you and I find this interesting, I hesitate to go on much more, cause I'm sure most won't.
May I make just two points? Firstly, Eisenhower was not originally so stuck on compelling the PomFrogs to go home, it was the state department that was gung ho. This department, like most public service enclaves was a sort of old boys club. Kennedy Senior, who I think was once UK Ambassador had on-going influence at State. General high level power and influence was demonstrated by getting his boy JFK up over Tricky Dicky.
Secondly, I didn't think my first post was bashing the US too much. Suez is historical fact, very few nations act out of altruism, its not unique to the Seppo's. This event did mark the final end to the already moribund British Empire, and the beginning of the American Empire, finally consolidated at the death of European Communism.
Would anyone deny that we currently have an American Empire, possibly more cultural and economic rather than military? Did this happen by accident?
Sorry again for being boring.
Isn't this all just a part of The Great Game?