Obama: Canceller-in-chief
In the very week that Australia launched its new global tourism campaign, the world's most powerful traveller, Barack Obama, has decided to postpone his trip Down Under. For the second time. Australians could be forgiven for looking upon him as the "canceller-in-chief".
There's a peculiar confluence about the domestic political problems which have led the White House to postpone two scheduled visits. Back in March, Obama decided to remain in Washington to push his healthcare reforms through Congress. Over the same period, Kevin Rudd was trying to sell his own healthcare proposals to sceptical state premiers. Now the president has decided to stay in America to oversee the efforts to deal with the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Rudd, too, is battling with the resources sector, even if the mining tax is a political problem of his own making.
"The man who walked on water is now ensnared by a crisis under water," wrote the New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd of the president's political predicament. Similarly, the one-time golden boy of Australian politics is ensnared by a political crisis involving black coal and red iron ore.
The White House has said it will try to reschedule the visit to Australia and Indonesia sometime in the near future, but where will it fit in the Australian political calendar? It is an intriguing question since most political insiders here expect the federal election to come in either August or September. It seems increasingly unlikely that Obama will make it here before Australians head to the polls.
This is bad news for Kevin Rudd. President Obama has made no secret of his admiration for the Australian prime minister, and a few intricately choreographed photo-opportunities on and around Sydney Harbour would surely have helped his host. For Mr Rudd, the visit might even have given him the chance to press the reset button on his embattled prime ministership.
Instead, the Australian prime minister finishes yet another week of negative headlines with more dispiriting news. It makes him look less consequential, and adds to the impression that he is being buffeted by events rather than exerting much control. Certainly, he is struggling to catch a break.
So Mr Rudd could be forgiven if the words of a previous tourism advertisement came to the forefront of his always crowded mind: President Obama, "Where the bloody hell are you?"
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~26~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Great blog Nick.
Love the headline.
Complain about this comment
Basically, Nick, Australia is not a problem for the current US Administration, the alliance is OK
I think an ongoing environmental disaster can be allowed to take precedence
Complain about this comment
I think Australians recognise that President Obama has a legitimate reason to be cancelling again. However, as to Rudd being rescued by an appearance by Obama, I'm not convinced. A lot of the current discontent with Rudd is related to his being a rather 'populist' Prime Minister. Any photo-op too contrived might, in fact, have an opposite reaction to a boost in support. Basically, the only thing that might save K-Rudd right now is the completely unappetising prospect of Tony Abbott and his unsavoury choice of swimwear. Rudd's opportunity to be a legislator with integrity and a sense of sticking to his beliefs regardless of public opinion is long past.
By the way, love the blog Nick. I love getting a different perspective on Australian happenings.
Complain about this comment
This is getting more hilarious every day. Poor Kevvie, all those tongue strengthening exercises for nought.
Complain about this comment
Might be easier and cheaper if Obama just gets on Facebook and invites us all over to his place, instead. How about, say, a week on Friday?
Complain about this comment
President Barack Obama – “Cancellor in Chief”.
Good one! I like that.
In conversations with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Obama “expressed his deep regret” for postponing his trip, which was to include Asustrtalia, Indonesia and Guam.
No "official" reason has been given for the cancellation this time. Administration officials have said they were considering a change in light of the Gulf oil spill. Obama is supposed to travel to Louisiana for an in-person update on the government’s response to the oil spill – this is his third such trip.
Indonesia’s Spkiesperson Dino Patti Djalal said that the delay was due to Obama’s need to focus his attention on a solution to the environmental disaster from the oil spill. Both leaders agreed to find a date for President Obama in November, if not earlier.
Personally, I find the excuse weak because Obama could receive updates re the spill from Australia, from Indoneais and from Guam. It’s not as though he’s providing immiediate expertise or even guidance re the spill, and he's certainly not getting down on his hands and knees to breath the fine coast air and remove grease.
I wonder if the cancellation doesn’t have more to do with this:
The president’s trip was to include Obama’s second address on US relations with the Muslim world during his visit to Indonesia, the world’s most-populous Muslim country. Having said this, protests were planned for Australia, Guam and Indonesia…and, when you come right down to it, what on earth could Obama say about American ongoing relations with the Muslim world?
Complain about this comment
Obama embroils in a misconceived war at Afghanistan and petroleum disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He is a political liability, not asset. Rudd should forget coal, iron, and nuclear energy. Hydrogen fuel is a current innovation. The real capital outlay should be the introduction of processed water for engine combustion.
Complain about this comment
Please, this has nothing to do with Australia. President Obama is dealing with hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil a day spilling into the Gulf coast. The right-wing Republicans blame him for everything and would certainly say he didn't care about the US if he visited Australia at this time. This is about the craziness of US politics and not about Australia. The US Goose-steppers criticse his every move and the commerical-selling media is always welcome to oblige. It has been interesting to see the free market, small government Republicans crying about why the Federal government isn't doing more...they are hypocrits, sometimes more obvious than others.
Complain about this comment
@ 8. Sort-of Correct. Obama is taking flak already and not just by 'goose-stepping' republicans (e.g. james carville) but indeed the administration is on the defensive and is now engaging in the time-honored kabuki dance of US politics (hand wringing, threats of criminal inquiry, grave facial expressions, photo-ops on site, etc) in order to show 'leadership'.
Re small government hypocrits, your comment is ridiculous. Even ardent 10th amendment types know there is a proper role of federal government and addressing unprecedented natural disaters is one of them.
Complain about this comment
I would hope that the Austrailians understand, because if they had their worst oil disaster in their history with oil all over their beaches, sickening workers, killing and sickening animals, ruining lifestyles, the environment, nature and careers, like we do, they would be beyond upset. I have always viewed the Austrailians as, for the most part, loving the environment and nature.
In all honesty, Obama has not shown much emotion, though, and his visits to the beaches with oil have been quick. In fact, during his last visit, Obama went to one of the more cleaned up beaches where workers were helping, but after Obama left, many of the workers left, too. It was a total photo op. I hope that President Obama does better today.
So please do not be upset, Austraila, because this is the worst oil spill in USA history.
Complain about this comment
Oh, don't feel bad Australia. He has canceled allot of stuff for the US, like long-term help for the unemployed in a miserable job market.
Complain about this comment
Well if that oil spill has indirectly hurt that gutless Krudd's re-election chances, then at least something good has come from it!
Complain about this comment
7 sean56z: Who started that war in Afghanistan and why no mention of his disasters?
Are you suggesting President Obama was responsible for the oil leak? Last I heard it was caused by total incompetence on the part of the oil company...BRITISH PETROLEUM.
And because of the incompetence of these, of which he had no connection, you call him "a political liability, not asset"?
And what has Kevin Rudd got to do with American politics?
One can assume which side of the political side of the fence you sit on...that of the ill informed.
Complain about this comment
I think you're being a bit mischievous, Nick, with the headline
A cancelled presidential visit won't influence Rudd's relection chances and it has little relevance to US politics
The oil spill appears to be going the way of a Gulf of Mexico spill, lxtoc-1 in the late 1970s, which took 10 months to shut down.
Let's just hope there's an earlier resolution
Complain about this comment
10 LucyJ: I think that far more Aussies are understanding of the American President's predicament, than are the Americans and Brits I have encountered in various places, including some of the comments here.
Obama's early days visits to Australia, while resident in Indonesia as a young man, would have him aware of our understanding of his situation.
Complain about this comment
Prime Minister Rudd might want to reconsider inviting President Obama over to restore his flagging election chances: when Obama has done the same for U.S. politicians it's been the kiss of death for their election campaigns.
Complain about this comment
Apart from being the canceller-in-chief, Obama is of course the USA's Commander-in-chief and is now taking a much tougher line with BP on the Gulf of Mexico oil leak.
Good on him.
But the recent outrageous attack by Israel in international waters probably also had something to do with Obama's trip cancellation.
The feeling in Indonesia right now is very pro-Palestine and extremely anti-USA, and the way that Indonesians in the past have welcomed Obama because he attended school in Indonesia for a couple of years, has turned 180 degrees.
Obama was to have spent a week in Indonesia, including Bali, so the security would have had to have been vast.
A letter in today's Jakarta Post calls for Iran to develop its nuclear capabilities more quickly so as to provide a new balance of power in the Middle East and thus bypass the USA and its ally Israel, or the other way around if you prefer.
Apart from that rather worrying opinion, pictures of Obama and family relaxing on a pristine Balinese beach while the globs of oil, dead fish and birds wash up on the USA's Gulf Coast certainly would not go down too well at home.
Remember, the southern states of the USA were not strong in their support for Obama in the most recent USA election, so if he wants Democrats to do better in those states, the ones affected most by the leak in the forthcoming mid-term elections, he must be there, on the ground, or on the beach.
Maybe this is stiff cheddar for PM Rudd, maybe not.
One thing I had hoped for when Rudd became PM was a stepping back from Australia's own "poodlelike" Howard basking in Bush Junior's shadow a la Blair.
Does Australia want a President?
Yes we do!
Our own.
Complain about this comment
ghostofsichuan wrote:
"Please, this has nothing to do with Australia. President Obama is dealing with hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil a day spilling into the Gulf coast. The right-wing Republicans blame him for everything and would certainly say he didn't care about the US if he visited Australia at this time. This is about the craziness of US politics and not about Australia. The US Goose-steppers criticse his every move and the commerical-selling media is always welcome to oblige. It has been interesting to see the free market, small government Republicans crying about why the Federal government isn't doing more...they are hypocrits, sometimes more obvious than others."
You are confused, "Goose-steppers" came from the left, including the Nazis.
You complain about his topic not having anything really to do with Australia and I agree, but then you go on to attack "Republicans in your response. How is that related to Australia??
Complain about this comment
18 AllenT2 wrote: "You are confused, "Goose-steppers" came from the left, including the Nazis."
No, goose-steppers and communists came from the right under the banner of the left. True socialists don't believe in violence to attain their ideologies. Violence and limited voice of their opposition has always been the tool of the right.
Complain about this comment
That last line should have read: Violence and limiting the voice of their opposition has always been the tool of the right.
Complain about this comment
Obama is not "dealing with the oil spill" unless I missed the bit where he has a secret valve to shut it off.
He is dealing with domestic demands that he "do something" even when there is clearly nothing he can do. So he does what Rudd did during the Montara blow-out - makes media statements.
There's no practical reason for him to stay in the USA but he'd be crucified if he left now.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps to hear from an American, from New York, it may help you with the horrible disappointment with the worlds most 'powerful' traveler having had to cancel his trip over to save your PM.
How odd that you want him to help you as he is the fastest falling president in this country since WW2.
The oil spill in the Gulf? Oh yes, that is why. He has been there 3 times for a few hours. Oh dear, he is just so busy.
But wait..there is date night, filled with stars and entertainers, his sports games, having them constantly at the White House, flying to NY City just for dinner and most of all, his constantly being on the campaign trail, reading his teleprompters, trying to recapture the audience he once had when there were people who believed him, at least enough to get him elected.
The right blaming the Gulf spill on him? Oh dear no, people do not do that. Hurricane Katrina, not one left minded citizen or the liberal media EVER blamed it all on President Bush.
If your PM is in trouble, perhaps you should elect another? He must be terribly far left if he needs help from Obama. Perhaps it is time for a 'change'. Obama has become the kiss of death to all political figures here and there is a reason for it.
However, if people think he is so great there, that he could save your PM, wait a bit, I think he may be available in a couple years to perhaps be your PM.
Australia is a great and beautiful country. Yes, I have been there.
Please, hold your heads high and do not pander to a man who is failing so bad in his own country. Read the polls here..all of them. If you are not bias, the average of all give a good indication.
Australia is much to great a country to put another lands leader on such a high pedestal and a failing one at that.
Complain about this comment
The last thing Australia needs is a visit from the "communist-in-chief,with his attempts to ruin America to make it a mirror image of socialist Europe.
Complain about this comment
22 ColleenBen: If your President were to 'take control' of the oil spill, which means over riding a corporate company, private enterprise, he would be called a socialist. The whole debate in America recently has been private versus public. Here in Australia our governments, both of the conservative and liberal persuasions, have brought our country further to the left than America and the UK, hence why we avoided the GFC. Governments need to have power over if that country wants to stop the BP disaster in the future. No point in asking the government to shut the gate AFTER the disaster...when no gates worth while exist.
And as to your comparison of this disaster to Hurricane Katrina, one was man made..deliberate and wilful, the other mother nature in an area where hurricanes are more the norm than the exception.
But this is only part of the scenario. 'It's the economy stupid,' to repeat an appropriate quote.
How many billions has BP spend already, and how successful have they been?
Had your Government under Obama spent the same about, and if he were able to intervene in that way, (surely that would have been the same method he would have been advised to used,) would you be here in these pages praising his attempts, even when that money was completely lost, as was BP's?
The reason your President is unpopular, as is our PM and the same with a number of country's leaders is because the people are ignorant of how their country got into serious financial difficulties in the first place.
In our case our previous conservative government wasted billions on useless projects, like building extremely expensive camps for illegal migrants, only to have them processed, and in the main, becoming Australian citizens.
Your previous government squandered billion, even trillions, on an illegal war that is still not won, and a second war, sanctioned by the UN, but only given lip service while they were in control.
I don't mind genuine criticism of any government, but when that criticism contains slanted to totally mistruthful rhetoric, with a complete lack of balance...dare I say Chauvinistic...I feel compelled to respond.
Might I suggest you give your new President the same respect you gave the previous one. In fact more, considering what this President is facing in comparison to the previous.
Complain about this comment
23 crash: Was it the Obama government that caused the crash, or repeated governments refusing to implement controls over the banking institutions, like we have here in Australia?
Had the banks been regulated, there wouldn't have been a crash...and remember the crash started in George Warmonger's time of Presidency...Obama got landed with it.
You really do need to learn the difference between Soviet Communism/Socialism, and true socialism. We live in a SOC iety and we need to protect ALL citizens of our countries, not just the big end of town...hence why we need a SOCIAL IST form of government...not Communist SOCIALISM....totally different ideologies....but a government that is of the people, by the people and for the people...all people...or society.
Complain about this comment
This oil leak has been going on for a month and a half and Obama still has to hang around the US till it's fixed. If the US placed the same level of gravity to things such as the Iraq/Afghanistan wars I doubt whether any President would ever leave the country. Looks like the US can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Personally speaking I can't see why the US maintains this charade that this part of the world means anything. All the facts confirm the exact opposite. Almost half way through this administration and there hasn't been a visit from the Defence Secretary, the Secretary of State, or the President. They even took a year to appoint an ambassador. I wish the US would face facts and accept they should concentrate on the Americas and Australia should concentrate on Asia.
If Kevin Rudd desperately wants Obama to visit I've got a solution for him. He should invite China's President Hu over. If that happens the yanks will break a land speed record getting Obama, Gates and Clinton to the airport.
Complain about this comment
As I recall, it was Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates who were to visit Australia. This was in January and was to take in PNG and NZ as well with the focus on security issues
That visit was cancelled because of the earthquake in Haiti
Then Obama's visit to Australia and Indonesia was announced, to make up for Hillary's no show. I don't know what has happened to PNG and NZ, they seem to have fallen off the radar
I kind of agree with sydneycynic #26.. this part of the world has little relevance to the US
If Rudd hopes an Obama visit would boost his re election chances (it won't), then he should flash the China card and invite Hu
It might also improve Rudd's relations with the mining industry
Complain about this comment
President Obama should not be faulted for cancelling his trip to Australia. The oil spill is a major crisis and until a satisfactory solution is found, the President cannot and will not leave for any state visit. This is understandable. Had he decided to go on a foreign trip, his detractors would have rubbed their hands with glee!! Right now the President along with his advisers will have to help those who have lost their livlihoods because of BP's inability to plug the leak. So blaming Obama is thoroughly unfair!
Complain about this comment
I guess many posters did not read my post #17.
Obama didn't cancel his trip to Australia...he cancelled his trip to Indonesia, and the stop over in Australia.
If one thing troubles me about my Aussie compatriots it is their inability at many times to see the world, or the region we inhabit beyond our own inward looking psyche.
Indonesia is more relevant to Obama than Australia.
As the world's largest Muslim nation and now a successful democracy Indonesia and its 240 million people is far more geopolitically important to the USA than Australia.
As my friend/nemisis stirling 222 has on previous occasions posted in this blog, Australians often have a more "enhanced" opinion of their place in the world than reality might suggest.
And as I said in #17, let us pull back from this poodelike (terrierlike) "His Master's Voice" notion of the USA and whoever its president may happen to be.
Yes I want a President to visit.
And I want him/her to live in Canberra and visit anywhere at any time any city, state or region in Australia or around the world he/her wishes to visit.
I for one don't give two hoots (I am restraining myself here) if an American president visits us or not.
A blight on your American presidents!
And by the way, the USA should get out of Okinawa!
Complain about this comment
To 11Pete11 and others who know nothing of what is happening in America.
We KNOW Obama did not cause the oil leak, please, do not insult our intelligence.
What obama IS responsible for is when it happened, he started shouting who was to blame.
It does not matter at this point WHO IS TO BLAME, what does matter is he ignored the pleas of the governors and senators of the gulf states to receive immediate assistance to build sand barriers on the shore lines, to send out EVERY available military, whomever, to try and skim this oil at any cost to lessen the impact of this disaster. There are many things that should have been started the minute it happened. Instead we have a president that blames everything on everyone else. He is a poor excuse of a leader. No..nothing can stop it so far, but he did next to nothing to put into motion a slow down of this impending disaster to the shorelines, wetlands. What he did was minimal, but with the constant rant..it is BP's problem!
In the meantime, he had many social events going on at the White House....as usual. His own party people started expressing outrage publicly, especially those in those lower states.
It did not and does not at this point matter who's fault it was...dealing with it matters.
May I suggest that you do not only read Liberal news media and become informed by reading parts of all media...actual reports, not opinion.
Yes, I know you now lean to the left as a whole. Multicultural is the PC word. Much more enlightened. Depending more on a government rather than the will of the people.
News Flash... The United States has been multicultural from the moment of its conception..we are a nation of immigrants. It has had it's bad moments trying to reach the ideal that every living soul is equal, but has done quite well at it. I can walk down my street and in nearly every home being a peoples of a different nationality. That..is America.
We however are a center right country and intend to keep it that way and we will succeed.
Your choice of what you want to be perceived as, is not relevant. What is important is that all respect each others ideals, which ever way they may sway.
I can not, as only being a visitor to your country, EVER understand it's government, I do not live there, so I do not judge it. However, I am continually amazed that every country THINKS they understand ours, which is much more complicated, but all have so much to say about it and think what they are saying is a truth. Amazing...simply amazing.
Complain about this comment
"In the very week that Australia launched its new global tourism campaign, the world's most powerful traveller, Barack Obama, has decided to postpone his trip Down Under. For the second time. Australians could be forgiven for looking upon him as the "canceller-in-chief".
Right... One of the great natural disasters of our time unfolds and all Australians can think about is tourist dollars and political campaigns, and how the US president should be supporting them... Reminds me of all those scientists in 60s sci-fi movies, who ignore the impending disaster and then demand that someone stop it as it steamrolls over them. Please tell me that it's just your pathetic attempt to sensationalize an otherwise boring story and that Australians and Indonesians are not actually self-serving isolationists.
Complain about this comment
Greg Warner Post 29.
Your writing of what is going on as written in your first 2 paragraphs, is actually correct.
He indeed has showed his alliances by his continual bowing (literally) to certain countries and where he most often visits.
You are right sir, and this has much to do with the uprising of the American people to unseat this president in the not so distant future.
However, wishing a blight upon all American Presidents, as we have had many excellent ones, with good ones yet to come, is going a bit to far.
Perhaps you could change that curse a bit by naming specific presidents and then something like....
"May President ---- be infested in his/hers body hairs by the fleas of a thousand camels."
That way, we could contain and fumigate them and no blight is spread to the good American people.
Signed by an American Scots/Irish girl, who had many family members die during the potato famine (blight) of Ireland.
Complain about this comment
I find it both very funny and sad when politicians have to bask in the reflected glory of a rather mediocre politician such as Obama just because he is the president of the USA. The Brits are the same with their "special relationship." I think it speaks volumes for our head honchos when they feel compelled to do this. We even go to war for the approval.
Complain about this comment
#29
Greg
I think the choice of Indonesia and Australia for the visit is because of how they're perceived in Washington
Obama defined himself as the Pacific president, based on his childhood in Hawaii and Indonesia. This set up an expectation in the region that the US would place more focus on its role in the Asia Pacific - at a time when China is increasing its economic and diplomatic clout across the region, not to mention building up its military
Regarding Indonesia...his choice of Indonesia is as much to claim US interest in the region, and given his personal association, the size of Indonesia, its Muslim population, its new democracy, Indonesia is a credible choice.
Regarding Australia..Washington's view of Australia over many Administrations. has been intractably unidimensional.. as a small dependable military ally. Obama will want to discuss Afghanistan
So I think the visit of the Pacific president - when it takes place - will be interesting
I would think China will be closely watching it too!
Complain about this comment
30 ColleenBen: It is interesting that the very people who claim others assume, do the very same thing themselves.
You don't know my origins. You don't know my history relating to the US. You know nothing of my involvement in matters relating to the US or it's political system.
Just because you don't have an understanding of our Australian political system, doesn't mean others don't have a very good understanding of yours.
Your current President, who received more votes that Bush in either of his elections, left the entire clean up of the oil spill by BP, to BP. To have done otherwise would have lessened the liability on BP. He is dealing with taxpayers money. The understanding of 'fault' is central to the legal aspects of this whole disaster. It is a part of your laws...you need to check them out.
He did the only thing he could by offered assistance in the form of man power, machinery etc but at cost to BP...why should American taxpayers pay for BP's damages....BP said they could do it alone. They didn't. Obama's now rightfully criticising them.
You would probably be amongst the first to attack him if he didn't.
As to the partying etc of your President, there isn't a leader of any country that can't be found at least one night of the week partying up in the name of his leadership position....it goes with the job.
Have you forgotten Bush's golfing days, his extremely expensive visits to other nations, including Australia, where he closed down cities, including three of ours, at what expense to the American taxpayer. Or the many visits he made to extremely expensive places just to have a meal...his body guards far outnumbered the current and previous Presidents?
As to your perceived assumption that I read Liberal material exclusively, I'll do you a deal, you start reading more WORLD news, and less of what they dish out to you at home, and I promise I'll never read a Liberal controlled network news post again....Easy for me really, I don't read Liberal material at all, simply go to WORLD news services...hence why I as an Australian read the British Broadcasting Corporation's material...unless you consider them Liberal...I guess to most reports in the US, the BBC IS more centre left than them.
Complain about this comment
Australia is very important to the US. We are the only nation, in the southern hemisphere, with the sophisticated bases needed by the US for space exploration. We were used exclusively for the relay to the US with the moon landing, and we have been the sole base used for at least one Mars landing...or at least attempted landing.
As to the importance of this postponed visit to Australia by the US President, it seems to be far more important to the media generally, and in this case, a British blogger, than it is to most Australians.
The visit to our shores by President Bush soured the taste in most Australian's mouth when he completely over ruled our government of the time on a number of laws....or bullied in other words.
Under our laws, only the Parliamentary Broadcasting Service, a government owned network, has the right to film and broad cast from our Parliament house. George Warmonger Bush demanded CNN and a number of other TV networks be allowed into the central chamber of our Government, against the express wishes of the Australian people at large.
The entire city of Sydney and Canberra were shut down so that, in the case of Sydney, the President and Vice Presidents could have a party on the northern side of the city...which meant the Harbour Bridge was blocked to all traffic but the Presidents to allow US security to comb the entire bridge...for fear someone would blow the bridge up. And in Canberra, all flights in and out of Canberra were halted for the day while the President's jet sat idle at the airport.
I wonder why those winging about Obama were deadly silent when this was going on, not just in Australia, but in many countries of the world, by their 'esteemed paranoid President' who preceded the current one.
Talk about being blinded by the right....
Complain about this comment
# 32. ColleenBen:
"May President ---- be infested in his/hers body hairs by the fleas of a thousand camels."
Very well put...I will be using that from now on.
But my point is we kow tow too much to America and its presidents.
#33 miker201 gets it.
#34 wollemi "Regarding Australia..Washington's view of Australia over many Administrations. has been intractably unidimensional.. as a small dependable military ally. Obama will want to discuss Afghanistan" also gets it.
#35 pete gets it.
No matter if you like or loathe Obama, he is just another President of the USA and far too much fuss is made over his visiting, or not visiting Australia.
We have our own agenda and we need to establish our own independent position in the world.
We need to move ahead with the Republic of Australia and the election of our own President as the figurehead of an independent nation that is in no way tied to London or Washington except in those common areas of human decency and dignity which the UK, the USA, Australia and other like-minded nations share.
And the reason why I threw in my two cents worth on Okinawa is because I for one would like to read more opinions by more Australians in Nick's blogs about global issues that affect Australia, such as the US base on Okinawa, the Israeli attack on the aid flotilla, the European debt crisis, North Korea's alleged sinking of the South Korean corvette, UN Security Council Reform etc, etc.
Football, cricket and the vagaries of Australian politics are fine, however it is time the people of Australia's voices were heard on global issues like those mentioned above in this worthwhile and widely read global blog.
How about it Nick?
Complain about this comment
Colleen - People didn't criticise Bush Jnr about Katrina itself.. they criticised him for letting his buddies run the fix-it-up program and half of New Orleans is still a wasteland.
If Obama had given the Gulf cleanup job to one of his Chicago church mates who helped get him elected... THEN you could have a comparison between the two incidents.
Interestingly also.. when Bush the Lesser was failing his way through his 8 years (four of which he didn't even win, but hey with your Dad's golf mates sitting on the court deciding the election outcome, you're a good chance of getting up) - supporters said "you may not respect the man but you must respect the OFFICE of the president".. etc.. and "you may not support the war but you MUST support the troops".. and such.
Basically throwing the focus off the real issue and saying anyone who dared disagree with the squealing right wing and their mumbler mouthpiece was unpatriotic and/or a traitor.
Now these same people, under the guise of the teabagger party, are saying the guy who beat them in the election (fairly, with real results) is now a "tyrant" and its time to "take back" the country? Where is the support for the office now? Hmm? Where is the 'unpatriotic!' scream from the defender of the system when people criticise Mr Obama?
Oh I forgot.. it is the 'unpatriotic!' screamer who is the one doing the criticising. Cant very well call themselves unpatriotic.. we'll just call the boss a 'tyrant' and now we're a New Revolution! Instead of a sad bunch of people who refuse to accept they lost an election.
And by how many years exactly do they want to "take back the country"? Back to when a man was a man but a black man knew his place?
Complain about this comment
11Pete11.
Thank you for your civil response. I must make a few corrections in your post if I may.
1. You tell me to read/watch the world news. Am I not an American on a BBC blog? I have read the BBC online since it was created as I am a frequent visitor to England. Sometimes on business, often times for pleasure.
2.Please look up the fact as it is online. George Bush played golf ONCE after our troops went to war.
3. CNN is a full scaled Liberal station, George Bush NEVER had any control over that station along with several others shown and created in the US. CNN slaughtered this man from day one of his presidency.
4. BP would have compensated the American government for any action on the oil spill which should have started immediately by the American government. This is not a blame game, this is a horrid disaster. Anything and everything should have been put into action..immediately. Trust me Pete, Obama has no problem spending taxpayers money. Compensation from BP would have been dealt with as they claimed responsibility from day one.
5. Allowed date night. A night of social activity for a hard working president? Well of course that is acceptable.
Now please look up as it is easy to do, how many social events this man attended just in the last week. Perhaps this would be a waste of your time, but I am saying to you, please verify what you claim...if only for yourself.
6. If you think Air Force One was a huge expensive ordeal when Bush was in...you should see it now. Double that. He also is in Air Force One flying campaigning constantly causing the people to pay for his constant need to push his agenda which is AGAINST the majority of the citizens of the US. You see, many who did vote for him are now saying..OH OH!
We will not mention his new car he calls the "Beast" which was a fortune. Needed for security? Well no one had a larger target on his back than Bush, but he came no where near the cost of this man. Where you got the idea that Bush had more security..well I will never know where you got that one from as there is no comparison.Please look that up as well.
I am a New Yorker. How odd that you should call the actions of the past president 'paranoid'. Then again, you were not here in New York, in the fields of Pennsylvania, or at the pentagon on 9/11. That was just that day as there were other attacks which had been ignored, just not on our soil other than the first one at the WTC.
I also feel great compassion for all the soldiers who died from each country and for the many Muslims who were innocent and died. A massive human disaster...for all.
You can not feel things, if you do not see them. Not really.
So long Aussie's, and I regret that you do not hold us in as high regard as we do all of you. You see, you would never see a blog such as this one in America,with our people bashing Australians or their government.
Never.
We do enough of that to ourselves..right here. Debate though, is always a good thing.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
39 ColleenBen: Have you ever been contented with a Democrat President? You sound very much like a Republican to me, at least half your comments are coming out of the ultra right opinion of that party.
Not that there's anything wrong with being a supporter of that side of politics, its just that it would have been more honest if you had stated where you lie, politically.
Frankly I can't see how anyone can judge a newly elected President, of Prime Minister for that matter, after only a few years into their position. It can take two terms at lest for a political party to change the basis of that which has been made prior to that change in leadership.
Complain about this comment
As far as I can see there is no requirement on this blog to state where commenters political affiliations belong. So to state that ColleenBen would be 'more honest' to state her voting preferences is moot - the inferences and research into Obama's coming and goings contained in her comments do very well to state her personal preference.
However, the greater amount of Colleen's comments miss the point - Nick's blog focus's on Rudd's discomfort in not having the grand spectacular of a Presidential visit . Not that acclamation always works - consider the upstaging of Howard by Rudd during the Sydney APEC summit.
The comments focused on the wrong party and (hopefully not for Colleen!)show a lack of awareness of Australian Politics
"Just because you don't have an understanding of our Australian political system, doesn't mean others don't have a very good understanding of yours." from 11pete11 is a very valid comment. And no, there wouldn't be a blog like this in America because the vagaries of Australian politics wouldn't even make a blip on the American radar - except in a small niche kind of way.
On the subject of Presidential visits, I was working within Parliament House during Bushes visit - a very cold, distant and bunker like visit - corridors and halls cleared and security everwhere. Contrast that with the anecdotes I heard at the time of Clintons visit where Parliamentary staff were able to at least have a view and maybe even meet him.
Unfortunately, Rudd has been found wanting after one term for not making good on his said commitments and and may not have the opportunity of a second term.
By the way, my voting preferences are my own, readers may infer how they wish.
Complain about this comment
11pete11
If you want to continue to blame Bush for the crash you are obviously one of those people who like to make sweeping statements that are factually incorrect and are a result of your brain washing from the liberal media.There should never have been a bail out,the whole point of the stock market is when companies make mistakes they go broke or somebody buys them and changes their course,all the bail out did was keep the greedy in control of the companies they were ruining.
Obama's stimulus plan has cost this country a "TRILLION" dollars and our unemployment still lingers at 10 percent,but i think this is his goal to make people reliant on the government and keep voting those lovely all seeing,caring people in control of their lives,back into power.
This form of socialism is far more frightening then the soviet kind.I have read and seen where Australia is being beat down by the lefts political correctness bully boys,hopefully before it is to late and you have ceded all your rights to to the government you will wake up and smell the roses.
Complain about this comment
43 crash wrote: "If you want to continue to blame Bush for the crash you are obviously one of those people who like to make sweeping statements that are factually incorrect and are a result of your brain washing from the liberal media."
Eh....wait a minute...isn't it the Republican manifesto to have small government? To have little to no involvement in private enterprise ventures? I assume you accept Bush was a Republican...although I know there are quite a few who distanced themselves from him.
If I'm wrong then what regulations did he, or any Republican President, initiate to make sure banks and lending houses didn't mismanage or unfairly/unethically use their investors money?
And before you cite Clinton or other Democrats...how many Republican Presidents have you had compared to Republicans since the great Depression?
It was FDR...the great Democrat...that introduced protective legislation into the US after the Great Depression of the late 20'and early 30's, a disaster which sent the world broke, and which was created because banks and lending institutions, of all nations at the time, weren't regulated by laws.
It has been the Republican Presidents in the main that have since dismantled such protections.
The problem is....now that we have a world banking system....your disaster in the US has hit ever nation on the planet, some sever, some not so. Some we have been made aware of, other we are about to hear about.
Australia is the only nation to have so far gone through the GFC unscathed. Why? Because we have had strong laws protecting investors in the banking and money lending industry. The Banking Regulation Authority saved our bacon.
You are in the mess you're in because your continuous line of Republicans Presidents...particularly George Warmonger...refused to reign in the lending houses, and protect both home base and WORLD investors.
For some unexplainable reason you believe that to regulate banking or private enterprise in general is somehow a socialist control of the individual's freedom.
Yet you have such rules governing the lives of every American when you demand, by law, that drivers obey road rules, and that citizens obey all other rules applying to their safety.
The only rules you don't want applies is when it comes to the misuse, or taking of, their money.
Why is it that theft....or mismanagement of moneys that's a parallel to theft .....is acceptable if it is done by the big end of town, but stamped on severely if done by the less well off?
None of this is "brain washing from the liberal media" but historical fact.
It is also true Christianity, not what American fundamentalist call Christianity, but that stated by Jesus:
"Treat your brothers as you would have them treat you."
"What you do to the least of my brethren, you do to me."
"What you sow, you reap."
"You cannot serve two masters, you learn to love one and despise the other."
And that will do for this post, though there are at least another 30 or so I could use...but you get my point I'm sure.
Complain about this comment
11Pete11,
I don't mind at all if you would like to know my political persuasion, I don't mind at all.
I have none.
Belonging to a party, makes you blind, prejudice and deaf.
I will compare it to a baseball team. You could see a person on the opposition team fall over dead, but in your mind, if your team was ahead? Your thoughts would be, get the other guy off the field so the game could go on. MY team MUST win.
There are some people, lets make that many, who would vote for the devil himself, just so their team..their party..wins.
You stop learning Pete, You stop being objective,and you don't even realize it.
I think what I admire most is a true independent mind, very hard to do, but some do achieve it.
So...I look at each individual, who are they. Who are they associated with and how much experience do they have. Then..my choices are made from the gut. So I guess best described, my choices are boiled down to the individual that is the closest to my core beliefs. That is human nature.
I then will donate or even work on a campaign if I have the time and am able.
Obama, I have many many reasons as to why I feel the way I do. He hit me poorly right from the start. On election night, the only thing I could think of in a positive note, was perhaps his winning would empower so many others to have a dream, that perhaps would have never had. However, within months, the mans will upon the people, turned out to be much worse than I ever imagined. You must go with the will of the majority, we all must accept the majority. If he was running today, he would not have a chance.
I do not hate him, I hate no one. In fact when he smiles he really tickles me, he has a great laugh as well.
It begins and ends there.
So I guess one could say, because this man is so far left, he has chased me to the right! Not far right, I do like extreme in any circumstance.
I have read your post above and Pete, sorry, just as I could not hide sounding right of center, I have to say, your left of center is just as obvious.
I do think though, differences are a good thing.
So easy isn't it to blame all the ills of the world on this country, but that is alright,I know better and we are quite used to it. Not really the average citizen here, but I think I have noticed it a bit more having been out and about this world a bit more than the average citizen. Not smarter than they, but merely because of my work.
Although I adore all countries and cultures, I really thrive on each culture remaining who they are...all their great traditions.
I am not speaking of staying the same and no progress, I am saying there is a greatness in all. Our differences.
Enough philosophy.
First off, never claim you know our presidents. Many have on this blog.
WE do not KNOW our presidents. There are so many advisers, so many influences and so many problems. It is a complicated country.
You go with what you feel, what sounds right to your ear, and you go for it and hope for the best. There is a difference in our governments, to think one is better than another is merely being bias.
The crash..I am going to make this really simple as I would reach the end of cyberspace trying to explain it. So if interested, you may want to do the research.
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mae, OWNED the lions part of our housing financial institution.
Bad loans given, people who could not pay, got homes.
Those notes were then sold to the large banks. People started defaulting.
Next...type in the names Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
Read all you can find on them.
You see, the last two years of the Bush presidency, the legislative branch was no longer controlled by Republicans. The Democrats/Liberals were now in the majority controlling the congress and senate.
Bush did call for an investigation TWICE. It was denied. Blocked.
This is a matter of public record, not Colleens ideal.
WEEKS before, and it can still be seen, Barney Frank said..BUY...all is good. I was watching when it was said.
Not long after..in September, almost overnight, something really bad happened. No one knows for sure exactly what, but it all came crashing down.
The saying before an election here is watch out for the October surprise. It has actually turned around elections. This however was a September surprise.
Please read about it and decide for yourself. If you care to. One has to know some background before issuing statements about it.
No one REALLY knows exactly what happened.
I do know that before this happened I had Look at the actual facts...then decide.
Before this all happened I had just been to the Lake district in Cumbria. My friend is ill and was selling her home.
The prices were sky high. I just sat there in complete amazement, how could anyone afford these homes. I know it is a desirable area, but the homes small and quite humble. The house across the street had just sold for $850,000 (our conversion). You could buy a small mansion here at that price.
My point is, prices were inflated...EVERYWHERE. ALL countries, prices of homes were out of this world.
People everywhere..not just America, were mortgaged to death.
Of course there is so much more to all this, it was not just the housing, but Fannie and Freddie...got it rolling.
So the blogger above that you were disagreeing with, please research and then decide.
I understand, yes, if you were to get a wart on your nose next week, surely George Bush was behind it.
I hope not..that would look awful!
To all....I am here to learn. Not to try to change beliefs, ideals, but perhaps create an understanding.I am not smart enough nor do I have the desire to even attempt it.
I have only written this due to personal comments made above. I usually stick to statements primarily and love to hear your ideals, whether I agree with them or not. I shall however respect them.
May Australia flourish.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"I think that far more Aussies are understanding of the American President's predicament, than are the Americans and Brits I have encountered in various places, including some of the comments here.
Obama's early days visits to Australia, while resident in Indonesia as a young man, would have him aware of our understanding of his situation."
How does his supposed familiarity with Australia mean "far more Aussies are understanding of the American President's predicament," and especially over Americans?
That doesn't make any sense.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"22 ColleenBen: If your President were to 'take control' of the oil spill, which means over riding a corporate company, private enterprise, he would be called a socialist. The whole debate in America recently has been private versus public."
Most Americans simply want him to show decisive and effective leadership. I suspect that is what Colleen is referring to.
We know what our "debate" in America is about, we live there.
"Here in Australia our governments, both of the conservative and liberal persuasions, have brought our country further to the left than America and the UK, hence why we avoided the GFC. Governments need to have power over if that country wants to stop the BP disaster in the future."
The federal government already has jurisdiction or "power" in granting permission to drill. The problem is not handing over more "power" to any government but simply being sure that "power," or authority, is correctly applied and enforced.
"No point in asking the government to shut the gate AFTER the disaster...when no gates worth while exist."
As I said, "power" correctly applied and enforced.
"And as to your comparison of this disaster to Hurricane Katrina, one was man made..deliberate and wilful, the other mother nature in an area where hurricanes are more the norm than the exception."
Wrong, the drilling was "deliberate and willful," not the accident that caused the spill.
Hurricanes on America's east coast are not "more the norm, " they are the norm.
"But this is only part of the scenario. 'It's the economy stupid,' to repeat an appropriate quote.How many billions has BP spend already, and how successful have they been? Had your Government under Obama spent the same about, and if he were able to intervene in that way, (surely that would have been the same method he would have been advised to used,) would you be here in these pages praising his attempts, even when that money was completely lost, as was BP's?"
As I said in the beginning of this post I believe you are misunderstanding her feelings.
"The reason your President is unpopular, as is our PM and the same with a number of country's leaders is because the people are ignorant of how their country got into serious financial difficulties in the first place."
Nonsense. Our president is increasingly unpopular because more and more Americans see him as ineffective in image and in practice.
Why would you as an Aussie think you know more on how Americans feel about their president?
"Your previous government squandered billion, even trillions, on an illegal war that is still not won, and a second war, sanctioned by the UN, but only given lip service while they were in control."
By what authority was it "illegal?"
Don't you think Iraqis should have a chance for the kind of life and freedom we enjoy in the west, or is the question of legality more important to you?
As for Afghanistan, it's funny to read your "lip service" comment because I would bet good money that someone like you would be the first one criticizing America if it were to use overwhelming and decisive force.
"I don't mind genuine criticism of any government, but when that criticism contains slanted to totally mistruthful rhetoric, with a complete lack of balance...dare I say Chauvinistic...I feel compelled to respond."
Is it "balance" that you are seeking or merely conclusions and opinions that agree with yours?
"Might I suggest you give your new President the same respect you gave the previous one. In fact more, considering what this President is facing in comparison to the previous."
What exactly is he facing that is so much more difficult than when Bush was president?
Complain about this comment
sydneycynic wrote:
"Personally speaking I can't see why the US maintains this charade that this part of the world means anything. All the facts confirm the exact opposite. Almost half way through this administration and there hasn't been a visit from the Defence Secretary, the Secretary of State, or the President. They even took a year to appoint an ambassador. I wish the US would face facts and accept they should concentrate on the Americas and Australia should concentrate on Asia."
So the many billions that it costs to maintain bases in your part of the world do not benefit Australia?
And who provides the most important and advanced military hardware to your country? China? North Korea? Russia?
"If Kevin Rudd desperately wants Obama to visit I've got a solution for him. He should invite China's President Hu over. If that happens the yanks will break a land speed record getting Obama, Gates and Clinton to the airport."
Why should any government from a free and democratic country have any kind of friendly dealings with another government that persecutes, imprisons and murders its own people for simply expressing opinions?
Complain about this comment
Greg Warner wrote:
"I for one don't give two hoots (I am restraining myself here) if an American president visits us or not.
A blight on your American presidents!
And by the way, the USA should get out of Okinawa!"
That's an issue to do only with Japan and America.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"30 ColleenBen: It is interesting that the very people who claim others assume, do the very same thing themselves. You don't know my origins. You don't know my history relating to the US. You know nothing of my involvement in matters relating to the US or it's political system.
Just because you don't have an understanding of our Australian political system, doesn't mean others don't have a very good understanding of yours."
No offense intended but you sound simply like a typical anti-American foreigner that likes to act as if he knows more about America than what most Americans would know. There are many of those types in your country, the UK and throughout many other European countries.
"Your current President, who received more votes that Bush in either of his elections, left the entire clean up of the oil spill by BP, to BP. To have done otherwise would have lessened the liability on BP. He is dealing with taxpayers money. The understanding of 'fault' is central to the legal aspects of this whole disaster. It is a part of your laws...you need to check them out."
You claim to have "a very good understanding" of our political system and yet you obviously do not know or understand how our voting system works to select a new president. I suggest "you need to check them out."
Besides, what does that have to do with the oil spill and his service so far as president??
And once again I believe you are misunderstanding what it is Colleen is trying to say.
"As to the partying etc of your President, there isn't a leader of any country that can't be found at least one night of the week partying up in the name of his leadership position....it goes with the job."
Are you trying to justify a wrong by a show of numbers of others who are also committing that wrong? Is that logical?
"As to your perceived assumption that I read Liberal material exclusively, I'll do you a deal, you start reading more WORLD news, and less of what they dish out to you at home, and I promise I'll never read a Liberal controlled network news post again....Easy for me really, I don't read Liberal material at all, simply go to WORLD news services...hence why I as an Australian read the British Broadcasting Corporation's material...unless you consider them Liberal...I guess to most reports in the US, the BBC IS more centre left than them."
You are here at the BBC website telling an American to "start reading more WORLD news" while at the same time patting yourself on the back for visiting the same exact site? Did I miss something?
As for the BBC not being seen as "liberal" I would hate to see what your definition of liberal or leftist is.
Complain about this comment
Greg Warner wrote:
"But my point is we kow tow too much to America and its presidents."
So agreeing with another country that shares many of the same values and culture equals "kow tow?
We need to move ahead with the Republic of Australia and the election of our own President as the figurehead of an independent nation that is in no way tied to London or Washington except in those common areas of human decency and dignity which the UK, the USA, Australia and other like-minded nations share."
If only that had happened during WWII then your country would be part of Japan today.
"And the reason why I threw in my two cents worth on Okinawa is because I for one would like to read more opinions by more Australians in Nick's blogs about global issues that affect Australia, such as the US base on Okinawa, the Israeli attack on the aid flotilla, the European debt crisis, North Korea's alleged sinking of the South Korean corvette, UN Security Council Reform etc, etc."
The Okinawa thing doesn't have to have anything to do with Australia. It is a Japanese/American defense agreement to protect Japan.
How does the Israeli defense forces protecting their homeland have anything to do with Australia?
How European governments bankrupt themselves is their business.
The power hungry and interfering UN should be abolished.
Complain about this comment
AllenT2 seems to think Australians should be grateful for his country's apparent ability to design and manufacture machinery which can kill millions of people. The US can keep their nuclear weapons, scatter bombs, land mines and white phospherous. What a perverse view you have of mankind when you are proud of your ability to destroy things. Even if you do exceed in this area of human endeavour you seem to infer that any such equipment has been given to Australia. As is the case with everything American, it comes at a price. For example, the latest piece of "US military genius" is the F22 Raptor. These pieces of junk have hardly come off the drawing board in 15 years and they won't show up for another 15 years. If they ever do turn up Australia is expected to give you lot 16 Billion Dollars. In the interim we're supposed to put up with some rubbish US plane that the Russian Sukoy jet fighter can run rings around. The US can't even build a decent armoured vehicle. US soldiers are expected to get inside death traps like Hummers. If you want a far superior armoured vehicle I suggest the US look into the Australian designed and built Bushmaster. Also, it says a lot for US military genius when you can't even come up with a better rifle than the 50 year old AK47.
I almost choked when you started on about how China persecutes and imprisons it's citizens. I suggest you learn a little more about your own country. Your country imprisons a higher percentage of it's citizens than any other country. It's five times worse than China's. Mind you, when you have a "three strikes and you're in" policy I'm hardly surprised. You shoplift three times and you go away for 25 years. Mind you, it makes your unemployment rate look better than it is because they're not classified as unemployed. Also, the prisoners are forced to work for 50 cents a day or it's solitary confinement for them. Even Chinese sweat shops pay more than that and you talk about Chinese persecution. Capitol punishment is another thing about the US which I find repugnant. It might however be a blessed relief compared to staying in some Texas prison hellhole .
It's funny that you have taken offence at my suggestion that the US should concentrate on the Americas and Australia should concentrate on Asia. The fact is that that is what is happening and I just expect Americans to be honest enough to admit it. Most Americans on this blog are indignant because some Australians have expected some level of representation from Obama, Clinton or Gates. I'm not one of those Australians. As stated previously, American politicians should stay in America. You're welcome to them. I don't want them coming over here telling us how to ruin our economy, how to destroy our health care system and encouraging everyone to go out and buy a gun.
Complain about this comment
#49 AllenT2:
You commented on my comment that the USA should get out of Okinawa "That's an issue to do only with Japan and America".
And that's where you get it wrong or are you just ill informed?
Australia also has a Defense Pact with Japan - we are part of the issue.
In this new, connected global world we have our own opinions and we will make sure they are heard.
Many of us believe that the Okinawa base creates more problems for the region than it solves.
By the USA not pulling back from WWII postures and thinking, the USA has become the problem.
Your comment in your Post #51 "If only that had happened during WWII then your country would be part of Japan today", again demonstrates your "broken record" perspective...WWII ended 65 years ago.
Get over it!
It's time Americans like yourself got over the contributions you made in WWII and got a grip on 2010.
Israel's attack on the flotilla?
Of course it affects Australia - the security of our people is of utmost concern to us. The Israeli blockade of Gaza and the continuing of building on the West Bank is a threat to all peace loving people as well as contributing to a focus of hatred by many terrorists who also attack MY people - look at Bali 2002.
We are sick and tired of Israel contributing to world instability - we want a fair and equitable solution for Israelis and Palestinians and that does not include attacks in international waters.
Do you not see the connection?
Do you not see the connection between Europe's debt crisis and Australia and the rest of the world when you say "How European governments bankrupt themselves is their business".
Look at what is happening to stock markets around the world, just as the global economy was beginning to recover from the USA driven global financial crisis.
And finally you say "The power hungry and interfering UN should be abolished".
There it is for us to see...the world body that represents the aspirations of the majority of the world...should be abolished?
Let me tell it to you, straight.
Your thinking is of the past, of a previous century, of an archaic concept preserved in people like you with your ostrich like view of this new century and this new super connected world.
# 52 sydneycynic:
Well put.
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10262818.stm
Thank you BBC.....I think you've said it all
Complain about this comment
45 ColleenBen wrote: "I don't mind at all if you would like to know my political persuasion, I don't mind at all. I have none. Belonging to a party, makes you blind, prejudice and deaf."
I made no comment to you belonging to a party, I was referring to your persuasion of interest.
As an American, must you only have a opinion on a particular political persuasion, or a point of view pertaining to either left or right if you are in a particular party.
My inference was that you seem to be swayed by one perception, rather than any other.
"You stop learning Pete, You stop being objective,and you don't even realize it.
I think what I admire most is a true independent mind, very hard to do, but some do achieve it."
I fully agree, hence why I think it is extremely unfair to be opposing Obama after only two years as President, in what has been the most catastrophic period in American financial history since the great depression. A true independent mind has got to be a fair and just mind.
"The crash..I am going to make this really simple as I would reach the end of cyberspace trying to explain it. So if interested, you may want to do the research.
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mae, OWNED the lions part of our housing financial institution.
Bad loans given, people who could not pay, got homes.
Those notes were then sold to the large banks. People started defaulting."
Under our 'leftist' system, as yo would perceive us to be, that could not have happened here. As I have mentioned in a previous post, we have the Bank Regulatory Authority...you would no doubt call it communist...which controls what banks can and cannot do with investors money.
You see to most Australians, who know the American system, America is much more right of centre than we are...and that is when you are under a 'liberal' government.
Please remember, this is a British based blog relating to Australia, by a Brit, in Australia.
Complain about this comment
46 AllenT2: We have a much warmer feeling, and sense of understanding compared to what I have read so far. The general feeling is 'If he comes, he comes, if he doesn't, he doesn't."
Complain about this comment
47 AllenT2: "Most Americans simply want him to show decisive and effective leadership. I suspect that is what Colleen is referring to."
And I expressed to Colleen why that action was delayed...I will continue discussing the matter with her otherwise I will end up answering more posters than is worth my while.
"We know what our "debate" in America is about, we live there." True, but are you aware of how serious any action taken by America is on the rest of the world? Don't you understand that as a result of poor management by the previous Administration, the world is now sliding into an abyss, possibly larger than the Great Depression. Are you suggesting we just ignore the power that your nation holds over the rest of us, and just 'cop it sweet' to use an oft expressed Aussie phrase?
As other posters have said above, any action taken, or not taken, by the US effects the rest of the world. The differences is you get to vote, we get to suffer the consequences.
Complain about this comment
Greg Warner wrote:
"You commented on my comment that the USA should get out of Okinawa "That's an issue to do only with Japan and America".
And that's where you get it wrong or are you just ill informed?
Australia also has a Defense Pact with Japan - we are part of the issue."
What does a pact that Australia have with Japan have to do with a pact that it has with America? I'll tell you what, absolutely nothing!
"In this new, connected global world we have our own opinions and we will make sure they are heard."
No, you will be budding into something that has nothing to do with you or your country.
"Many of us believe that the Okinawa base creates more problems for the region than it solves."
So it's OK for Australia to have a defense pact, as you say, with Japan but America's defense pact, which actually can do something meaningful, is not OK?
Besides, it is an issue between two sovereign countries so in the end it has nothing to do with you and your country.
"By the USA not pulling back from WWII postures and thinking, the USA has become the problem."
Not according to most Japanese post WWII to now.
And who gives you the right to speak for Japan and America?
"Your comment in your Post #51 "If only that had happened during WWII then your country would be part of Japan today", again demonstrates your "broken record" perspective...WWII ended 65 years ago.
Get over it!"
Instead of you telling me to "get over it" why not prove what I said is wrong? The fact is you can not, hence your kind of dismissive reply.
"It's time Americans like yourself got over the contributions you made in WWII and got a grip on 2010."
I never even think about it, that is, until someone like you brings up something so obviously wrong related to it that it warrants the mentioning of it.
So all of a sudden because we are in the year 2010 what happened during WWII could never happen again?
"Israel's attack on the flotilla?
Of course it affects Australia - the security of our people is of utmost concern to us. The Israeli blockade of Gaza and the continuing of building on the West Bank is a threat to all peace loving people as well as contributing to a focus of hatred by many terrorists who also attack MY people - look at Bali 2002."
It has zero to do with Australia! The Bali attack was in response to support of America going to war in the Middle East. That has zero to do with Israel! Blame the women beaters, head cutters and baby killers known as "terrorists!"
"We are sick and tired of Israel contributing to world instability - we want a fair and equitable solution for Israelis and Palestinians and that does not include attacks in international waters."
Every nation reserves the right to defend itself, period!
"Do you not see the connection between Europe's debt crisis and Australia and the rest of the world when you say "How European governments bankrupt themselves is their business".
Look at what is happening to stock markets around the world, just as the global economy was beginning to recover from the USA driven global financial crisis."
First off, America didn't drive anything by itself. The fact that Europe is now in trouble proves just that. It boils down simply to governments and people around the world living beyond their means.
That said, no country anywhere has a responsibility to you or your country to manage its own finances correctly.
"And finally you say "The power hungry and interfering UN should be abolished". There it is for us to see...the world body that represents the aspirations of the majority of the world...should be abolished?
Let me tell it to you, straight.Your thinking is of the past, of a previous century, of an archaic concept preserved in people like you with your ostrich like view of this new century and this new super connected world."
Sorry, but the world is made up entirely of sovereign countries and I see none of them willing to give that up to subscribe to your view of how the world should be.
Don't confuse matters of cooperation on things that obviously affect all, such as something like ocean pollution, with your idea of creating some kind of oppressive and dictatorial world government run by the UN because it is not going to happen.
In this so-called "new super connected world," as you describe it, the domestic policies of other countries that do not affect you in any way whatsoever are simply none of your business! It's that simple!
Complain about this comment
50 AllenT2:
11pete11 wrote: "30 ColleenBen: It is interesting that the very people who claim others assume, do the very same thing themselves. You don't know my origins. You don't know my history relating to the US. You know nothing of my involvement in matters relating to the US or it's political system.
Just because you don't have an understanding of our Australian political system, doesn't mean others don't have a very good understanding of yours."
No offense intended but you sound simply like a typical anti-American foreigner that likes to act as if he knows more about America than what most Americans would know. There are many of those types in your country, the UK and throughout many other European countries."
Foreigner? How do you know I'm not an American citizen living in Australia? Or an ex American living in Australia?
Or born in America, spent my entire time up to my 30 in New York state before returning to my parents home here in Aussie.
What do you really know?
Well you certainly know how to offend by claiming I sound "like a typical anti-American foreigner that likes to act as if he knows more about America than what most Americans would know."
"You claim to have "a very good understanding" of our political system and yet you obviously do not know or understand how our voting system works to select a new president. I suggest "you need to check them out.""
What exactly is the part of my post that has you believe this?
"Besides, what does that have to do with the oil spill and his service so far as president?"
You obviously forgot to read the rest of that parragraph.
"Are you trying to justify a wrong by a show of numbers of others who are also committing that wrong? Is that logical?"
Since when was it wrong for a President to entertain or party, as part of his duties?
My point was the other Presidents, and country leaders have all done exactly the same, as part of their work load...the are employed by the people 24/7 for the full time of their term in office. Why is Obama particularly being singled out, and not other leaders, PM's or Presidents?
"You are here at the BBC website telling an American to "start reading more WORLD news" while at the same time patting yourself on the back for visiting the same exact site? Did I miss something?"
Yes you did, but the clue is far more cryptic than I realised...or is it just you?
"As for the BBC not being seen as "liberal" I would hate to see what your definition of liberal or leftist is."
As I have said in other posts, Americans are so far to the right that anything to the centre-centre right in most other English speaking countries is perceived as Communist/Socialist.
Complain about this comment
51. At 07:54am on 08 Jun 2010, AllenT2 wrote: "How does the Israeli defense forces protecting their homeland have anything to do with Australia?"
Are you not aware that the Mossat stole Australian passports and used them to assassinate a high ranking Palistinnian? Are you not aware that three Aussies were on that ship that was stormed by the Israelis in international waters, one shot numerous times in the leg, and he was totally unarmed...he just happened to have the appearance of an middle easters?
"How European governments bankrupt themselves is their business."
Greece has just gone down, as has Britain before it, thanks to the American induced GFC, and it looks like Spain, Italy and Portugal could be next. Many nations invested their superannuation, their state finances and other government owned monies into these places...it is no longer a Europe/America business...it is the world.
"The power hungry and interfering UN should be abolished."
OH you don't know about John Bolton? He pretty much single handedly gutted the UN. Appointed by George Warmonger, he completely stripped all the recommendations made by then then UN head Coffi Annan, amendments that were recommended and supporter by ALL other nations, but George didn't like them and now the UN is a powerless white elephant.
Another George Warmonger legacy to the world.
Complain about this comment
sydneycynic wrote:
"AllenT2 seems to think Australians should be grateful for his country's apparent ability to design and manufacture machinery which can kill millions of people. The US can keep their nuclear weapons, scatter bombs, land mines and white phospherous. What a perverse view you have of mankind when you are proud of your ability to destroy things."
No, I am proud of their ability to deter war, which they have, by effectively defending all Western countries, including yours, post WWII.
They are also called cluster bombs, not "scatter bombs."
"Even if you do exceed in this area of human endeavour you seem to infer that any such equipment has been given to Australia. As is the case with everything American, it comes at a price."
Australia most certainly is given something in that regard. It is given the privileged access to purchase those products. I never inferred anything related to costs.
"For example, the latest piece of "US military genius" is the F22 Raptor."
Who are you quoting, because it certainly is not me.
"These pieces of junk have hardly come off the drawing board in 15 years and they won't show up for another 15 years. If they ever do turn up Australia is expected to give you lot 16 Billion Dollars."
You are confused because you don't even know which airplane you are talking about. The F-22 is not open to foreign purchases.
I'll let you figure out which airplane Australia is in fact waiting for. The wait, by the way, is because others have a higher priority in receiving the earliest batches produced.
As for your "pieces of junk" comment all I can say is you have no idea what you are talking about, especially when you consider that the plane is still in testing and development.
"In the interim we're supposed to put up with some rubbish US plane that the Russian Sukoy jet fighter can run rings around."
Ah, I see you have been reading a certain website that is well known to be against the actual plane you were criticizing in favor of the one you accidentally named. :)
The fact is they can not know the performance and capabilities of an airplane that is still in testing and development. Their bias towards the F-22 is also quite obvious.
"The US can't even build a decent armoured vehicle. US soldiers are expected to get inside death traps like Hummers."
Uh, the Hummers were never meant to be an armored vehicle!
"If you want a far superior armoured vehicle I suggest the US look into the Australian designed and built Bushmaster."
I "suggest" you look into the available American vehicles already successfully in service in combat environments in the Middle East."
"Also, it says a lot for US military genius when you can't even come up with a better rifle than the 50 year old AK47."
Right, because as we all know the enemy toting around AK47s kill far more than Americans kill with their M-16s/4s. ;)
"I almost choked when you started on about how China persecutes and imprisons it's citizens. I suggest you learn a little more about your own country. Your country imprisons a higher percentage of it's citizens than any other country. It's five times worse than China's."
LOL. America imprisons and MURDERS its people for expressing opinions? Answer the question, please.
And why should it be surprising that there are more people in prison in a free society compared to a place like China where punishments boil down to execution for simply expressing an opinion? Do I have to explain that to you?
"Mind you, when you have a "three strikes and you're in" policy I'm hardly surprised. You shoplift three times and you go away for 25 years. Mind you, it makes your unemployment rate look better than it is because they're not classified as unemployed."
LOL. Talk about looking through the trash.
"Also, the prisoners are forced to work for 50 cents a day or it's solitary confinement for them. Even Chinese sweat shops pay more than that and you talk about Chinese persecution. Capitol punishment is another thing about the US which I find repugnant. It might however be a blessed relief compared to staying in some Texas prison hellhole ."
Interesting. So you find capital punishment in America "repugnant" and yet you do not even mention when China does it, and when it does it simply to shut their own people up? That's very bizarre.
"It's funny that you have taken offence at my suggestion that the US should concentrate on the Americas and Australia should concentrate on Asia. The fact is that that is what is happening and I just expect Americans to be honest enough to admit it. Most Americans on this blog are indignant because some Australians have expected some level of representation from Obama, Clinton or Gates. I'm not one of those Australians."
Good for you.
"As stated previously, American politicians should stay in America. You're welcome to them. I don't want them coming over here telling us how to ruin our economy, how to destroy our health care system and encouraging everyone to go out and buy a gun."
No, those are your country's choices to make. It is only through your rabid anti-Americanism, that doesn't allow you to think reasonably and logically, that you come to such bizarre conclusions about America.
As an American I couldn't care less what Australians choose to do in their own country on matters that do not affect me whatsoever. I know what is my business and what is not. I wish you, and others like you, would learn the same.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"Please remember, this is a British based blog relating to Australia, by a Brit, in Australia."
If you talk nonsense about America then it is the business of an American to respond so don't act like they shouldn't or be surprised if they do.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"46 AllenT2: We have a much warmer feeling, and sense of understanding compared to what I have read so far. The general feeling is 'If he comes, he comes, if he doesn't, he doesn't."
Sorry but that response makes no sense to what you wrote and my response.
Complain about this comment
Tell me AllenT2, how did your land mines and cluster bombs go in discouraging wars like Viet Nam and Iraq. Moreover, give me any examples where they stopped a war. Also, how do you justify leaving munitions around the countryside 30 years after hostilities have finished. Also, if your weaponry is so brilliant why can't it identify the difference between a soldier and a child. Please direct me to the relevant information where it tells me land mines and bomblets don't go off when children pick them up. I'm also particularly interested in knowing how you lay down land mines before hostilities even commence i.e. to discourage wars. If they can't discourage wars please explain the moral justification for using them. Just in case you're wondering, Australia doesn't use or purchase such inhumane and indiscriminate weapons.
You seem to think that I would embrace a visit from the Chinese President. Can you again please direct me to the posting in which I said this. This is a figment of your imagination. You also think my repugnance to capitol punishment is dependant upon which country carries it out. Again, this is something you've made up in your own mind. Just in case you still don't understand, I find capitol punishment repugnant no matter who carries it out.
I for one also don't hold to China's behaviour in imprisoning or executing dissenters. Again, this seems to be something for which you have found me guilty despite the absence of any evidence. I'm starting to feel like I'm in a US Court about to get life for something I didn't do. I do however admit that I find it offensive when a person from a country who imprisons the highest percentage of it's people starts to talk about the circumstances in which another country imprisons it's citizens. Especially, as in a case reported last week, an American citizen gets 25 years for stealing four chocalate chip cookies. As far as I'm concerned thats up there with anything China could come up with. It'll be expensive for the thief and probably cost the Government a few million having him locked up for 25 years. What do they say, "only in America" ?
AllenT2 is also very fond of banging on about how the US saved Australia from the Japanese. I've ignored this in the past because this stuff was previously directed at others. Now you've said the same stuff to me I now take great pleasure in responding. For a start, there was no altruistic gesture on the part of the US in entering WW11 and, as a consequence, saving Australia. Just in case you didn't know there was an event in 1941 at Pearl Harbour. Before then the US didn't give two hoots about Australia. This was at a time when the men we had were fighting Rommel at Tobruk and Elalamein. Other Australians were flying spitfires and lancasters in the Battle of Britain. All the time the yanks stayed at home and did their knitting. When the yanks finalling turned up in the Pacific the Australians had already inflicted the first losses on the Japanese at Milne Bay and Port Moresby. The Japanese were knackered by then and they weren't going any further. In other words the Japanese had been stopped before you lot turned up. I'll admit the US suffered a hell of a lot and Australia could not have driven the Japanese all the way back to Tokyo. This largely fell on the US under the command of General Macarther. A man who liked to waste thousands of lives taking islands with airfields. Airfields he often never ended up using. In other words the US did it's bit just like every other country i.e. Britain, Russia, Canada, New Zealand, China (who by the way suffered more casualties than anybody). Now, do you think you can spare me this stuff about Australia talking Japanese ?
In relation to WW1 you can apply the above principle i.e. US soldiers turned up and arrived on the battlefield in March 1918. Under the command of the Australian General John Monash I might add. Do you see a trend emerging. Just in case you don't, it's the fact the US likes to turn up once the main protagonists have punched themselves out. They then like to go on about "how we won the war". AllenT2 is a classic caricature of such a person.
Complain about this comment
One is forgiven, reading some of your statements such as: "As an American I couldn't care less what Australians choose.....I know what is my business and what is not. I wish you, and others like you, would learn the same."
Or,
"If you talk nonsense about America then it is the business of an American to respond so don't act like they shouldn't or be surprised if they do."
Or,
"Sorry but that response makes no sense to what you wrote and my response."
for thinking that you are the self appointed mouthpiece for all Americans. Why is it that we have to pass your censorship, your magnifying glass, in order that it be acceptable to America?
Please let me show an example using the first statement, replacing the American with Australia:
"As an Australian citizen, I couldn't care less what American's choose.....I know what is my business and what is not. I wish you, and others like you, would learn the same."
Now to start with, an Australian, nor a Brit I would suggest, would EVER make such a statement, it reeks of arrogance, of a person who believer their country is a stand alone...dare I say bully...nation that has no respect or opinion of any other nation's intentions or interests, only that of the person's own nation.
There are millions of Americans who would totally disagree with you. You, like the rest of us, are entitled to an opinion. But we are individuals, not holders of the constitutional oath, ready to slam someone into court for having an opinion that disagrees with us.
I accept your opinion is contrary to a number of us here, as we are to you and others, but you are not the authority that determines what is acceptable to the US citizen, any more than we are to our nation.
The days of as superior nation, such as was Britain, now America, are fast fading, as we mover closer to becoming a global village. Once it was said that is America sneezes, the rest of the world catches the cold. Now it is the case that if any nation becomes ill, we all become ill. We are not isolated. We are all very much dependent on each other. Never before have we needed a United Nations body than we do now, but not a United Nations that is based in the US, where the US has over riding powers on any decision made in that esteemed body's security council, as is the case now.
Switzerland would have been the most obvious place to have based such an organisation, not New York.
Complain about this comment
To both sydneycynic and AllenT2: I am one of many older Aussies that feel deep gratitude for America's involvement in the Pacific War during the dying days of WWII. Many American lives, along with British, Australia, New Guinean, etc were lost on that frightful battle field, where humanity ceased to exist.
Mind you, what sydneycynic says is correct. We had two rather worn out nations, Britain Alies and Japan slowly wearing thin till the US, fresh and with much superior fighting power, came to our rescue.
I have no objection to what was done by the US at that time, in fact there is no way of knowing where we would be today had they not involved themselves.
However, as sydneycynic said, the war ended in 1945, why is America still dotted around the Pacific some 65 years later?
Do the Japanese still hold a threat to America?
Well yes they do, to the more recent American mantra; American Interest.
Wars in which America now become involved have very little to do with humanitarianism, as was the case back in previous times.
America now fight to protect American Interests.
American Interests are such institutions as Coca Cola, Burger King, McDonalds, General Motors, Ford, Century 21, H&R Block to mention just a scattering.
The Japanese car industry, in which American investment is very large, is acceptable to the American Interest, so long as the swing of the Japanese invertment doesn't exceed that of the American.
And just in case someone in Japan decides to test the American Interest, a whole island of their country Okonawa(sp?) remains 'occupied' by American military.
Here in Australia, we have signed the ANZUS treatie which gives America the right to install their Interests here in our country. I have yet to find how much money, if any, has been paid to us by the US for such a priviledge, and under what terms they 'occupy' portions of our sovereign nation, portions that are not even open to Australian government representatives without the expressed permission of some US authority.
The motor vehicle industry is solely owned by America and Japan, and as I have aluded to, the Japanese industry is primarily owned by America.
There is also the Guam debarcle, where a Pacific Island was taken over by the US from the Japanese during WWII and where they remain as 'occupiers' some 65 years later. My understanding is that the local people still don't have a vote in the US elections, yet the island long ago lost its sovereignty.
The war in Iraq was fought solely on the basis of American Interest being protected. It had nothing to releasing a peoples from a dictation. Had helping nation been the new Interest of the US, then Robert Mugabe would have been assassinated, captured or removed many, many years ago.
Any overthrow of an existing sovereign leader, in the past 40 or so years, has been done to protect American Interest, not as many US citizens believer, to help those nation's people from dictators.
Nations in the South Americas attest to this.
But to be fair to the US, it seems that not all political persuasion in that nation hold so boldly...and dare I say arrogantly to this new mantra. The right of the political persuasion seems more hell bent on promoting such an ideology.
Complain about this comment
My post at 65 was intended for AllenT2
Complain about this comment
Just to clarify, AllenT2 obviously does not represent all Americans.
Many of them would disagree with his view of the world.
His view is shared by alot of Americans though.
I believe it's essentially driven by patriotism, though he may disagree with me.
His views actually remind me of an uncle of mine, who i take great pleasure in winding up.
I don't know how Allan reacts, but my uncle is genuinly shocked at the way foreigners percieve the US, and reacts with hostility.
He has certain inherint beliefs, and you could probably group them under the term American Exceptionalism.
I'll never forget him asking a friend of mine incredulously whether or not she wanted America to be the world's superpower (he asked virtually rhetorically, assuming she would see the basic good sense of America remaining as the sole superpower), and was bowled over when she emphatically said no. he couldn't understand why people wouldn't want America to be the world's main power. The idea that people are disgusted with America due to the invasion of Iraq, their unequivicol and blind support of Israel no matter what atrocities are committed, the invasion of other countries like Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Vietnam (and their incredibly underreported carpet bombing of uninvolved countries civlian populations during Vietnam - Laos and Cambodia particularly), their obsession with gun ownership, their support of capitol punishment, their support of foreign dictatorships and suppression of popular uprisings in places around the world, but particularly South and Central America, etc., none of this occurs to them as a reason for anti-americanism.
They come up with hilariously ridiculous things like the idea that they are hated because they have too much freedom, or people just hate them cuz they are democratic.
To be fair, I believe it's motivated by a genuine love of the USA, and it is an amazing country, with so much going for it.
The point is though, Allan has his view, and it's one shared by many of his countrymen, and the chances of anyone reasoning him away from it are slim to none.
Complain about this comment
#58 AllenT2:
"What does a pact that Australia have with Japan have to do with a pact that it has with America? I'll tell you what, absolutely nothing!"
- The pact is by definition a three way pact. If the USA was required to go to the aid of Japan, Australia would also be so required. The Okinawa base sends a message to other nations in North Asia that they too must build up their military to counter the US military strength in the area. The base adds to tensions in North Asia when by pulling back to Guam those tensions would ease. In the event of any "problem" US forces would be able to deploy from Guam.
"No, you will be budding into something that has nothing to do with you or your country."
-Again you miss the point that everything is connected now. Australia is not going to stay on the sidelines any more. Too often in our short history we have been pulled into other people's wars. We want more control over our own destiny. Most recently we got pulled into Iraq to honor our defense pact with the USA only to get caught up in what was a bungled operation highlighted by the sacking of Iraqi Army's senior officers after the Iraqi Army was defeated and after some lowbrow in Washington reasoned "The Shia will support us because they don't like the Sunni". And that was AFTER the intelligence was "cooked" to provide evidence of WMD.
"So it's OK for Australia to have a defense pact, as you say, with Japan but America's defense pact, which actually can do something meaningful, is not OK? Besides, it is an issue between two sovereign countries so in the end it has nothing to do with you and your country."
- See my comment above. There are three parties involved. Japan, the USA and Australia. And I resent the fact that Australia's contribution would not be "something meaningful". Is that how you see Australia's contributions in Iraq and Afghanistan?
"Not according to most Japanese post WWII to now. And who gives you the right to speak for Japan and America?"
- I am speaking as an Australian on a subject in which Australia is involved...as mentioned above.
"Instead of you telling me to "get over it" why not prove what I said is wrong? The fact is you can not, hence your kind of dismissive reply.I never even think about it, that is, until someone like you brings up something so obviously wrong related to it that it warrants the mentioning of it. So all of a sudden because we are in the year 2010 what happened during WWII could never happen again?"
-Lame answer. You said it didn't you? It is obviously top of mind with you or did you just blurt it out? And regarding "could never happen again"...the events leading up to WWII are completely different to events in 2010...the world now is completely different to the 1930s...isn't it?
"It has zero to do with Australia! The Bali attack was in response to support of America going to war in the Middle East. That has zero to do with Israel! Blame the women beaters, head cutters and baby killers known as "terrorists!"
- I am not anti Israel but that nation's treatment of the Palestinians and its nuclear arsenal are a festering sore and focus of the hatred that breeds terrorism in the Middle East for export to places like Bali and dare I say it, to the USA. I am not the first to say that but you must have missed the expression of that opinion elsewhere. Not only that, Israel has a way of shooting itself in the foot as was seen in the attack on the flotilla in international waters. That was a leadership disconnect. Wouldn't the better strategy have been to wait until the flotilla entered the Israeli zone? The Israelis seem to have done everything they could to distance themselves from a strong ally in the Middle East, Turkey. Now Iran looks like sending ships.
"Every nation reserves the right to defend itself, period!"
- Of course every nation has the right to defend itself, but read my comments above. Some Israeli general or politician makes a tactical blunder, and the situation worsens, and the Middle East rises up again against Israel, and then Iran gets involved, then the USA get involved, and then Australia gets involved. You see the scenario? It's happened to us too many times before. We want to be in the front line of the diplomacy and the solutions to help ensure that our troops don't end up in the front line of the battle of some war that with some Aussie wisdom could have been averted in the first place. We have our sabres but we don't rattle them as loudly as some nations I could mention do.
"First off, America didn't drive anything by itself. The fact that Europe is now in trouble proves just that. It boils down simply to governments and people around the world living beyond their means. That said, no country anywhere has a responsibility to you or your country to manage its own finances correctly."
- You must be one of the few people on the planet who does not accept that it was the USA the began the Global Financial Crisis. Yes everybody was too greedy, it's just that once again the USA was more greedy than anyone else.
"Sorry, but the world is made up entirely of sovereign countries and I see none of them willing to give that up to subscribe to your view of how the world should be. Don't confuse matters of cooperation on things that obviously affect all, such as something like ocean pollution, with your idea of creating some kind of oppressive and dictatorial world government run by the UN because it is not going to happen. In this so-called "new super connected world," as you describe it, the domestic policies of other countries that do not affect you in any way whatsoever are simply none of your business! It's that simple!"
-Nobody said anything about an "oppressive and dictatorial world government" except you. And sadly, from its previously held position of respect the USA has over the past decade fallen from that position of respect to a point where many of the world's citizens might well say that the oppressive and dictatorial world government, IS the USA. And finally, the policies of other countries ARE my business and they ARE our business for as I have previously said "We are all connected now". That is the fundamental change that has taken place in the world and what you fail to recognise. And regarding "None of your business", Myanmar is now reported to be seeking nuclear weapons.
Is that none of our business too?
Should we not be concerned?
Should there not be an Australia point of view on that?
Allen, the world has changed...the American century is over.
Complain about this comment
sydneycynic wrote:
"Tell me AllenT2, how did your land mines and cluster bombs go in discouraging wars like Viet Nam and Iraq. Moreover, give me any examples where they stopped a war."
Since when did my remarks about American military hardware and know-how become limited to just those weapons?
So Vietnam and Iraq were the only threats, and more specifically the biggest threat, to Western freedom throughout the later part of the 20th Century?
"Also, how do you justify leaving munitions around the countryside 30 years after hostilities have finished. Also, if your weaponry is so brilliant why can't it identify the difference between a soldier and a child. Please direct me to the relevant information where it tells me land mines and bomblets don't go off when children pick them up. I'm also particularly interested in knowing how you lay down land mines before hostilities even commence i.e. to discourage wars. If they can't discourage wars please explain the moral justification for using them. Just in case you're wondering, Australia doesn't use or purchase such inhumane and indiscriminate weapons."
I can explain the "moral justification" in the same way those that appreciated WWII being won can.
And again, my comments were not limited to such weapons.
"You seem to think that I would embrace a visit from the Chinese President. Can you again please direct me to the posting in which I said this. This is a figment of your imagination. You also think my repugnance to capitol punishment is dependant upon which country carries it out. Again, this is something you've made up in your own mind. Just in case you still don't understand, I find capitol punishment repugnant no matter who carries it out."
I don't "seem to think" anything. If you are unclear what my obvious words mean then simply ask. Don't place your own meanings and infer just to advance your arguments. That isn't logical.
That said, you showed an obvious level of deference to my remarks about China.
"I for one also don't hold to China's behaviour in imprisoning or executing dissenters. Again, this seems to be something for which you have found me guilty despite the absence of any evidence. I'm starting to feel like I'm in a US Court about to get life for something I didn't do."
Right, because you know so well what it is like to live under American authority in America. Your anti-American bias is showing.
As I said, your remarks showed deference to China while at the same time criticizing America.
"I do however admit that I find it offensive when a person from a country who imprisons the highest percentage of it's people starts to talk about the circumstances in which another country imprisons it's citizens."
See what I mean? :)
So China doesn't persecute, imprison and murder its own people for simply expressing opinions?
More than a third of America's prison population consists of illegal immigrants. If your country was likewise being invaded by so many illegal immigrants I am quite sure your country would act similarly.
And as I already said, considering the way China treats its own people why would you expect a large prison population? :)
"Especially, as in a case reported last week, an American citizen gets 25 years for stealing four chocalate chip cookies. As far as I'm concerned thats up there with anything China could come up with."
Oh, you mean like being run over by tanks and being shot to death for simply expressing an opinion?
As for the American you speak of I don't know the story or the person's background to comment on it.
"It'll be expensive for the thief and probably cost the Government a few million having him locked up for 25 years. What do they say, "only in America"?"
I doubt you know very much beyond what you think you know about America.
"AllenT2 is also very fond of banging on about how the US saved Australia from the Japanese. I've ignored this in the past because this stuff was previously directed at others. Now you've said the same stuff to me I now take great pleasure in responding. For a start, there was no altruistic gesture on the part of the US in entering WW11 and, as a consequence, saving Australia. Just in case you didn't know there was an event in 1941 at Pearl Harbour. Before then the US didn't give two hoots about Australia. This was at a time when the men we had were fighting Rommel at Tobruk and Elalamein. Other Australians were flying spitfires and lancasters in the Battle of Britain. All the time the yanks stayed at home and did their knitting."
Uh, first off, I have not been "banging on about how the US saved Australia from the Japanese."
You and other Australians are simply having a knee-jerk insecure response to some obvious facts of the past.
You also don't realize that America didn't have to help Australia at all to defeat Japan. It could have let the Japanese ultimately defeat and retain Australia for itself.
American pilots flew in the Battle of Britain. Also, lend lease to Britain and others started over eight months before America formally entered the war.
"When the yanks finalling turned up in the Pacific the Australians had already inflicted the first losses on the Japanese at Milne Bay and Port Moresby. The Japanese were knackered by then and they weren't going any further. In other words the Japanese had been stopped before you lot turned up."
You actually think your country inflicted any worthwhile and decisive damage to Japanese forces? Is that a joke?
You don't know much about WWII history if you actually think and believe "the Japanese had been stopped before" American troops showed up.
"I'll admit the US suffered a hell of a lot and Australia could not have driven the Japanese all the way back to Tokyo. This largely fell on the US under the command of General Macarther. A man who liked to waste thousands of lives taking islands with airfields. Airfields he often never ended up using. In other words the US did it's bit just like every other country i.e. Britain, Russia, Canada, New Zealand, China (who by the way suffered more casualties than anybody). Now, do you think you can spare me this stuff about Australia talking Japanese ?"
No, America's participation was the overwhelmingly decisive contribution. Your anti-Americanism can not handle that obvious truth.
"In relation to WW1 you can apply the above principle i.e. US soldiers turned up and arrived on the battlefield in March 1918. Under the command of the Australian General John Monash I might add. Do you see a trend emerging. Just in case you don't, it's the fact the US likes to turn up once the main protagonists have punched themselves out. They then like to go on about "how we won the war". AllenT2 is a classic caricature of such a person."
And I believe you are a classic "caricature" of a person that can not think clearly, objectively and logically about anything to do with America because of your anti-Americanism.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"One is forgiven, reading some of your statements such as:.......
for thinking that you are the self appointed mouthpiece for all Americans. Why is it that we have to pass your censorship, your magnifying glass, in order that it be acceptable to America?"
What makes you think I consider myself a "self appointed mouthpiece for all Americans?"
That said, considering that I am an American I can assure that I know what my fellow Americans think a lot better than you can ever claim to know. I can further assure you that a vast majority of Americans would in fact strongly object to foreign criticism and interference on things that are strictly of a domestic concern, hence my remark of some on this site needing to learn how to mind their own business.
"Please let me show an example using the first statement, replacing the American with Australia:
"As an Australian citizen, I couldn't care less what American's choose.....I know what is my business and what is not. I wish you, and others like you, would learn the same."
Now to start with, an Australian, nor a Brit I would suggest, would EVER make such a statement, it reeks of arrogance, of a person who believer their country is a stand alone...dare I say bully...nation that has no respect or opinion of any other nation's intentions or interests, only that of the person's own nation."
You are leaving out keys words of my remarks? You know, the part having to with things of purely domestic concerns. :)
"There are millions of Americans who would totally disagree with you."
Not with the most important part that you left out. :)
"You, like the rest of us, are entitled to an opinion. But we are individuals, not holders of the constitutional oath, ready to slam someone into court for having an opinion that disagrees with us.
I accept your opinion is contrary to a number of us here, as we are to you and others, but you are not the authority that determines what is acceptable to the US citizen, any more than we are to our nation."
I have no "authority" to prevent you from saying whatever you like, that's obvious. I have simply shared my opinion and the opinion that I know the vast majority Americans share when I say they would strongly object to foreign criticism and interference on things having to do with purely domestic policies.
You simply would not see any significant of meaningful number of Americans criticizing Australians or Britons for how they choose to run their own country on matters that have absolutely nothing to do with them.
People like you bizarrely think our health care system and our right to bear arms, etc, etc, etc is somehow your business. They are not!
"The days of as superior nation, such as was Britain, now America, are fast fading, as we mover closer to becoming a global village. Once it was said that is America sneezes, the rest of the world catches the cold. Now it is the case that if any nation becomes ill, we all become ill. We are not isolated. We are all very much dependent on each other."
In regards to things that obviously affect us all, like pollution, then I would agree we need cooperation but beyond that we obviously do not. America, for example, has no obligation to share high tech technology with any other country.
"Never before have we needed a United Nations body than we do now, but not a United Nations that is based in the US, where the US has over riding powers on any decision made in that esteemed body's security council, as is the case now."
Uh, every member of the permanent members have that right. The UN located in New York is meaningless in that regard. The UN should stay what is was formed for. It should never think it should have authority over any country.
"Switzerland would have been the most obvious place to have based such an organisation, not New York."
I have no problem with that as it would greatly improve traffic conditions in New York City and save America quite a bit of money. :)
Complain about this comment
Jono wrote:
"Just to clarify, AllenT2 obviously does not represent all Americans.
Many of them would disagree with his view of the world.
His view is shared by alot of Americans though."
Actually, most.
"I believe it's essentially driven by patriotism, though he may disagree with me."
It's driven by the fact that America is a sovereign country of free people with a right to make its own choices on how it should run its country on matters of purely domestic concern. Most citizens of most countries I am quite sure feel the same way.
"His views actually remind me of an uncle of mine, who i take great pleasure in winding up."
It gives you "great pleasure" to upset someone, especially someone in your family? You are actually proud of that?
"I don't know how Allan reacts, but my uncle is genuinly shocked at the way foreigners percieve the US, and reacts with hostility."
Your uncle, I'll bet, can discern anti-Americanism when he sees it.
"He has certain inherint beliefs, and you could probably group them under the term American Exceptionalism."
Nothing worng with that.
"I'll never forget him asking a friend of mine incredulously whether or not she wanted America to be the world's superpower (he asked virtually rhetorically, assuming she would see the basic good sense of America remaining as the sole superpower), and was bowled over when she emphatically said no. he couldn't understand why people wouldn't want America to be the world's main power."
Most Americans, I am sure, want America to stay as strong as possible, whether that means it remains a superpower is not nearly as important as it being easily able to defend itself.
"The idea that people are disgusted with America due to the invasion of Iraq, their unequivicol and blind support of Israel no matter what atrocities are committed, the invasion of other countries like Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Vietnam (and their incredibly underreported carpet bombing of uninvolved countries civlian populations during Vietnam - Laos and Cambodia particularly), their obsession with gun ownership, their support of capitol punishment, their support of foreign dictatorships and suppression of popular uprisings in places around the world, but particularly South and Central America, etc., none of this occurs to them as a reason for anti-americanism."
The "people" you refer to are mostly anti-American leftists. No surprise they would be against America on such things, among the many others.
They would rather attack America on invading Afghanistan than celebrating the fact that less and less of Afghanistan's women do not have to worry about getting their heads chopped off in a stadium by the Taliban.
"They come up with hilariously ridiculous things like the idea that they are hated because they have too much freedom, or people just hate them cuz they are democratic."
No, most of the people that hate us around the world do so for obvious reasons, such as differences in politics and jealousy. It's what drives, for example, the EU.
"To be fair, I believe it's motivated by a genuine love of the USA, and it is an amazing country, with so much going for it."
Right, only if it does exactly what they think it should do. :)
"The point is though, Allan has his view, and it's one shared by many of his countrymen, and the chances of anyone reasoning him away from it are slim to none."
You have it wrong, it is because of reason that has brought me and most of Americans to think the way we do.
Complain about this comment
Greg Warner wrote:
"The pact is by definition a three way pact. If the USA was required to go to the aid of Japan, Australia would also be so required."
Who is forcing Australia to participate in a pact with Japan??
"The Okinawa base sends a message to other nations in North Asia that they too must build up their military to counter the US military strength in the area. The base adds to tensions in North Asia when by pulling back to Guam those tensions would ease. In the event of any "problem" US forces would be able to deploy from Guam."
Don't be so naive, China needs no motivation from others in its quest to build up its military.
The Okinawa base is an American base on Japanese soil and that has zero to do with Australia or you.
"Again you miss the point that everything is connected now. Australia is not going to stay on the sidelines any more. Too often in our short history we have been pulled into other people's wars. We want more control over our own destiny."
As I said, no one is forcing Australia to participate.
"Most recently we got pulled into Iraq to honor our defense pact with the USA only to get caught up in what was a bungled operation highlighted by the sacking of Iraqi Army's senior officers after the Iraqi Army was defeated and after some lowbrow in Washington reasoned "The Shia will support us because they don't like the Sunni". And that was AFTER the intelligence was "cooked" to provide evidence of WMD."
Wrong, your sovereign country made its own decision to do so. Many other countries chose not to participate and still maintained good relations with America.
"See my comment above. There are three parties involved. Japan, the USA and Australia. And I resent the fact that Australia's contribution would not be "something meaningful". Is that how you see Australia's contributions in Iraq and Afghanistan?"
Not meaningful if one considers it essential to success. Your forces are much too tiny to have such an affect.
And you can "see my comment above."
"I am speaking as an Australian on a subject in which Australia is involved...as mentioned above."
Australia is not forced to participate in anything. America's pact with Japan doesn't have to have anything to do with Australia.
"Lame answer. You said it didn't you? It is obviously top of mind with you or did you just blurt it out? And regarding "could never happen again"...the events leading up to WWII are completely different to events in 2010...the world now is completely different to the 1930s...isn't it?"
Uh, yeah, I did just "blurt it out" in response to something universally considered historical nonsense.
So your country is immune to future invasion? Interesting.
"I am not anti Israel but that nation's treatment of the Palestinians and its nuclear arsenal are a festering sore and focus of the hatred that breeds terrorism in the Middle East for export to places like Bali and dare I say it, to the USA."
Israel doesn't bother anyone that that doesn't bother it. It's simple really.
Their hatred is because of a thinking and culture from another time.
"I am not the first to say that but you must have missed the expression of that opinion elsewhere."
Why would you think that?
"Not only that, Israel has a way of shooting itself in the foot as was seen in the attack on the flotilla in international waters. That was a leadership disconnect. Wouldn't the better strategy have been to wait until the flotilla entered the Israeli zone? The Israelis seem to have done everything they could to distance themselves from a strong ally in the Middle East, Turkey."
Turkey is merely a so-called moderate Muslim nation that rarely condemns Islamic terrorism.
Considering past attempts to smuggle arms into Israel why should have it waited for a potentially hostile ship to enter Israeli waters?
"Now Iran looks like sending ships."
I hope they do! :)
"Of course every nation has the right to defend itself, but read my comments above. Some Israeli general or politician makes a tactical blunder, and the situation worsens, and the Middle East rises up again against Israel, and then Iran gets involved, then the USA get involved, and then Australia gets involved."
No one is forcing Australia to get "involved" in anything.
"You see the scenario? It's happened to us too many times before."
That is your country's choice.
"We want to be in the front line of the diplomacy and the solutions to help ensure that our troops don't end up in the front line of the battle of some war that with some Aussie wisdom could have been averted in the first place. We have our sabres but we don't rattle them as loudly as some nations I could mention do."
You mean like the effective "diplomacy with Iran?
"You must be one of the few people on the planet who does not accept that it was the USA the began the Global Financial Crisis. Yes everybody was too greedy, it's just that once again the USA was more greedy than anyone else."
Right, hence the homegrown mess in Europe. :)
"Nobody said anything about an "oppressive and dictatorial world government" except you."
And if a country in the future refuses to participate in a world government, then what? :)
"And sadly, from its previously held position of respect the USA has over the past decade fallen from that position of respect to a point where many of the world's citizens might well say that the oppressive and dictatorial world government, IS the USA."
LOL. I doubt it would be any of the women that would have had their heads chopped off in Afghanistan. Huh?
And what is this nonsense of some supposed "respect" before the last ten years? Your type has always hated America on many other occasions besides the events of the last ten years.
"And finally, the policies of other countries ARE my business and they ARE our business for as I have previously said "We are all connected now". That is the fundamental change that has taken place in the world and what you fail to recognise. And regarding "None of your business", Myanmar is now reported to be seeking nuclear weapons.
Is that none of our business too?
Should we not be concerned?"
When it comes to matters of a purely domestic concern our policies in America are absolutely none of your business.
"Should there not be an Australia point of view on that?
Allen, the world has changed...the American century is over."
Read my words again, only this time more carefully.
As for the "American century" being over, I'm quite sure you are looking forward to that. Would those freedom seeking students in Tienanmen Square agree with you?
I'd say be careful what you wish for.
Complain about this comment
71 AllenT2:
"You are leaving out keys words of my remarks? You know, the part having to with things of purely domestic concerns. :)"
And what specifically domestic is it you are talking about? The US economy? Large numbers of world companies went broke because they trusted that America had safety nets for those that invested in your country. How do you think the world went into recession, as the same time as the US economy crashed...coincidence?
"I have simply shared my opinion and the opinion that I know the vast majority Americans share when I say they would strongly object to foreign criticism and interference on things having to do with purely domestic policies."
Are you aware of what you have just said????? No criticism of the US please, but leg me vent my spleen concerning China, or Vietnam, or Iraq etc.
In one breath you claim you uphold the sovereignty of a nation, in the next you support the over throw of that sovereignty. You can't have it both ways.
"You simply would not see any significant of meaningful number of Americans criticizing Australians or Britons for how they choose to run their own country on matters that have absolutely nothing to do with them.
They would if the outcome affected them to the degree the wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan have...and then there is the economy stupid...and I'm quoting here, not my words.
People like you bizarrely think our health care system and our right to bear arms, etc, etc, etc is somehow your business. They are not!
Sorry, you've got me confused with another poster. Understandable considering you attacked so many, hard to figure out who said what.
"America, for example, has no obligation to share high tech technology with any other country."
Again you're confusing me with another poster's comment. But I must ask, if Russia now owned the moon instead of the US, if Russia had bases all over the world, including numerous ones on your continent, would you feel the same?
"Uh, every member of the permanent members have that right."
Yes and there are only six, if my memory serves me well, permitted onto that council. Guess which nations are on there?
"The UN located in New York is meaningless in that regard."
Not meaningless at all, the hose country has a decisive advantage over other nations. If the UN were based in say a poor African nation, they wouldn't be poor for too long.
"The UN should stay what is was formed for. It should never think it should have authority over any country.
Check back over UN resolutions and see how many were instigated, deferred or refused by the US. The UN by default has become a world controlling arm of the US. If the US don't like a resolution, it doesn't happen.
I'm glad we agree on Switzerland.
Complain about this comment
I could spend at least an hour exposing AllenT2's latest diatribe as a complete compilation of incoherent nonsense. It would however end up being an hour of my life which I will never get back. If this hour resulted in AllenT2 being enlightened as to the truth it would be time well spent. Alas, such a cause is lost and there is nothing more I can do.
Complain about this comment
AllenT2 & ColleenBen
You're fighting a losing battle. Not because you are wrong or because your contributions aren't welcome to the rest of us. It's because if your opinions don't conform with faddish, pious left wing orthodoxy, you'll be subjected to a never ending avalanche of self-righteous, pompous verbal diarrhoea from resident dribblers, GregWarner and 11pete11. They're as boring and tedious as they are predictable, bigoted and loose with the facts.
Most of all, don't criticise Kevin Rudd. You might make them cry.
Complain about this comment
Having just read the back and forth, I am exhausted. Let's all link arms and head for the nearest pub and a brew....
Complain about this comment
#75 sydneycynic:
I agree mate, It's getting a bit tedious.
I spend a lot of my day in front of a computer solving complex problems and responding to my clients and suppliers.
For a little mental refreshment, I take a look at Nick's latest blog and follow the comments, make a comment of my own if I feel I have something to add to the conversation, then go to the BBC Home Page to check the news, then the Sports page for a quick look and read, then back to work.
I'd like to respond to AllenT2's most recent spin, but frankly I don't have the time or the inclination.
I thought #68 Jono's post was a fair comment regarding AllenT2's POV "The point is though, Allan has his view, and it's one shared by many of his countrymen, and the chances of anyone reasoning him away from it are slim to none".
And I agree, he has his point of view and I have mine - an Australian's POV.
I am not anti American as I am not anti British but I am pro Australia.
Then of course you get posters like #76 murph73v2...hmmm.
Murph will you ever make a comment on the subject of Nick's blog or will you always post attacks on the posters?
Such as "It's because if your opinions don't conform with faddish, pious left wing orthodoxy, you'll be subjected to a never ending avalanche of self-righteous, pompous verbal diarrhoea from resident dribblers".
Murph, take a look at what I have posted in THIS blog...are any of my words "faddish, pious left wing orthodoxy"?
And you still don't get it do you when you say "Most of all, don't criticise Kevin Rudd. You might make them cry."
Murph, I don't mind if anyone criticises Kevin Rudd, it's all part of what hopefully is an intelligent debate and, for what it is worth I am anti the other mob and their policies.
And as well, I believe the current leader of the Australian opposition is not competent or worthy enough to serve as Australia's leader.
It's leadership murph!
What would make me cry is if my PM turned out to be a stammering, guffawing, "did he mean what he said or didn't he" laughing stock on the world stage.
The thought of Tony Abbott being PM might even make me want to apply for American citizenship.
That is a joke of course.
Complain about this comment
76 murph73v2 wrote: "You're fighting a losing battle."
And therein lies the crux of your form of debate or input. You assume that those who oppose your point of view, or have a differing one, need fighting.
You are fear based in your approach.
If you have something to say concerning a subject, then put it to the readers of this blog for them to make up their mind. But to constantly 'attack' anyone with a differing point of view...well that's how wars start...and most wars are started by conservatives that hate to have people disagree with them.
If you don't like the points of view of those that you disagree with here, either leave, or go get some information to back your point of view.
Neither Greg or myself are authorities here, we simply put together our point of view on subjects we wish to speak to, as do others.
Just because we oppose you doesn't mean we have to be labelled as communist, left wingers, Rudd mouth pieces or what ever term suits you at the appropriate moment.
From what I have read of your material so far, you have a strong dislike of certain things, but absolutely nothing to put in its place. Hence why some of us have asked you to actually say something worth reading.
Complain about this comment
Allen, what's the point in responding mate?
We have very different views of the world, politics, the US. We'll never see eye to eye, so why go to the trouble to argue about it?
One thing I'll say is that yes I do enjoy winding my uncle up. He doesn't get that upset though Allen, he's not precious or a little princess. We just have a bit of an argument then laugh about it and have a beer.
Cuz life's too short.
Complain about this comment
Jono wrote:
"Allen, what's the point in responding mate?"
You are asking me while responding to me?
"We have very different views of the world, politics, the US."
With all do respect my "views," and the views of other Americans, on America on matters of domestic policy that have zero to do with your country are none of your business or the business of your fellow countrymen.
"We'll never see eye to eye, so why go to the trouble to argue about it?"
Again, why are you asking me this while doing the same yourself?
"One thing I'll say is that yes I do enjoy winding my uncle up. He doesn't get that upset though Allen, he's not precious or a little princess. We just have a bit of an argument then laugh about it and have a beer."
Here is a little advice on life to you, don't assume you know what other people are truly feeling, no matter how well you think you know them.
Anyone that enjoys upsetting someone, even a little, as they may think, obviously has other more important issues that need tending to that have nothing to do with posting in this forum.
"Cuz life's too short."
Life is much more than you think it is.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"But to constantly 'attack' anyone with a differing point of view...well that's how wars start...and most wars are started by conservatives that hate to have people disagree with them."
Oh you mean like leftist dictators such as Hitler? How about the millions killed by leftist Stalin? How about leftist China? How about leftist North Korea? How about leftist Cuba?
How many of their own people have they killed for simply expressing "a differing point of view?
"Just because we oppose you doesn't mean we have to be labelled as communist, left wingers, Rudd mouth pieces or what ever term suits you at the appropriate moment."
Have you not labeled by making remarks about "conservatives?"
"From what I have read of your material so far, you have a strong dislike of certain things, but absolutely nothing to put in its place. Hence why some of us have asked you to actually say something worth reading."
Why are you referring to yourself as "us?" Have you been appointed to speak for others?
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"And what specifically domestic is it you are talking about?"
Maybe you should read the discussion all over again.
"The US economy? Large numbers of world companies went broke because they trusted that America had safety nets for those that invested in your country. How do you think the world went into recession, as the same time as the US economy crashed...coincidence?"
I already addressed things to do with economies so I will not repeat myself. People like you simply like to get involved in all matters to do with American domestic policies that have nothing to do with you or your country. Bizarrely many of you will actually think it is your business and your right to have a say in such matters. It's a matter of going from simply sharing a respectful opinion to open hostility, interference and ultimately disrespect.
"Are you aware of what you have just said????? No criticism of the US please, but leg me vent my spleen concerning China, or Vietnam, or Iraq etc. In one breath you claim you uphold the sovereignty of a nation, in the next you support the over throw of that sovereignty. You can't have it both ways."
I know exactly what I said.
Try figuring out the key difference between Western countries and the type of countries above and consider my remark once again.
"They would if the outcome affected them to the degree the wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan have...and then there is the economy stupid...and I'm quoting here, not my words."
Right, because America forced your country's participation. That must be it.
"Sorry, you've got me confused with another poster. Understandable considering you attacked so many, hard to figure out who said what."
Ah, I see, so better to portray me as one who is seemingly out of control that I have "attacked so many." I guess that's one way to have a discussion with someone.
"Again you're confusing me with another poster's comment. But I must ask, if Russia now owned the moon instead of the US, if Russia had bases all over the world, including numerous ones on your continent, would you feel the same?"
Think carefully before you start comparing America to a country that has a history of persecuting, imprisoning and murdering millions of its own for simply expressing an opinion.
I haven't gotten you confused with anyone else. I know exactly who I am speaking to.
"Yes and there are only six, if my memory serves me well, permitted onto that council. Guess which nations are on there?"
You were not highlighting the other members, just one, America!
"Not meaningless at all, the hose country has a decisive advantage over other nations."
How so? In having the most unpaid parking tickets?
"If the UN were based in say a poor African nation, they wouldn't be poor for too long."
As I said, it doesn't matter where it is located. Are you now trying to turn this into a discussion on rich nations supporting poor ones?
"Check back over UN resolutions and see how many were instigated, deferred or refused by the US. The UN by default has become a world controlling arm of the US. If the US don't like a resolution, it doesn't happen."
As I already said, America is not the only country to have that right. What is it that you are not understanding about something so obvious?
"I'm glad we agree on Switzerland."
It is a meaningless agreement as our reasons for agreeing have nothing to do with each other.
Complain about this comment
murph73v2 wrote:
"You're fighting a losing battle. Not because you are wrong or because your contributions aren't welcome to the rest of us. It's because if your opinions don't conform with faddish, pious left wing orthodoxy, you'll be subjected to a never ending avalanche of self-righteous, pompous verbal diarrhoea from resident dribblers, GregWarner and 11pete11. They're as boring and tedious as they are predictable, bigoted and loose with the facts."
Oh I realized it was a losing battle even before I started typing my first response. The thing is my target audience doesn't include those I am responding to, or even those that agree with me.
That said, I appreciate your welcoming response. Thank you.
And if you are Australian I wish you and your country the best.
Complain about this comment
nothing like short and sweet. Hmmm, if you're going to quote, quote in full - particularly when the quote is a full comment short and sweet in comparison on this topic.....
There's a bit missing from your quote AllenT2
**Most of all, don't criticise Kevin Rudd. You might make them cry.**
I wholeheartedly agree with LiveOrDie888
**Having just read the back and forth, I am exhausted. Let's all link arms and head for the nearest pub and a brew....**
Or, I could just have coffee and sit back to read the next installment.....hmmmm....I heard that a great souvenir coffee mug WAS going to be sold at Parliament House and then it wasn't! Just $10 bucks - what a GREAT buy!
Complain about this comment
82 Allan T2: "Oh you mean like leftist dictators such as Hitler? How about the millions killed by leftist Stalin? How about leftist China? How about leftist North Korea? How about leftist Cuba?"
As I have said before none of them were truly from the left, they were from the right mistruthfully (can I say liars yet at BBC?) claiming to be of the left. A true leftist person puts the people of their country above the profits or gains of that nation. People first.
"Just because we oppose you doesn't mean we have to be labelled as communist, left wingers, Rudd mouth pieces or what ever term suits you at the appropriate moment."
Have you not labeled by making remarks about "conservatives?"
You're right. So I will stop calling you a conservative, if you promise not to mouth conservative propaganda ad nauseum.
""From what I have read of your material so far, you have a strong dislike of certain things, but absolutely nothing to put in its place. Hence why some of us have asked you to actually say something worth reading."
Why are you referring to yourself as "us?" Have you been appointed to speak for others? "
True, you don't have to answer to the contents of my post....and I will assume you therefore don't mind if I don't answer yours.
Complain about this comment
83 AllenT2 wrote:"11pete11 wrote:"And what specifically domestic is it you are talking about?"
Maybe you should read the discussion all over again."
No you need to be more specific as to what you refer to as 'domestic'. Are you talking about the GFC that America thrust on the world, or are you referring to the oil problem in the Gulf that will severely effect world oil productions, could even send BP broke, and all because your American administrations have not, till now, bothered to regulate seriously cowboy oil operators.
"People like you simply like to get involved in all matters to do with American domestic policies that have nothing to do with you or your country. Bizarrely many of you will actually think it is your business and your right to have a say in such matters."
I repeat: "And what specific domestic issue are you are referring to here?"
"I know exactly what I said."
Which sounds a like you want the world to have American values, and if they don't then they deserve to be invaded.
"Right, because America forced your country's participation. That must be it."
No, because your country's then President told us mistruths, and our conservative government of the time bought it. The people of Australia then kicked out that government, as did your people with your then President, and the Brits with their war supporting government.
"Think carefully before you start comparing America to a country that has a history of persecuting, imprisoning and murdering millions of its own for simply expressing an opinion."
No, my proposition, that I suggested you think carefully about, was if another super power claimed its right over the world, how would American's feel?
"I haven't gotten you confused with anyone else. I know exactly who I am speaking to."
I find that very hard to believe considering you very sweeping statements in this very post alone. You generalise me with anyone you disagree with using statements like "People like you"...the labels I was talking about earlier.
""Yes and there are only six, if my memory serves me well, permitted onto that council. Guess which nations are on there?"
You were not highlighting the other members, just one, America!"
Sorry, let me re state that for you "Guess which nation CONTROLS WHO can be a member there?". Check out the UN web site, look up John Bolton amendments, and see for yourself.
""Not meaningless at all, the host country has a decisive advantage over other nations."
How so? In having the most unpaid parking tickets?"
I answered you in the following line. It seems you choose to read things out of context. "If the UN were based in say a poor African nation, they wouldn't be poor for too long."
"Are you now trying to turn this into a discussion on rich nations supporting poor ones?"
No, but seeing as you are, what do you see wrong with that notion?
"As I already said, America is not the only country to have that right. What is it that you are not understanding about something so obvious?"
Basically your ignorance of the UN and particularly the mess John Bolton made of it at George Warmonger's request. Again I suggest you check out the UN web site concerning this matter.
""I'm glad we agree on Switzerland."
It is a meaningless agreement as our reasons for agreeing have nothing to do with each other."
Ah but unlike you, I at least try to be polite.
Complain about this comment
Allen, you genuinly believe the rubbish you talk, it's a shame, because you come across as one of the most blinkered, ignorant people I've had the displeasure of having a conversation, even a pointless internet one, with.
And Allen, spare me your advice on my uncle, he's nothing like you, and doesn't take himself too seriously.
PS I'm a US citizen, so I have exactly as many votes as you, and exactly as much right to discuss the country as you do, whether you like it or not. Which I'm sure you don't.
Bloody Republicans... you're ruining a great country with your calous attitude to the rest of the world, poor people, ethnicites, entire religious groups etc.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Sorry folks have no idea what this post above is about. I assume I accidentally hit the Post Comment button.
Complain about this comment
Jono wrote:
"Allen, you genuinly believe the rubbish you talk, it's a shame, because you come across as one of the most blinkered, ignorant people I've had the displeasure of having a conversation, even a pointless internet one, with."
Take solace in the fact that the "displeasure" you say you are feeling does not give me pleasure, unlike the pleasure you feel when you upset others, as you have freely admitted feeling.
"And Allen, spare me your advice on my uncle, he's nothing like you, and doesn't take himself too seriously."
I guess that's one way to deal with someone you upset, just tell them they take themselves "too seriously," or that they are "blinkered" and "ignorant."
Bravo.
"PS I'm a US citizen, so I have exactly as many votes as you, and exactly as much right to discuss the country as you do, whether you like it or not. Which I'm sure you don't."
Why would you think I would have something against an American, if you really are one, having the right to vote in America? By what logic have you arrived at that conclusion?
"Bloody Republicans... you're ruining a great country with your calous attitude to the rest of the world, poor people, ethnicites, entire religious groups etc."
Who says I am a Republican?
Would a typical Republican support abortion for women, as I do? Would a typical Republican support stem cell research, as I do? Would a typical Republican support much stricter environmental regulations, as I do? And I can go on and on.
I'm an Independent, as I believe most Americans, deep down, are also.
And how exactly am I, or the "Republicans" "ruining a great country" for a supposed "calous attitude," to the rest of the world, poor people, ethnicites, entire religious groups etc."
I'm curious about the "ethnicities" one in particular. Why, because Republicans, and most Americans, do not want our borders being overrun by illegal immigrants?
You may as well include most of the people in most of the countries of the world for feeling the same way, and rightly so.
How about "entire religious groups?" Which ones would those be?
What "poor people" are you referring to?
I look forward to your response.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"No you need to be more specific as to what you refer to as 'domestic'. Are you talking about the GFC that America thrust on the world,"
Considering that Europe has its own home grown crisis going on how do you figure?
So America is responsible for European countries living well beyond their means?
"or are you referring to the oil problem in the Gulf that will severely effect world oil productions,"
Since when is America obligated to provide oil to the rest of the world?
"could even send BP broke,"
I couldn't care less.
"and all because your American administrations have not, till now, bothered to regulate seriously cowboy oil operators."
And yet that lack of regulation didn't prevent BP from going further and cutting corners on safety, huh?
"I repeat: "And what specific domestic issue are you are referring to here?"
The fact that you are having so much trouble distinguishing matters of American domestic policies that do not affect you with those that do says a lot. And I am not surprised.
"Which sounds a like you want the world to have American values,"
That's an illogical conclusion but the fact of the matter is most Americans couldn't care less, me included.
"and if they don't then they deserve to be invaded."
I don't shed a tear over countries that persecute, imprison and murder their people being invaded. Not a single drop.
"No, because your country's then President told us mistruths, and our conservative government of the time bought it."
Assuming that's the case then that's their problem and your country's problem. It doesn't say much for the quality of your politicians, does it?
"The people of Australia then kicked out that government, as did your people with your then President, and the Brits with their war supporting government."
Actually, the Republicans here in America lost the election because of the economy, not the war.
"No, my proposition, that I suggested you think carefully about, was if another super power claimed its right over the world, how would American's feel?"
My same reply still applies. Read it again if you have forgotten.
"I find that very hard to believe considering you very sweeping statements in this very post alone. You generalise me with anyone you disagree with using statements like "People like you"...the labels I was talking about earlier."
I have had enough of an exchange of words with you to know who I am dealing with. I don't say that as an insult either.
"Sorry, let me re state that for you "Guess which nation CONTROLS WHO can be a member there?". Check out the UN web site, look up John Bolton amendments, and see for yourself."
Right, that's why America is over and over, and over again, powerless to overrule permanent members like France, Russia and China, huh?
"I answered you in the following line. It seems you choose to read things out of context."
Apparently you do not understand the UN's history in New York City to understand the comment. It's called humor.
"No, but seeing as you are, what do you see wrong with that notion?"
Not me, you brought it up!
The only thing I would support is birth control in poor nations and aid in the form of knowledge on how to have them feed themselves. That's it, as it should be.
"Basically your ignorance of the UN and particularly the mess John Bolton made of it at George Warmonger's request. Again I suggest you check out the UN web site concerning this matter."
I know all I need to know.
"Ah but unlike you, I at least try to be polite."
No, you mistake a lack of consensus and compromise as being impolite.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"As I have said before none of them were truly from the left, they were from the right mistruthfully (can I say liars yet at BBC?) claiming to be of the left."
Wow, is all I can say. Wow.
"A true leftist person puts the people of their country above the profits or gains of that nation. People first."
No, a "true leftist" always resorts to the use of threats, force and worse, to get others to toe the collective line. That was, and is, the case in all the countries that I have mentioned.
Even today in some European countries you can be put in prison for simply expressing a belief in something.
"You're right. So I will stop calling you a conservative, if you promise not to mouth conservative propaganda ad nauseum."
So if I agree with some conservative policies and some policies considered of the left and of the center what does that make me?
You see, I am not a drone. I can think for myself.
"True, you don't have to answer to the contents of my post....and I will assume you therefore don't mind if I don't answer yours."
My remark was nothing to do with the "contents" of your post but simply you referring to yourself as the collective "us" to try and add weight to your words.
Complain about this comment
Havockhoya wrote:
"nothing like short and sweet. Hmmm, if you're going to quote, quote in full - particularly when the quote is a full comment short and sweet in comparison on this topic.....
There's a bit missing from your quote AllenT2
**Most of all, don't criticise Kevin Rudd. You might make them cry.**"
_________________________________________________________________________
Why would I quote something that I had no comment on and that is irrelevant to what I did comment on??
Complain about this comment
92 AllenT2 wrote: "The fact that you are having so much trouble distinguishing matters of American domestic policies that do not affect you with those that do says a lot. And I am not surprised."
Until you can write more specific to a topic, instead of making broad unintelligent statements like above, in reply to my at least third request as to what specifically you are referring to, I will stop posting to this thread.
AMERICA caused the European crisis, because AMERICA had no protections on the money invested in their country.
AMERICA is now paying dearly for a massive oil spill and are now blaming Britain, when the whole oil industry has had a complete free range to do what they want, where they want under past administrations, and now it's biting the US back where it hurts most.
You ignorance of the world is not your fault however, on a number of American news broadcasts concerning the lost girl sailor yesterday our time, NOT ONE mentioned that the girl was saved by Australian sea rescue services.
NOT ONE mentioned that our Jessica Watson has just done the same journey, injury free, and NOT ONE mentioned that a number of round-the-world-sailors bagged the organisation of the US girl's attempt as being unprofessional, a wrong choice of boat, the wrong time of year for southern waters, and not enough care in preparation.
Americo eccentricity is killing your country.
WE ARE THE WORLD...WE ARE ALL PART OF THE ONE.
Complain about this comment
93 AllenT2: Allen you need to get out more...out of the US. Your understanding of the world is frightening. You have an extremists perspective of the world where everyone is wrong except the US. The us can do no wrong. Yet in the past 20 years it has been the US that has interfered in more world events than any nation on earth.
You say in one voice you don't give a damn concerning other nations and their difficulties or their actions...then you claim it is acceptable for the US to invade countries where they damage or hurt their people...talk about double standards.
Then you say that is how most in the US feel.
Man, I hope they continue to build that dividing fence currently under construction between Mexico and the US, all the way around continental USA...then put signs on the outside saying..'Enter At Your Own Risk, Occupants Severely Mentally Ill."
Complain about this comment
Allen T2: Further to you comment in one of your posts that runs as a theme through most of them: "People like you simply like to get involved in all matters to do with American domestic policies that have nothing to do with you or your country."
Then what the hell are you doing posting in a British blog...about Australian domestic matters??????
Our domestic matters, according to your logic, "have nothing to do with you or your country."....or Britain for that matter.
Maybe this explains why the BBC don't have a reporter/blog living in the US...I haven't found a similar blog to this one pertaining to the US yet...
America is so isolated as to be overtaken by nations that long ago began to interact and trade .... on a level playing field...time the US caught up is it.
Complain about this comment
In reference to posts 96 and 97 11Pete11,
I have just been reading this blog for the last few nights, not commenting.
You become more and more full of hate as time goes on.
You are a disgrace to your great country.
Thankfully I HAVE been there and I do know you do not even resemble who and what an Australian is. Spewing hate, is not something they are known for.
Do you not know that by trying to make yourself look larger by degrading other peoples, you then become smaller?????
You also write much misinformation and I feel quite sorry for you.
It has been all over the news about the young sailor who was found by Australians and I even heard a few commentators say...thank you Australia.
Like I wrote days ago..you know nothing about this country..nothing. Don't bother denying it, one only needs to read what you write.
America is a fantastic country, I would live no where else in this world, pretty much ALL peoples of this country feel this way.
Australia, so highly regarded, you are NOT good for your country.
Leftist..Left as in politics...does not mean FOR the people, it is for a larger government to control the people. Look it up!
You do not even understand political terms.
You think you know world politics, well you do not.
You should be ashamed and you are no model for the Australian people. Thankfully you are not, and just a hateful person on a blog.
I just heard it again! A thank to the Australians for finding the sailor.
11Pete11....you are a buffoon.
The BBC's Washington Correspondent LIVED in the United States, Justin Webb, he grew quite fond of it. The new fellow, not sure where he is living but would assume he does as well.
I would go into all the other things that you have written false information about, but haven't the time.
Complain about this comment
98 ColleenBen: Well other than a vitriolic rant, you really didn't say anything at all. But that seems to be a trait of both yourself and Allan T2. You both make wild accusations short on any basis or facts, just a lot of self opinionated hot air.
Complain about this comment
American interest preventing competition:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/13/2925765.htm?section=justin
Complain about this comment
Please Excuse America, but we are in the middle of an ecological disaster right now brought on by our greed and insatiable need to consume , and have not the time nor desire to come for a visit , our bad, get over it.
Complain about this comment
a smile wouldnt hurt , nick,
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
"American interest preventing competition:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/13/2925765.htm?section=justin"
_________________________________________________________________________
The organizers of the expo are the ones to blame, not Coca Cola, for signing the contract as it was. All businesses will try and place themselves in a position to protect their business if they can. So long as it is within the limits of the law then there shouldn't be a problem. If current laws do not make it reasonably easy to get into markets to compete then that should be addressed separately.
Lets not make this just another lame attempt to demonize America.
The article also says: "his invention of a fizzy milk drink which comes in a can"
I don't know where they get that from or why he thinks he invented carbonated milk drinks but here in America we have had carbonated milk drinks for about as long as there have been carbonated drinks, or soda.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
________________________________________________________________________
"Allen you need to get out more...out of the US. Your understanding of the world is frightening."
________________________________________________________________________
Thanks for the advice but I have traveled to over 2 countries on very numerous occasions and I lived in a European country for quite a number of years.
_________________________________________________________________________
"You have an extremists perspective of the world where everyone is wrong except the US. The us can do no wrong. Yet in the past 20 years it has been the US that has interfered in more world events than any nation on earth."
_________________________________________________________________________
On matters that have absolutely nothing to do with non-Americans, like purely domestic issues, it simply has nothing to do with being "wrong" to them, or you, since it, once again, does not affect you and it is therefore none of your business See?
America has given the chance for millions more of the world's population to live in freedom "in the past 20 years." I'm sure those people that can directly benefit from that chance, and who have, will appreciate it more than you. No surprise there.
_________________________________________________________________________
"You say in one voice you don't give a damn concerning other nations and their difficulties or their actions...then you claim it is acceptable for the US to invade countries where they damage or hurt their people...talk about double standards."
_________________________________________________________________________
No, I couldn't care less what other free and democratic nations choose to do that doesn't affect others. For example, your country's domestic policies that do not affect me or my country in any way are none of my business.
Once again, I have no sympathy for brutal and murdering, non-democratic, regimes being toppled by my country when it is possible to do so. Besides, your freedom is a direct result of just that.
________________________________________________________________________
"Then you say that is how most in the US feel.
Man, I hope they continue to build that dividing fence currently under construction between Mexico and the US, all the way around continental USA...then put signs on the outside saying..'Enter At Your Own Risk, Occupants Severely Mentally Ill."
________________________________________________________________________
I guess that says a lot about the difference between you and me. I would simply argue my point and ultimately agree to disagree, whereas you feel it necessary to say that not only I am "Severely Mentally Ill" but so are most of my fellow Americans.
Gee, thanks.
Complain about this comment
11pete11 wrote:
________________________________________________________________________
"Further to you comment in one of your posts that runs as a theme through most of them: "People like you simply like to get involved in all matters to do with American domestic policies that have nothing to do with you or your country."
Then what the hell are you doing posting in a British blog...about Australian domestic matters????"
_________________________________________________________________________
Uh, exactly where am I commenting on or criticizing Australian domestic issues that have absolutely nothing to do with me or my country?
Good luck finding an example of that.
You see I come here to read about issues to do with other countries, not to criticize and interfere in their matters like so many non-Americans here do with America.
_________________________________________________________________________
"Our domestic matters, according to your logic, "have nothing to do with you or your country."....or Britain for that matter.
Maybe this explains why the BBC don't have a reporter/blog living in the US...I haven't found a similar blog to this one pertaining to the US yet..."
_________________________________________________________________________
LOL. You don't know the Have Your say section of the BBC very well.
And my comments are not limited to just this site or one media organization.
_________________________________________________________________________
"America is so isolated as to be overtaken by nations that long ago began to interact and trade .... on a level playing field...time the US caught up is it. "
_________________________________________________________________________
You me like the free and democratic, cough, nation of China with its bogus currency valuations? :)
If you think America is "isolated" when it comes to trade then I'd be very curious to see what your idea of non-isolation is.
Complain about this comment
104 AllenT2 wrote: "America has given the chance for millions more of the world's population to live in freedom "in the past 20 years." I'm sure those people that can directly benefit from that chance, and who have, will appreciate it more than you. No surprise there."
This is pure propaganda out of the Gobel's handbook that only some believe in American, and no one else in the real world.
We know that there are far more unsung hero countries that don't brag about their efforts to being world peace, arrest the situation of the poor, run huge humanitarian campaigns that Americans never hear about.
The rest is just a waste of time replying to.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS