Another US shooting - Newtown, Connecticut

[Exe Gesis]

Why not?

If it's accepted that there is a need or a right for people to have firearms, why can there never be movement on what types they can have?

Especially as technology advances, surely it is a good idea to examine what things are reasonably necessary for people to have? 150 years ago there would have been no argument that people could have a rifle. But today, what is a "rifle" is not at all like what it was 150 years ago.

What about in 100 years time, when the standard "rifle" fires laser bolts that can pass through anything for a range of two kilometres and fire 2000 rounds per second? Will it be non-negotiable that you can buy one at K-Mart?

Mentioned it before, and while it may just be me, I don't agree that Govt sector (police, SS) should have the advantage over the private sector in terms of weaponry. The Govt spends trillions a year on developing weaponry, which is fine in terms of national security from foreign enemies. But when there's always a risk of that Govt rotting (patriot act growing) then any attempts by them to ultimately eliminate the 2nd Amendment or Bill of Rights collectively, must be met with resistance, and pushing back the other way. It's the only way to keep them in check, keep the evil elements from festering, getting more of a stranglehold.

 

[blackcat]

Also something else to ponder....for as evil as the USA Govt has become infected....the world is safer/better off with America as the super power and cultural influence, than if "Arabia", or Communist Russia/China, had become or becomes the super power. The Western Way is still democratic at heart, tolerant, moving forward. Whereas the others are far more inflexible of human rights, etc. Better the devil you know.

but you cant devine the counter factual like a dowsing rod. The states in Arabia were a product of the post Ottoman and Sykes Picot. You take that out, and take out the French and British Empire, and what product of political organising comes in its place. We had a democratic government in Iran in 53. In Iraq and Palestine, there were advanced and educated middle classes. And Damascus and Beruit were cities with potential.

Counter factual is pure speculation.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I call crap on this. There's always a few dickheads that will ruin it for everyone else.

I agree and disagree.

If by "few dickheads" you mean well resourced people that mess with other peoples freedom and property, then I wholeheartedly agree.

If you are referring to people who do no harm to others and who are disadvantaged by many of societies current laws, then I completely disagree.

The state is wholly responsible for many of the criminals it creates.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I agree and disagree.

If by "few dickheads" you mean well resourced people that mess with other peoples freedom and property, then I wholeheartedly agree.

If you are referring to people who do no harm to others and who are disadvantaged by many of societies current laws, then I completely disagree.

The state is wholly responsible for many of the criminals it creates.

I disagree. For many it is the outcome of bad parenting. Children need to learn why rules exist and what the benefit to society is. One of the things my mother used to say to me was "just imagine what would happen if everyone else did it too".

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I disagree. For many it is the outcome of bad parenting. Children need to learn why rules exist and what the benefit to society is. One of the things my mother used to say to me was "just imagine what would happen if everyone else did it too".

Society is responsible for dealing with the products of bad parenting, but is not responsible for ensuring bad parenting does not eventuate?

Is this your premise?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Society is responsible for dealing with the products of bad parenting, but is not responsible for ensuring bad parenting does not eventuate?

Is this your premise?

It's a bit more complex than that.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

It's a bit more complex than that.

Yes. it is.

 

[Exe Gesis]

but you cant devine the counter factual like a dowsing rod. The states in Arabia were a product of the post Ottoman and Sykes Picot. You take that out, and take out the French and British Empire, and what product of political organising comes in its place. We had a democratic government in Iran in 53. In Iraq and Palestine, there were advanced and educated middle classes. And Damascus and Beruit were cities with potential.

Counter factual is pure speculation.

Look at their track records, says it all. They are not democratic. They are theocracies. And savage at that. Islam. The Crusades a shining example of what world domination lead to and would still lead to. Their religion is so 500 AD, and their culture/politics/etc still so attached to that religion and way of looking at the world circa 500 AD. Christians were no better at the time. But it was important for them to stem that global threat.

Whilst Communist Russia/China as super power is a bad world in a different way. Democratic freedoms. Culture. Art. Freedom of thought. Etc. There would still arise occasions of genocide.

Imperialistic nations like Japan another example if they had gained world domination. The atrocities they committed were as bad or worse than Hitlers.

Further back, in the 1300's? a particular Dutch? ruling class that believed in slavery of the masses. Forget the details, remember reading about it in some "what if" book about how much different and worse the world would have been if the French/English/Spanish didn't defeat them and gain the upper global hand. Was said to be the most influential moment in modern history of how the world is today vs what it could've been.

America doesn't try to eliminate the nations, genocide, wipe out cultures, persecute and torture like savages on the streets, doesnt endanger the world at large. They control things thru shadowy nefarious means but do maintain a livable world for the most part.

The others would still pose a risk of endangering the world at large, creating jihads, and genocides, and at the very minimum human rights would be sent back in time, expansiveness of culture -- the vast beauty/latitude/growth that is the western way -- would be destroyed.

 

[Monniehawk]

Have you ever made a substantial comment in your entire bigfooty existence?
If it wasn't for cliches, you would dry up and blow away on the wind.

ummmmm....
Some examples of your in-depth contributions that have substance and avoid cliches.

1) I understand that you can't relate to me.
2) Your arguments are generic and piss weak

therefore....

3) I don't care

You can't tell me anything that I couldn't read in the Herald Sun.

Why don't you just take my earlier advice and leave me alone?

I'd certainly have you on ignore if you weren't a mod.

This doesn't surprise me.

 

[blackcat]

Look at their track records, says it all. They are not democratic. They are theocracies. And savage at that. Islam. The Crusades a shining example of what world domination lead to and would still lead to. Their religion is so 500 AD, and their culture/politics/etc still so attached to that religion and way of looking at the world circa 500 AD. Christians were no better at the time. But it was important for them to stem that global threat.

Whilst Communist Russia/China as super power is a bad world in a different way. Democratic freedoms. Culture. Art. Freedom of thought. Etc. There would still arise occasions of genocide.

Imperialistic nations like Japan another example if they had gained world domination. The atrocities they committed were as bad or worse than Hitlers.

Further back, in the 1300's? a particular Dutch? ruling class that believed in slavery of the masses. Forget the details, remember reading about it in some "what if" book about how much different and worse the world would have been if the French/English/Spanish didn't defeat them and gain the upper global hand. Was said to be the most influential moment in modern history of how the world is today vs what it could've been.

America doesn't try to eliminate the nations, genocide, wipe out cultures, persecute and torture like savages on the streets, doesnt endanger the world at large. They control things thru shadowy nefarious means but do maintain a livable world for the most part.

The others would still pose a risk of endangering the world at large, creating jihads, and genocides, and at the very minimum human rights would be sent back in time, expansiveness of culture -- the vast beauty/latitude/growth that is the western way -- would be destroyed.

just maybe, just maybe, a counterfactual could include the element of western interference like in Chalmers Johnson's Blowback.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Thanks for the reference (Blowback), will read up on it now to get the gist.

But in the meantime i still disagree that western interference created or caused 'Arabia' or Communist Russia/China or Imperial Japan or 'Dutch Sovereignty' to become what they are. Islam is what it is. Communism is what it is. Nazism is what it is. Imperialism is what it is. The world is no different now than how it was two thousand+ years ago. There's always a people/nation looking for global domination, looking to control the world's resources, looking to start war, invade, wipe out ideological/theological/political/cultural enemies or opposites. War is never going to go away. There's always going to be threats to the world at large. It happens every century. The last one was only 70 years ago. Soon as America falls or is weakened in some way, the world will be immediately threatened once again by an ideology/politics/theology/culture that wants to impose itself on the rest of the world, and its never benign. Despite the internet etc, the world hasnt truly hybrid. There are still those dangers there. Ideologies/Politics/Theologies that stand opposed to western ones and do not possess tolerance for their existence. Do not fool yourselves into thinking the world is cool since ww2 and those sorts of things cant/wont happen. Human nature. Tribal nature. Threats are always there, and America is at heart a 'democratic'/'peace' keeper of the status quo, with tolerance/latitude.

The 1950s to now has been largely an era of beauty and expression, cultural/technological/lifestyle expansion/growth. That's the American way, what we're all living in the west. Thank God for it. Don't take your liberties and the world the way it is for granted. Don't hate America, it allows life to breathe under it.

Just always got to remain vigilant still because wherever dominance is, the same evil elements try to infest, take hold, and fester.

 

[Moo]

Mentioned it before, and while it may just be me, I don't agree that Govt sector (police, SS) should have the advantage over the private sector in terms of weaponry. The Govt spends trillions a year on developing weaponry, which is fine in terms of national security from foreign enemies. But when there's always a risk of that Govt rotting (patriot act growing) then any attempts by them to ultimately eliminate the 2nd Amendment or Bill of Rights collectively, must be met with resistance, and pushing back the other way. It's the only way to keep them in check, keep the evil elements from festering, getting more of a stranglehold.

I'll do the USA a favour and give them some advice - we'll do you a deal ....the US Govt will cut their 760 billion military budget in half (and still be more than Russia + China + Britain + France combined) and the US citizens agree to keep them in check without assault rifle technology and unlimited magazine sizes?

Win - win

 

[blackcat]

Thanks for the reference (Blowback), will read up on it now to get the gist.

But in the meantime i still disagree that western interference created or caused 'Arabia' or Communist Russia/China or Imperial Japan or 'Dutch Sovereignty' to become what they are. Islam is what it is. Communism is what it is. Nazism is what it is. Imperialism is what it is. The world is no different now than how it was two thousand+ years ago. There's always a people/nation looking for global domination, looking to control the world's resources, looking to start war, invade, wipe out ideological/theological/political/cultural enemies or opposites. War is never going to go away. There's always going to be threats to the world at large. It happens every century. The last one was only 70 years ago. Soon as America falls or is weakened in some way, the world will be immediately threatened once again by an ideology/politics/theology/culture that wants to impose itself on the rest of the world, and its never benign.

Persia and democratic elections in mid C20th dont fit your narrative. Sykes Picot was intended never to give Arabia one state with influence, but a patchwork of tribes that would self-destruct in sectarianism.

If there was one Arabia, it may have been a major problem for the international body with the energy resources held by one state, and they could have had a theocratic government and been a callous on freedoms and committed crimes on the infidels and other religions' followers.

 

[Northalives]

True. You'll not see me argue that the American Govt/Intel has become infected with evil designs, fallen into the hands of the bankers, nazism, secret societies, etc. There are evil elements there surging, infecting; but not all of its elements are, there are still good people there fighting.

But it has nothing to do with American people anyway, those evil elements....who have always opposed the Govt's foreign policy post-war, sticking their noses into the global community, bullying, etc, creating foreign enemies, killing in the name of oil, opium, post-war regeneration projects, etc. Most of the comments in this and similar threads have been generalized anti-american, of the people and the culture. There are differences between all western cultures/peoples, but it's typical of Australians to slam all the others as being inferior to their own culture.

At the same time tho...we're all still allies. If there was a conflict/danger, Australia would run to the USA for help.

Also something else to ponder....for as evil as the USA Govt has become infected....the world is safer/better off with America as the super power and cultural influence, than if "Arabia", or Communist Russia/China, had become or becomes the super power. The Western Way is still democratic at heart, tolerant, moving forward. Whereas the others are far more inflexible of human rights, etc. Better the devil you know.

I admire your utopian view of the world, that is, that somehow we are better off having the US as a super power and that the "Western Way", as you put it, is democratic at heart, tolerant and moving forward.

With all due respect to you GG, you have a whimsical view of what the world is today.

 

[Monniehawk]

WTF is the point of posting data from 1998? It is the epitome of irrelevant evidence; it means nothing.
1998? Seriously dude, WTF.
Please read the quote below this time. Could you please?
Why focus on homicides? Because the thread was prompted by a homicide?

Not quite.
It was raised about deaths caused by guns. You can try to keep it to the confines of your comfort zone.
Just like the original graphic you trumpeted as being from reliable sources. READ your data, analyse it first, then propose supporting argument rather than just rabidly sticking it on the page without fully comprehending it.
So far, your stuff has been shredded by most posters and your posts are punctuated with incredible claims and outrageous conspiracy theories.
The issue is still the guns and the deaths are mere products of the guns.
The gun homicide rate in the U.S. is still well ahead of any comparable nation.
The 1998 data is only irrelevant in your mind. But I read "inconvenient", rather than irrelevant.Perhaps you can show a significant shift in rates to recent times?
You conveniently side-stepped the other data. And, as I stated, there is more.
If you want to raise anarchy, conspiracy theories about the guv'mint, etc., then it is valid for others to raise other gun-related deaths.
You're setting a lot of rules to align with your own narrow arguments.

Back to your data.
You do realise that the 14 other countries were of, say, rather dubious stability, don't you?
Not ONE is a comparable culture or developed western democracy!
Those nations are basically irrelevant in this debate.
Even so, it actually means that the U.S. is behind 185 of the other nations on the planet who have a better record in gun homicides. That's JUST homicides! The rate climbs higher when we include other gun-related deaths.
What positive can you make out of that for supposedly the most civilised and free nation on earth??!

 

[Exe Gesis]

I admire your utopian view of the world, that is, that somehow we are better off having the US as a super power and that the "Western Way", as you put it, is democratic at heart, tolerant and moving forward.

With all due respect to you GG, you have a whimsical view of what the world is today.

You disagree. But to call it whimsical isn't necessary, or even on the mark in the first place. Just a way for you to come off feeling better about yourself at the expense of someone else. And someone else who has put it out there on the table unabashedly. Most posters in these topical threads, purely inhabit them to mock the views of those who put stuff out there, or oppose the status quo.

And you're out of touch with anything I've posted calling my view of the world utopian. Lol. WTF. It's actually more a weltschmerz. Truth, of one's self, the world of selves, and the world itself, is like a Colonel Kurtz -- a heart of darkness at the end of a journey along a serpentine river that flows thru all things that is life. The world is terrible, and all that happens from when one is born, is the gradual awakening year by year of the difference between the idealistic understanding of it and the reality of it.

All I emphasized previously is that the world is better under the rule of the western way than any other way, because it allows more latitude, expansiveness, expression. However, one must remain vigilant, because where there is dominance, those same non-'democratic' elements always still look for a way in, to seed and fester. America, thru the growth of the CIA, has gradually been infested, and there's a threat there. You can not let the big get too big. That's at the core of the very constitution and bill of rights. Vigilance/guardedness against tyranny.

 

[mantis]

Have you ever made a substantial comment in your entire bigfooty existence?

If it wasn't for cliches, you would dry up and blow away on the wind.

I've been posting on BF for 12 years & you for a few months, how would you know about my posting history, unless you are a previously banned poster with a new alias.

 

[Moo]

I've been posting on BF for 12 years & you for a few months, how would you know about my posting history, unless you are a previously banned poster with a new alias.

Inb4 long time reader - first time poster

 

[Exe Gesis]

blackcat

Reading the gist of Chalmers Johnson's 'Blowback'

Johnson believed that the enforcement of American hegemony over the world constitutes a new form of global empire. Whereas traditional empires maintained control over subject peoples via colonies, since World War II the U.S. has developed a vast system of hundreds of military bases around the world where it has strategic interests. A long-time Cold Warrior, he applauded the dissolution of the Soviet Union: "I was a cold warrior. There's no doubt about that. I believed the Soviet Union was a genuine menace. I still think so."[9] At the same time, however, he experienced a political awakening after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, noting that instead of demobilizing its armed forces, the U.S. accelerated its reliance on military solutions to problems both economic and political. The result of this militarism (as distinct from actual domestic defense) is more terrorism against the U.S. and its allies, the loss of core democratic values at home, and an eventual disaster for the American economy.

That's nothing I disagree with, or have said differently about my own observations of things without reading these or similar books.

All I emphasized was that the world is better for it than if another nation with non-democratic ideologies was a super power. I also said that this current American Empire can/will start to become a problem only because a non-democratic ideology infests it and takes hold. Which is what has happened thru the CIA. But remember that this growing threat is not American, not of the American way. It is a non-democratic element coming from elsewhere. It's a nazism or a 'dutch-like' sovereignty thing. Islam, communism, nazism, sovereignty...they are all non-democratic, non-American. The USA being the super power just becomes the conduit for these ideologies to find a way in. If NZ became a super power somehow, hypothetically, again, those elements would just try to find a way in again, using whatever nation is in power as a conduit.

That western interference to ensure there was never a unified "Arabia" was important and necessary, to stem the threat of crusade-like proportions arising, as you agreed.

 

[Northalives]

You disagree. But to call it whimsical isn't necessary, or even on the mark in the first place. Just a way for you to come off feeling better about yourself at the expense of someone else. And someone else who has put it out there on the table unabashedly. Most posters in these topical threads, purely inhabit them to mock the views of those who put stuff out there, or oppose the status quo.

And you're out of touch with anything I've posted calling my view of the world utopian. Lol. WTF. It's actually more a weltschmerz. Truth, of one's self, the world of selves, and the world itself, is like a Colonel Kurtz -- a heart of darkness at the end of a journey along a serpentine river that flows thru all things that is life. The world is terrible, and all that happens from when one is born, is the gradual awakening year by year of the difference between the idealistic understanding of it and the reality of it.

All I emphasized previously is that the world is better under the rule of the western way than any other way, because it allows more latitude, expansiveness, expression. However, one must remain vigilant, because where there is dominance, those same non-'democratic' elements always still look for a way in, to seed and fester. America, thru the growth of the CIA, has gradually been infested, and there's a threat there. You can not let the big get too big. That's at the core of the very constitution and bill of rights. Vigilance/guardedness against tyranny.

I didn't mean to offend you and in hindsight, I should have chosen my words a bit better.

All I am trying to say to you GG is that it seems to me that your heart is in the right place but the world isn't heading in the right direction and all is not well with what is happening on our planet.

The forces of capitalism are running rampant and if you really want to know what it is like in a purely capitalist, dog-eat-dog, law-of-the-jungle country, go live in downtown LA and in the vast suburban wastelands. Go and live in Queens and in Chicago: live like the vast majority of American's. They are not like the sit-coms that are shoved down our throats.

It is a violent and filthy place to live in and the poor creatures that do live there are, in general, completely ignorant of what is happening in the world and are so poorly educated that it made me want to cry every time I tried to have a normal, everyday conversation as I was able to do in normal, everyday Australia.

The USA is a lost cause. It should not be held up as the epitome of the "Western Way". Australia should be held up as the Western Way and I find it reprehensible that the so called media in this country and the Conservative parties, are hell bent on Americanising our way of life as if we lag behind the rest of the world, let alone America for ****'s sake.

I don't want to think, be treated nor live like an American.

 

[TheRealComptroller]

Not quite.
It was raised about deaths caused by guns. You can try to keep it to the confines of your comfort zone.
Just like the original graphic you trumpeted as being from reliable sources. READ your data, analyse it first, then propose supporting argument rather than just rabidly sticking it on the page without fully comprehending it.
So far, your stuff has been shredded by most posters and your posts are punctuated with incredible claims and outrageous conspiracy theories.
The issue is still the guns and the deaths are mere products of the guns.
The gun homicide rate in the U.S. is still well ahead of any comparable nation.
The 1998 data is only irrelevant in your mind. But I read "inconvenient", rather than irrelevant.Perhaps you can show a significant shift in rates to recent times?
You conveniently side-stepped the other data. And, as I stated, there is more.
If you want to raise anarchy, conspiracy theories about the guv'mint, etc., then it is valid for others to raise other gun-related deaths.
You're setting a lot of rules to align with your own narrow arguments.

Back to your data.
You do realise that the 14 other countries were of, say, rather dubious stability, don't you?
Not ONE is a comparable culture or developed western democracy!
Those nations are basically irrelevant in this debate.
Even so, it actually means that the U.S. is behind 185 of the other nations on the planet who have a better record in gun homicides. That's JUST homicides! The rate climbs higher when we include other gun-related deaths.
What positive can you make out of that for supposedly the most civilised and free nation on earth??!

Dude.

I think you have me confused for another poster. No problem. It happens.

I have no idea what you are referring to in most of the above post.

Anarchy?

Conspiracy theories?

Where are my conspiratorial posts?

You have made a statement in the above text that is almost verbatim what I posted last week "America is easily the worst country for gun violence in the prosperous world but is a trillion miles behind many Latin American countries" or something like that.

I think we have a simple case of mistaken identity.

BTW I didn't think aiming for the most current data as possible would be a problem. I thought quoting politifact quoting the UN's most recent data would be considered a pretty wise submission to the proceedings.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I didn't mean to offend you and in hindsight, I should have chosen my words a bit better.

All I am trying to say to you GG is that it seems to me that your heart is in the right place but the world isn't heading in the right direction and all is not well with what is happening on our planet.

The forces of capitalism are running rampant and if you really want to know what it is like in a purely capitalist, dog-eat-dog, law-of-the-jungle country, go live in downtown LA and in the vast suburban wastelands. Go and live in Queens and in Chicago: live like the vast majority of American's. They are not like the sit-coms that are shoved down our throats.

It is a violent and filthy place to live in and the poor creatures that do live there are, in general, completely ignorant of what is happening in the world and are so poorly educated that it made me want to cry every time I tried to have a normal, everyday conversation as I was able to do in normal, everyday Australia.

The USA is a lost cause. It should not be held up as the epitome of the "Western Way". Australia should be held up as the Western Way and I find it reprehensible that the so called media in this country and the Conservative parties, are hell bent on Americanising our way of life as if we lag behind the rest of the world, let alone America for ****'s sake.

I don't want to think, be treated nor live like an American.

You didn't offend me, just I went to all that trouble posting and you flippantly ended it with that remark.
Anyway, I appreciate your opening lines above. It's cool.

Still, you're in error thinking I have a utopian view of the world. Or that I think the world is in a good place right now. If anything you're preaching to the choir with me. I'm known here for engaging conspiracy theories on NWO, bankers, the US Govt, etc.

All i emphasized was that the world was threatened in the 40s with another global tyranny. The democratic forces won out, and the USA as super power has kept the world in check under its reign since. That if Nazi Germany, Communist Russia/China, or a central Arabia had instead become super powers at any point prior to or after, this world would be in a lot worse shape, more obviously too, crusade-like. And that while the USA has maintained that power, however, those non-democratic elements still find a way in again to try again. That vigilance against tyranny.

Remember, it was one of the things i expressed often/early in this or similar threads why 2nd Amendment is non-negotiable, to guard against tyranny, and I got mocked for it as nutter talk by all the pitchfork-wavers in here. So, i dont know how you could say I am naive/utopian about my views, considering.

Your generalizations about American people is offensive tho

 

[romeoh]

blackcat

Reading the gist of Chalmers Johnson's 'Blowback'



That's nothing I disagree with, or have said differently about my own observations of things without reading these or similar books.

All I emphasized was that the world is better for it than if another nation with non-democratic ideologies was a super power. I also said that this current American Empire can/will start to become a problem only because a non-democratic ideology infests it and takes hold. Which is what has happened thru the CIA. But remember that this growing threat is not American, not of the American way. It is a non-democratic element coming from elsewhere. It's a nazism or a 'dutch-like' sovereignty thing. Islam, communism, nazism, sovereignty...they are all non-democratic, non-American. The USA being the super power just becomes the conduit for these ideologies to find a way in. If NZ became a super power somehow, hypothetically, again, those elements would just try to find a way in again, using whatever nation is in power as a conduit.

That western interference to ensure there was never a unified "Arabia" was important and necessary, to stem the threat of crusade-like proportions arising, as you agreed.

But surely most of America's problems are self-inflicted and largely a consequence of the capitalist system. The 'American way' promotes the concentration of power in fewer and fewer bodies and the damaging results of this can be seen -GFC, health system, widespread poverty, disregard for social justice (and indirectly the lack of support services increases the likelihood of nutjobs running around with high powered guns). The CIA is just a tool carrying out the wishes of these inherently corrupt bodies- it is a symptom, not the cause.

 

[WinmarToLockett]

Thanks for the reply. I haven't taken the time to read about philosophical anarchism since I was in university, but what you said was helpful in understanding of your perspective (for me, anyway)... I think a lot of what you say is true, however on this point:

Any truly civilised society is organised by rules which originate from individual consent.

I don't understand how this is possible. How can an individual consent determine a rule? It's impossible to imagine a situation where everyone is going to agree on evan a single law.

I'm also a little unsure of how the personal liberty argument works. Sometimes there has to be a trade off between personal freedom and the welfare and safety of the citizens, surely.

 

[Pie eyed]

All you mouthing off about Americans, worth reminding yourselves about this when you look around at your way of life, your freedoms...

US Saves Australia from the Japanese

Why Did Australia Turn to the USA for Help in WW2

You flatter your country here GG.
The US is a market place first and foremost today and China took precedence quite sometime ago.
WWII saw the US "assist" Australia because it suited their purpose at the time and when resources and priorities changed we were left to our own defence.
Simple luck had it that the Japanese had bigger fish to fry, for if the invasion of Australia was a priority we would have fallen, at least from Darwin to Brisbane.
US assistance to any ally has always and always will be a case of self preservation or promotion.
Not that I have an issue with that philosophy, but don't make the US sound like a global phillanthropist.
Australia's way of life and freedoms are overwhelmingly thanks to the British and our own variation on their democracy.