your political views

Mr Q

Brownlow Medallist
May 27, 2002
10,897
30
Wombling Free
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Perth
Originally posted by Frodo
You have to go on what's probable and not what's possible. Iraq has only 43 scuds left maximum. They are on portable launchers. Now there should be no civilian casualties on any strike on them unless Saddam places them in the middle of public areas, and in that case the blood will be on his hands. The vast majority of air defence systems are also in military areas although some are portable. So again I repeat that less that 100 innocent civilian casualties will occur that will be the responsibility of the allies.
We can only wait and see the reality.
The allies will certainly not use Chemical.biological or nuclear weapons on civilian targets.

Do you really believe that knocking out Iraq's scuds will cause Saddam to immediately surrender to the US? He will hide himself behind a human shield made of civilians and dare the US to come and get him. And to succeed will cost thousands of lives. You're looking at urban warfare here where you can't just use missiles.
 

elt

All Australian
Apr 6, 2000
945
2
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Originally posted by dreamkillers
I agree it might not have been the main game in the Pacific but it's scary to think how close the Top End of Australia came to being taken after Singapore and most countries to the North of Australia had been taken. The Aust military even had contingency plans to back off from the top third of the country should the attacks persist and New Guinea fallen.

Ahhh yes Curtin's famous "invasion threat" and the "Brisbane Line" myth. It's all bollocks of course by why let the truth get in the way of a chance for us to feel more important about our involvement.

Try reading something else at the War Memorial :

http://www.awm.gov.au/events/conference/2002/stanley_paper.pdf
 

elt

All Australian
Apr 6, 2000
945
2
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Originally posted by manutd/dogs
General Tomoyuki Yama****a, Japan's biggest general (responsible for the fall of Malaya and Singapore had planned to.
It was discussed but dismissed in 1942 in favour of isolation of Australia. There is no evidence that there were plans prior to 1942.

Originally posted by manutd/dogs
And why was Australian-Japanese money was prepared in Tokyo, along with several Japanese diplomats who had previously represented their governemnt in Canberra?
The link I posted above deals with the "Australian-Japanese money". There were four denominations of notes in Australian pounds produced but they were for use in occupied British Oceania and Papua New Guinea - plenty of Australian servicement brought them back from New Guinea. Hardly evidence of an invasion plan of Australia.

Originally posted by manutd/dogs
Admittedly, Yama****a's superiors had said that the supply lines would have been too long, but the plan was there:
Aye, there's the rub.

The documentation that I've read all suggests that whilst an invasion was suggested by some (primarily naval staff) in 1942 following recent victories it was rejected and isolation was the plan of choice.
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 17, 2000
12,447
23
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
Originally posted by Mr Q
Do you really believe that knocking out Iraq's scuds will cause Saddam to immediately surrender to the US? He will hide himself behind a human shield made of civilians and dare the US to come and get him. And to succeed will cost thousands of lives. You're looking at urban warfare here where you can't just use missiles.
No I don't. I believe that knocking out scuds and air defences will be the first action. I think most would agree to that so it is a probability.

I don't think Saddam can hide behind a human shield. I think troops and civilians will turn on Saddam and welcome the allies. Now that icannot be classed as a probability any more than a human shield can. We each have differing opinions as to potential outcomes.
 

Pessimistic

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts TheBrownDog
Sep 13, 2000
86,852
42,951
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
My opinion on the outcome ? Not conclusive, the 'war' will go on. Those using PR terms such as 'endgame' and 'the time is up' etc are misleading. This whole thing wlill go on until both sides understand each other much more.

There will be more terrorism, there will be more 'invasions' there will be less 'truth'.

It is not A "FINAL SOLUTION".

Disarm saddam (and by implication terrorists) OK- but wasn't sept 11 perpetrated with nothing more sinister than stanley knives ?
 

Mr Q

Brownlow Medallist
May 27, 2002
10,897
30
Wombling Free
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Perth
Originally posted by Frodo
I don't think Saddam can hide behind a human shield. I think troops and civilians will turn on Saddam and welcome the allies. Now that icannot be classed as a probability any more than a human shield can. We each have differing opinions as to potential outcomes.

I think you're sticking your head in the sand a bit here Frodo. I'd say that if the Iraqi army wasn't loyal to the Iraqi regime then Saddam would have been removed long ago. If the army is loyal - even a reasonable minority of it, then it can hole up in Baghdad (or some other city) forcibly using civilians as armour. I'd suspect that there would also be a section of the civilian population who would stand against the invading forces.

America would be well placed to remember its forays into Somalia before attempting to use overwhelming firepower to remove Saddam.
 

skilts

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts
Feb 14, 2002
17,797
6,858
South-West Gippsland
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Lexton, Northcote Park
If the Japanese, or anyone else for that matter, cared to invade Melbourne at the appropriate time they could have done so without contest. So could anyone else for that matter.

All you have to do is plan your invasion for the last Saturday in September, or the first Tuesday in November. Lay-down misere.

BTW it's my understanding that there was a significant Australian presence, often unacknowledged, in the battle for the Coral Sea. Anyone got any info.?
 
Jan 11, 2002
9,092
11
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide - SANFL
Originally posted by Mooster7
The US had been in the war all of 9 weeks when when Darwin was first attacked. The US Pacific fleet was decimated (with the exception of the Carriers) and defending anything at that time wasn't possible.

The Japanese had no intent to invade Australia. The bombing of Darwin was a strategic move. They wanted it reduced as a possible aircraft staging point to threaten their planned invasion of Timor. It made sense other than the fact that they overestimated allied air strength to begin with.

Darwin was more extensively bombed than Pearl Harbor. The attacks on Darwin and the surrounding area continued for some months. The casualties and damage to vital military resources were far less. In the initial first two attacks, around 250 people were killed and 400 wounded. Subsequent attacks brought very few casualties as people had left the area. At Pearl Harbor 2400 people were killed with 1200 wounded - along with the battleships necessary to defend the Pacific.

Next came a 3 1/2 year unconditional war which decisively defeated the Japanese along with several operations which made it impossible for the Japanese to further attack Australia. It's the longer view you have to consider. To say your allies failed to protect you because you were attacked is rather myopic IMO.

Peace,


Probably wasn't the best example to use but some people in this country seem to think the US will jump to our defence whatever trouble we get ourselves into and use this for the basis of why we should do whatever they say whenever they want..............

I probably should have used farmer subsidies as a better example.......
 
Jan 11, 2002
9,092
11
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide - SANFL
Originally posted by elt
Ahhh yes Curtin's famous "invasion threat" and the "Brisbane Line" myth. It's all bollocks of course by why let the truth get in the way of a chance for us to feel more important about our involvement.

Try reading something else at the War Memorial :

http://www.awm.gov.au/events/conference/2002/stanley_paper.pdf

Well I'll blame my high school history teachers on that one as we were taught about the "Brisbane Line" and at the same time were taught the attacks on Darwin were small and insignificant........

Interesting article.......always good to learn more and more......especially compared to the crap we are spoon fed in the education system.........
 

elt

All Australian
Apr 6, 2000
945
2
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Originally posted by dreamkillers
Well I'll blame my high school history teachers on that one as we were taught about the "Brisbane Line" and at the same time were taught the attacks on Darwin were small and insignificant........
They certainly wouldn't have been significant for those involved and considering how few times Australia has been attacked they are quite significant. But as the article says, most popular thinking about Australia at that time was manipulated politically - truth being the first casualty and all that.

Originally posted by dreamkillers
Interesting article.......always good to learn more and more......especially compared to the crap we are spoon fed in the education system.........
Yep, not nearly enough Australian history taught imho.
 
Back