While We Wait: Part 6

[TaylorFlame]

It was hardly vassalage. It was more of an unequal partnership. And we didn't ditch you. Air crews were still operating in Britain and there were still some soldiers left in Africa and Mesopotamia. And we had to bring them back because a great deal of our men in the Pacific had been killed or captured. However, you almost prevented our soldiers from returning by diverting the convoy to defend British Burma. Not very sporting.

 

[Disenfrancised]

It was hardly vassalage. It was more of an unequal partnership. And we didn't ditch you. Air crews were still operating in Britain and there were still some soldiers left in Africa and Mesopotamia. And we had to bring them back because a great deal of our men in the Pacific had been killed or captured. However, you almost prevented our soldiers from returning by diverting the convoy to defend British Burma. Not very sporting.

I'm talking about post war where Oz did ditch Blighty, and I did say it was 'justifiably so' .

 

[Sheep]

Interesting note about ANZUS.... its actually now more an alliance between Australia and the United States on one end and Australia and New Zealand on another. The United States - New Zealand portion of it has been suspended since in 1985 for the 'New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone'

The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS or ANZUS Treaty) is the military alliance which binds Australia and New Zealand and, separately, Australia and the United States to cooperate on defense matters in the Pacific Ocean area, though today the treaty is understood to relate to attacks in any area.

In 1985, the nature of the ANZUS alliance changed significantly. Due to a current of anti-nuclear sentiment within New Zealand (see New Zealand's nuclear-free zone), tension had long been present between ANZUS members as the United States is a declared nuclear power. France, a naval power and a declared nuclear power, had been conducting nuclear tests on South Pacific Islands. Following the victory of the New Zealand Labour Party in elections in 1984, Prime Minister David Lange barred nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed ships from using New Zealand ports or entering New Zealand waters.

You can read more here

 

[TaylorFlame]

I'm talking about post war where Oz did ditch Blighty, and I did say it was 'justifiably so' .

Ah, fair enough. My mistake.


And New Zealand and the US aren't exactly close. I respect New Zealand alot for sticking to it's ideological morals rather then appealing to the US. It shows character in the government. It's something I wish Australia did more.

 

[Sheep]

Well I find it abhorent that we didnt take stronger action against France when they bombed with fighter jets, the Greenpeace vessel in Auckland harbour in 1985 either. That was a bloody act of war against the Kiwis..... Hardly anyone in the west batted an eyelid.

And New Zealand can afford to be more in character, they have no jets, so no air force to really speak of, and in all honesty if Australia was to fall in a war, New Zealand wouldnt last long anyways, other than hold outs in mountain areas.... and if there is no war New Zealand wont be bothered much anyways.

On the other side, New Zealand is in FTA talks with America, although the Americans have made it a condition to allow the nuclear ships back in Kiwi ports. New Zealand has also committed a contingent of troops to Afghanistan (Australia actually invoked the ANZUS treaty for the first time in its history to justify its troop presence in Afghanistan)

 

[Masada]

Bah, turn away from blighty?

Lets run through your colonial problems we served in even after we "ditched" you.

The Malayan Emergency, we committed today what would be termed ethnic cleansing in service to the Commonwealth,
The Konfrontasi, hell we were happy to let you have Archie bombers in Singapore armed with nuclear weapons which were on readiness to bomb Jakarta if the Indonesian army crossed the border into Malaysia oh and we were going to follow it up with landings,
We stood by the Motherland for the Mau Mau Uprising we just couldn't send troops to it because of the emergency,
We worked in tandem to condemn Rhodesia and South Africa something we had no interest in past loyalty to the Mother Country,
We stood by and assisted the foundation of Singapore,
We supported you in Suez Canal Crisis but were not told about it,
Heck and in the Falklands New Zealand Navy vessels freed up British vessels so they could drive the Argentinians back, despite not being in our interest, again for the Motherland,
We still police the mess you left in the Pacific Islands and have to prop up the poor blighters...

There are probably more.

What more do you want? You were ready to sell us down the river and abandon half of Australia [admittedly only some 5-10% lived there] and were happy to leave us to fend for ourselves. You failed miserably at Singapore, and lost the halo of Empire when the Prince of Wales and Repulse sunk. You lied to us about our safety despite knowing that the region had been stripped of troops... you refused to let our troops defend their homeland. You so ditched us first!

So meh.

Solution 1 to the EU: Negotiate free trade with them, not exactly all that hard to do.
Solution 2 to the dependance on EU trade: The EU isn't going to be growing for much longer, India and your former African colonies [eventually] by contrast will grow at a rapid rate for a sustained period. Choose well.

 

[TaylorFlame]

Australia is in the right boat, having good relations with the economies that are growing greatly and haven't even gotten into full swing, rather then European economies that are stagnant, or only just growing.

 

[Disenfrancised]

Bah, turn away from blighty?

Lets run through your colonial problems we served in even after we "ditched" you.

The Malayan Emergency, we committed today what would be termed ethnic cleansing in service to the Commonwealth,

Pretty much, I also think it likely Australia would have done the same even if Britain had packed up and left, perhaps with the Americans, perhaps on your own - Malaya was too important to fall to communist anti-colonialists.

The Konfrontasi, hell we were happy to let you have Archie bombers in Singapore armed with nuclear weapons which were on readiness to bomb Jakarta if the Indonesian army crossed the border into Malaysia oh and we were going to follow it up with landings,

I'm getting confused, Britain abandoned the commonwealth, yet is in trouble for stationing weapons in Singapore? And a hostile and interventionalist Indonesia would have been great for Australia?

We stood by the Motherland for the Mau Mau Uprising we just couldn't send troops to it because of the emergency,

Reserve judgement on this, its easy to be supportive when your not expected to do anything.

We worked in tandem to condemn Rhodesia and South Africa something we had no interest in past loyalty to the Mother Country,

Interesting, so those regimes were all hunky-dory for you then?

We stood by and assisted the foundation of Singapore,

Good for you.

We supported you in Suez Canal Crisis but were not told about it,

Yeah keeping Suez in the Anglosphere would have been just terrible for Oz, and I really can't find much mention of what Australia did...

Heck and in the Falklands New Zealand Navy vessels freed up British vessels so they could drive the Argentinians back, despite not being in our interest, again for the Motherland,

Yeah because supporting the self-determination of distant island groups full of white settlers is hardly the precident you want to encourage is it?

We still police the mess you left in the Pacific Islands and have to prop up the poor blighters...

If you can't solve it what makes you think Britain could have?

What more do you want? You were ready to sell us down the river and abandon half of Australia [admittedly only some 5-10% lived there] and were happy to leave us to fend for ourselves. You failed miserably at Singapore, and lost the halo of Empire when the Prince of Wales and Repulse sunk. You lied to us about our safety despite knowing that the region had been stripped of troops... you refused to let our troops defend their homeland. You so ditched us first!

What part of 'justifiably' don't you understand? Also wrt Singapore don't attribute to malice what it is the fault of stupidity and bad luck.

Solution 1 to the EU: Negotiate free trade with them, not exactly all that hard to do.

You're funny, ask Canada how being next door to and reliant on a huge trading block works out. Being within the EU allows Britain to influence policy, if we were on the outside we would face their collective barginning to our net cost.

Solution 2 to the dependance on EU trade: The EU isn't going to be growing for much longer, India and your former African colonies [eventually] by contrast will grow at a rapid rate for a sustained period. Choose well.

It will always be easier to trade with europe, especially if fuel costs rise, ditto eastern europe still has a long way to go.
Grouping with India might be nice, but then we'd be screwed every time they go through a protectionist phase or political instablity and it much easier to work with 20 or so nations of the same or smaller economic size rather than one huge one.
China is digging deep in africa, to compete there we'd need some sort of supra-national organisation with similar goals to us providing economic and demographic muscle...I wonder where we could get a thing like that?
The EU and the four freedoms are about more than just trade, there about making wealth in other ways too.

Australia is in the right boat, having good relations with the economies that are growing greatly and haven't even gotten into full swing, rather then European economies that are stagnant, or only just growing.

Yeah have great natural resources whilst Asia booms is totally your own work . Europes slow growth economic growth is tied to its slow population growth - and frankly the HDI is pretty nice in Europe, as long as long term growth is somewhere above population increase I'm not to worried about not matching the growth rates of economies that are playing catch-up, and flirting with social and environmental collapse.

 

[Kozmos]

It is easy to stick to your ideological morals when you live on the ass end of nowhere.

 

[Angst]

Bah even you Danes don't really profit from the Union all that much, a simple deal with Germany [50% of the volume of your trade] and your Scandinavian "friends" [10%] would probably be almost as beneficial

Those figures are from memory.

Except that the European Union helps us preserve our culture against Americanization, and neglecting the Euro was the worst thing ever happening to Danish economy. If you want to know why, ask for elaboration

And I have no idea what a basket case is.

....

Oh, on another note:

Min intention er at gøre tilværelsen så ulidelig for tuneseren, at han vælger at forlade landet sammen med sin formørkede burkaklædte kone.

This is why I really hate the general Danish everyday idiot. You don't understand what it says, but I'll explain myself, as well as translate this text so that you can understand why I get so angry.

My intention is to make the life of the Tunesian so unbearable that he chooses to leave the country along with his darkened burka-clad wife.

And now to the explaining part. First of all, Pia Kjærsgaard is the leader of the Danish People's Party (Dansk Folkeparti) who parted from the ultraliberal Progress Party (Fremskridtspartiet) a lot of years ago. The special thing about this party is that they have a number of key issues: Firstly, they care about animals. In Denmark, we have no animal police, and they want us to spend tax money on that. Secondly, they care about the rights of the elderly, raising their pensions. Thirdly, they aim to... preserve our nation's culture in a number of ways, including propagandizing against EU.

Next point is to explain the situation in Denmark. Currently, we have a 'liberal' block and a 'social liberal' block, where the liberal one currently is in control of our state. They're not that different, though, but that's another story. The important thing is that the liberal block currently in control of the Danish state is lead by the Liberals (Venstre), or Left if you translate it directly. They are, however, only having supreme number in the Parlament because they have support from the Danish People's Party. The Danish People's Party are hosting a number of almost 14% of the votes, which is a lot in the Danish Parlament due to the number of parties. Therefore the Liberals are too afraid to object to any of the Danish People's Party's demands. They are simply too afraid to lose the votes on their block, especially since thinking that the Danish People's Party's politics actually are social liberal, not liberal.

So, what about this? Yeah, what the hell is wrong with Danes?

Firstly, an animal police is useless in Denmark. The only freely running animals we've got are freaking house cats. Secondly, I myself will have to work until I am 80 myself to pay the insane amount of money that we in Denmark give to the elderly in pensions. I don't know a single old woman who doesn't have a fur coat. Thirdly... Well, this is the actual point I'm raging about right now.

In Denmark we, like the rest of EU, have 'problems' with immigration, apparently. A number of immigrants, especially from the Middle East and Eastern Africa, are traveling to Denmark to seek their luck. This is a benefit for Danish economy since we lack about 50,000 workers to maintain our economy at the very least. Especially since pensions have been raised so high, we really need those people. However, with the increasing number of 'New Danes', or 'People With Alternative Ethnical Background', as the newspapers name them, Danes are generally becoming feisty about the whole thing.

They don't want them in here. I don't understand it. Just look at freaking America. What is wrong with having more ethnical groups? Right now, the government is trying to produce laws that ban New Danes from our nation, throw them out as soon as possible, making it difficult for them to enter. And, gentlemen, you might think 'I see it's unfair, but it doesn't mean that the Danes are racist', but sadly it isn't true. The problem is that the whole elderly believe that New Danes are violent, underdeveloped, extremely Islamistic and criminal. Apparently a Turkish white man is no big deal as well. I mean, what the hell, just look at the statement of Pia Kjærsgaard - previous statements from her have been that they believed there was severe Islamism in Denmark. Why would Muslims want that when they flee from their home nation to find work up here?

They 'preserve' our nation's culture as well, propagandizing against EU fx. This has lead to a) a serious loss of economical strength, b) lesser international influence, c) no real protection against Americanization.

To end this rant, I'll just add that I know who vote for the Danish People's Party. They are:

• Old people afraid of the nation to change because they like safety for their spoiled old arses
• Blondes who think that animals are cute
• Nazists
• People with no education, not knowing how economy, sociology etc. works

Pia Kjærsgaard was nothing but a home help with no education. Being really hot as well when she was wrong she probably only cared for boys as well, neglecting any kind of educational input in school. And she's the most influential person in Denmark.

Because of the whole thing, us Danes are being persuaded by the UN because we don't rule with any attention to Human Rights regarding racism. So I get the blame for my dear countrymen to be stupid. I am ashamed of being a Dane sometimes.

 

[sp1023]

Did your science teacher look at you like o.O while he was giving you an answer to what must have been an extremely odd question?

Yes. *What is this kid talking about?*

You know what else was quick? This thread has already almost hit 100 pages and I didn't even notice until just now.

Totally awesome. We spam like fools- Thlayli

Does anyone else think the EU would be better off with just the UK, France, the Low countries and Germany? Why do we even bother with those East Europeans? The only place in the UK that receives any funding from the EU is Cornwall, how much do you wanna bet they give Hungary or Slovakia? If we ditched the East then we Europeans might actually be able to compete with America and the other upoming super-powers. Then maybe we could expand the union, but slowly, one country at a time, and help them develop up to the level of the original members.

Yes, if the EU just included those 4, and then added Spain and Italy, its all good. But you still can't compete with america!

GDP (Nominal) 2050 PREDICTION (millions USD):
People's Republic of China: 70,710,000
United States of America: 38,514,000
India: 37,668,000
[United Kingdom, Germany, France]: 5,133,000+5,024,000+4,592,000=14,749,000
Brazil: 11,366,000
Mexico 9,340,000

In a word: no. As a hint it's related in large part to this, more easily visualized here.

Rememvber Silver's post?

Seems like he's right...

It is easy to stick to your ideological morals when you live on the ass end of nowhere.

 

[das]

They don't want them in here. I don't understand it. Just look at freaking America. What is wrong with having more ethnical groups?

With all due respect, a-ha-ha-ha. Then again, America has got it relatively easy when compared to France or Russia, at least for the present moment.

Ethnic groups are ofcourse generally harmless, but only as long as they are well-integrated into their country's society. When the process is still ongoing they are capable of making life this much worse for everyone else in the short-term and in the long-term, even without any active malicious intent.

That said, it probably isn't as big a deal in Denmark, although none of your arguments in this regard seem at all convincing to me so far.

 

[Angst]

With all due respect, a-ha-ha-ha. Then again, America has got it relatively easy when compared to France or Russia, at least for the present moment.

Ethnic groups are ofcourse generally harmless, but only as long as they are well-integrated into their country's society. When the process is still ongoing they are capable of making life this much worse for everyone else in the short-term and in the long-term, even without any active malicious intent.

That said, it probably isn't as big a deal in Denmark, although none of your arguments in this regard seem at all convincing to me so far.

Yeah it isn't a big deal in Denmark, and that's why I'm that disappointed with my fellow countrymen.

But do remember that integrating another ethnical group requires you not to hate it by instinct.

 

[das]

Not sure about hatred, but from historical experience limitless contempt can work out pretty okay.

There is, ofcourse, also a question of how exactly they are integrated into society. I think Symphony did a mini-rant on the Mexicans and their unsavoury effect on local politics a while back.

 

[Dachs]

There is, ofcourse, also a question of how exactly they are integrated into society. I think Symphony did a mini-rant on the Mexicans and their unsavoury effect on local politics a while back.

To hilarious effect. It's the other way around up here; Prince William County's expulsion of its Latino illegals for not much other reason than "they were illegal" has destroyed that county's economy...unsavory effect of local Americans on local politics...

 

[das]

Darn bloody Mexicans going and making themselves essential to the local economy! The gall!

 

[Thlayli]

It's ironic that the most secular states in the world (Europe) are on a set course to become theocratic playgrounds within the next 50 years.

There are already more practicing Muslims than practicing Catholics in France. Given the rioting in the banlieues, it's only a matter of time before French Muslims gain a significant amount of government control and attempt some sort of political overhaul.

And no, this isn't some xenophobic crazy statement. It's just extrapolating the demographic trends. The welfare state has the sad tendency to kill off the birthrate.

 

[Sheep]

Hahaha, France is no more.......

 

[Symphony D.]

ANZUS is also to cool for NATO.

I think the whole "North Atlantic" thing might have something to do with that, eh?

There is, ofcourse, also a question of how exactly they are integrated into society. I think Symphony did a mini-rant on the Mexicans and their unsavoury effect on local politics a while back.

I don't mind Mexicans, or any immigrants really. I mind when they immigrate and decide to remain primarily what they were and don't integrate. If you want to be Mexican, stay in Mexico. You want to be American with Mexican roots, then fine, come here. That's how everybody else (Italians, Irish, Poles, Swedes, French, Danes, Chinese, on and on) did it and Mexico shouldn't be excused as something special just because they're next door. But for some reason when the less pleasant aspects of their culture come over it's suddenly racist or nationalist to criticize it. It isn't a melting pot if it's frozen over.

 

[Ekolite]

GDP (Nominal) 2050 PREDICTION (millions USD):
People's Republic of China: 70,710,000
United States of America: 38,514,000
India: 37,668,000
[United Kingdom, Germany, France]: 5,133,000+5,024,000+4,592,000=14,749,000
Brazil: 11,366,000
Mexico 9,340,000

In a word: no. As a hint it's related in large part to this, more easily visualized here.

Well I didn't mean straight away, although 4th place isn't that bad . We are Europeans after all. I just don't think we're ready to support all these Eastern Europeans just yet. (And yes I saw the massive gap between 3rd and 4th place )

About Immigration:

In a country like Denmark, where the population is fairly low, and aging, I would imagine having a few immigrants here and there would be a benefit.

Today I found out that the population of London alone is greater then the entire population of Denmark .

One advantage of the EU is that we always have some little countries to look down on and pretend we're still the big guys .