|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 6, 2010 19:35:56 GMT 12
It's probably unfair to place all of the blame on Churchill for escalating the tensions amongst the former WW2 allies as the cause of the Cold War. Tensions between the West and USSR had been a fact of life probably from around the time of the October 1917 Revolution and things didn't improve much once Stalin gained control after Lenin's death. The alliance between the US, UK and USSR was a marriage of conveniance against a common enemy. It was always a fractious affair with Churchill sometimes doing deals with Stalin behind Roosevelt's back and things started unraveling after D-day as Stalin had been pressing the Allies to open a second front for a long long time without success. Stalin was hellbent on vengence and seeking reparations from Germany, the West were looking at supporting them and the rest of Western Europe financially via the Marshall Plan but didn't want to cut in Eastern Europe or the USSR into the deal. The US was worried about post-war inflationary effects on its economy, Churchill couldn't see that the sun was setting on the British Empire, although he was no longer PM by the time it all came apart. The short story is that in time, things eventually broke down between all the various parties resulting in the Cold War. All of the politicians from all of the countries involved really were a little to blame for the Cold War kicking off as far as I can tell. I think Churchill's speech was about putting out into the public arena his own take on things as he saw it, that was out of step with the accepted thinking at the time. Stalin made the mistake of blockading Berlin and that made public opinion turn against the USSR. The rest is history.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 5, 2010 15:14:36 GMT 12
Yep this Winston is well worth listening to, unlike our own. I managed to find a website that had most of Churchill's post-war 'iron curtain' speech as I was writing my first history essay on the question of 'Who started the Cold War?' I got so caught up in his speech I ended up listening to the whole thing. If anyone is particularly interested they can try this website for free downloads of his speeches. www.archive.org/details/Winston_Churchill
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 4, 2010 20:26:29 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 4, 2010 20:17:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 4, 2010 20:11:51 GMT 12
Great photos, especially of the Sabre and Meteor. Timing is everything, right time, right place.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 4, 2010 20:03:03 GMT 12
I think the White Paper is shaping up to be steady as she goes, signalling of the obvious replacement requirements over the next 10+ years such as the C130s, P3s and Frigates. My gut feeling is any potential reactivation of the Maachis was scuppered by the SCF bailout and need to divert $$$ due to the Canterbury earthquake. It'd be nice to be proved wrong :-)
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 3, 2010 12:03:34 GMT 12
Have fun guys.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 3, 2010 9:34:18 GMT 12
Lucky, lucky, blighter....I did a double take at first. I thought it was Guy Gibson ;-) Going to MOTAT is on my list of things to do in the future before I kick the bucket.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 3, 2010 9:30:52 GMT 12
Looking at the original, it's two separate photos. If it hadn't been, it would have been bloody loud alright!!!
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 3, 2010 9:20:03 GMT 12
Thanks arclight/paulwhite/arclight2/Hame for showing us what valuable input a highly educted military academic can offer the country. Err... not a lot. Your third account has also been terminated in case you decided to come back. Interesting how you are accusing your own alter-ego of a serious psychosis, you should get that checked out. Dave ;D ;D ;D lol. corokid66 gets a years supply of virtual chocolate fish for his rebuttal of arclight's original points. From what arclight, et al said it seemed like he was one of my fellow UC students with too much time on his hands. Sorry that someone like that has caused so much upset to the forum as most of us adults can conduct ourselves pretty well, even if we have a different point of view. You only have to look back to recent history to see that the pressures of a growing population, the ability to feed them and declining resources in your own back yard can create a situation where a country in the Asia-Pacific region chooses a military option to get what it wants. That may or may not happen, but you want to be prepared in case something did kick off.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 2, 2010 20:40:21 GMT 12
Well said Dave. It's ok to be passionate about a topic but we need to keep perspective and realise that it's the pollys who make the decisions. That's why I suggested an alternative thread for further discussion once the White Paper is released. It is however a crying shame that this debate did not happen in the corridors of power back in 1999-2001 or so. Again that's our Pollys who failed the nation imho. Finally I'd just like to say that I do enjoy reading and commenting on various topics on this forum, something that I find interesting and intellectually stimulating. As many forum members know I am presently a uni student full-time here in Christchurch but that doesn't make my opinion any more or any less relevant than any other forum members, most of whom are much better qualified to comment on aviation matters than I am. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to share in these discussions and I believe the most important thing in doing so is that we treat each other with respect. Cheers and beers, Obi.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 2, 2010 13:27:12 GMT 12
In response to arclight I would say that it's fair enough to say that views in favour of renewal of an Air Combat Force have varied from one end of the spectrum to the other. One end would be the fantasy end and the other end would be the practical, realistic end. If you want to get the full view on the disbanding of the ACF then I hope you have done your research properly and not just focussed on this thread alone. As one person who I think inhabits the latter end of the spectrum I think the only thing you could hope for was a reactivation of the Maachis as a step towards the RNZAF reinstating the fast jet capability that it and the other branches of our Defence Force sorely miss. The Skyhawks were at the end of their lifespan and the replacement of them with the F16s was a sensible deal, particularly when you consider how much the NZ dollar has appreciated against the US dollar over the past 10 years. It was an opportunity lost and also a capability in trained personnel and infrastructure that was needlessly flushed down the toilet by the Clark government that then went about a series of misguided and inappropriate purchases in favour of the Army and Navy, particularly the 'new' HMNZS Canterbury (not suited or properly equipped for the role) and the 105 LAVs. Not only was Clark wrong in her view of a benign strategic environment she also maintained this outlook despite world events in 2001 and beyond. You seem to have the same viewpoint as my friend (Claiming a degree on Political Science as evidence of his 'expertise' in discussing this issue) who lives and works in South Korea, a fortress mentality that views the ACF as primarily an 'attack' force. It really is more than just this, it served as a vital part of a credible defence force that was able to exercise regularly with our Army and Navy (as well as the Aussie Navy) to represent both a threat to practice against as well as an asset to practice with. It also was a capability that was able to be deployed on occasion in exercises with our allies in the Asia-pacific region, along with Army and Navy assets. It also served as a deterrent capability for those fishing vessels fishing within our waters as ably demonstrated by the Skyhawks in the Korean squid boat incident of 1976. As I said, this capability is sorely missed. The thing is that NZ has never been able to fully provide for its defence needs on its own, it has always worked in cooperation with its allies and our ACF fulfilled a niche role in this regard. Being seen as a peaceful nation doesn't preclude having a properly equipped and balanced defence force, including some form of air combat/strike capability. Personally I don't think that the government would be considering buying up secondhand F16s or F18s but as I mentioned above reinstatement of the Maachis as a step towards a long term plan of reinstating some form of fast jet capability is about the only outcome one could hope for, although that would also present a number of prickly issues. Raising Defence spending to 2%? I don't think so. The defence white paper needs to have a plan in place that addresses the country's local and regional defence requirements for the next 25 years or so. If you know your NZ history arclight, then you will know that NZ has been caught out defence wise (particularly its Air Force) in the past. We are supposed to know our history and learn from it. The Clark government and too many complacent NZers don't and haven't.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 1, 2010 20:09:36 GMT 12
It's ok to speculate and debate what we think/wish should come out in the Defence White Paper, that is one of the reasons for having a forum with a topic thread about the 'launch' of the Defence Review document. Perhaps when it does eventually come out we can start a separate thread to discuss its recommendations?
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 1, 2010 16:15:54 GMT 12
Having visited Miramar in July and had a tour of the area, and all of the different buildings associated with PJ's movie producing empire, I'd like to assure you that this is only one of them. Still it is a major blow. No doubt it would be insured.
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 1, 2010 12:46:39 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 1, 2010 12:34:04 GMT 12
So the Aussies are flicking off this aircraft that the NZ government so kindly donated to them back in the day....?
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Oct 1, 2010 12:24:12 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Sept 30, 2010 19:49:27 GMT 12
Most definitely older than me.... lol
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Sept 30, 2010 15:46:45 GMT 12
You're right Dave, Tonga are one of the poorest Pacific Island nations. Then you look at Samoa where they've had something like $130M of foreign aid and yet people in villages in the earthquake affected portion of the island (the south-east corner) are still having water trucked in (that they have to boil) and there has been no reconstruction work done by the Samoan government for them. The question is has the aid money been used effectively and where has it gone? www.3news.co.nz/Samoa-tsunami-Has-aid-been-used-effectively/tabid/367/articleID/178364/Default.aspx
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Sept 28, 2010 20:14:13 GMT 12
Hmmm maybe the government could justify the resurrection of an Air Combat Wing on the basis of stimulating the economy and job creation?
|
|