1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please contact us and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the new 12ozProphet!

US Marines to be Stationed in Australia

Discussion in 'News' started by Fist 666, Nov 16, 2011.

  1. Walid Jumblat

    Walid Jumblat 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,728

    Walid Jumblat - Replied Apr 22, 2012

    Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. The US benefits from China being the boogy man and right now China is doing all the heavy lifting in that department by being belligerent on the South China Seas and with Japan on Senkaku. The US doesn't have to make anything up. It's a very natural response for the ASEAN/Oceania nations to look towards the US as a security provider. China is is attempting to create a region of exclusive influence inside the 1st island chain and building the military kit to make it happen. Nobody wants to lose independence and the US system is the next best thing to being independent. China has so far shown little intention to offer the region the same benefits the US offers as a regional security provider, hence the balancing behaviour from ASEAN, Japan, ROK and Australia.
     
    Walid Jumblat - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    1,728
    - Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2012
  2. bourgeoisie

    bourgeoisie 12oz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Messages:
    314

    bourgeoisie - Replied Apr 23, 2012



    I dont think there will be war in the Pacific... Just kinda figuring out if a new (republican) govt in the states would have any more motivation than the current one to deploy troops from here to go fight somewhere. That would be damaging to Australia and its power in the Pacific, I think.

    I really have always wondered (even with the information that is fed to us about the USA's motives behind war in Vietnam) what their *actual* motivation was.. I've never really understood the Vietnam war and I dont know why America hates communists so much. Good read, thank you.
     
    bourgeoisie - Rank: 12oz Member - Messages:
    314
    - Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2012
  3. Walid Jumblat

    Walid Jumblat 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,728

    Walid Jumblat - Replied Apr 23, 2012

    Yeah, I can't really say whether a Rep. White House will be more belligerent than a Dem White House. Russia certainly prefers to work with the Dems at the moment rather than the Reps. Whether that implies that Moscow thinks the Dems are a weaker competitor or that the Reps are belligerent I don't know.

    The thing to remember is that the US doesn't create reality. regardless of a Rep or Dem president Iran will continue with nuclear enrichment, the Russians will continue with regional consolidation and China will continue with creating an East Asian sphere of influence. The president might change but the constraints that s/he must work within remain constant. Character only matters within the limited range of rational choices the president is faced with.


    The counter argument to this theory is George Bush Jr. I don't have any explanation as to what happened there.
     
    Walid Jumblat - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    1,728
    - Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
  4. eviltrailer77

    eviltrailer77 12oz Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,600

    eviltrailer77 - Replied Apr 23, 2012

    Boeing Super Hornet Chief Test Pilot gives Flightglobal a tour at Aero India ...

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3h8yImm4U

    Last shipboard deployment I went on we trotted out the super hornet for India and the Aussies. The Aussies have already purchased it, and I was around when the first Aussie pilots and maintainers showed up to start the transition from the F-111 aardvark.
    There are features on this demo jet that we don't even have on our frontline super hornets. IE: conformal fuel tanks, laser detection equipment, external stealth weapons pods and the EPE motors, although I doubt the international sales version will have AESA, JHMCS, ATFLIR or JTIDS. The US doesn't have a history of selling this kind of hardware lightly, factor that in to all the joint training (India and AUS) and it's easy to see that the US is trying to establish a stronger/larger sphere of influence in the WESTPAC/IO regions.
     
    eviltrailer77 - Rank: 12oz Elite Member - Messages:
    3,600
    - Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2012
  5. theprotester

    theprotester Moderator Crew

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,051

    theprotester - Replied Apr 23, 2012

    I know it's not marines, but there's around five thousand Navy sailors about to get to port over here. Bunker Hill and Carl Vinson, shame they're not opening up to the public this time around.

    They've just finished exercises with the Indian Navy.
     
    theprotester - Rank: Moderator Crew - Messages:
    11,051
    - Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
  6. bourgeoisie

    bourgeoisie 12oz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Messages:
    314

    bourgeoisie - Replied Apr 23, 2012

    I think the US are helping Australia monitor Indonesia too... Any thoughts?
     
    bourgeoisie - Rank: 12oz Member - Messages:
    314
    - Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
  7. eviltrailer77

    eviltrailer77 12oz Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,600

    eviltrailer77 - Replied Apr 23, 2012

    The Chucky V. is a floating shithole, you're not really missing much. Check your pm's
     
    eviltrailer77 - Rank: 12oz Elite Member - Messages:
    3,600
    - Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
  8. Walid Jumblat

    Walid Jumblat 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,728

    Walid Jumblat - Replied Apr 24, 2012

    I was interested by this comment in particular as there is a huge amount of value in asking this question. I also wish I could give a more confident and comprehensive answer as well, but I will spell out my thoughts as they stand now.


    The most immediate perspective would have to be that of competing interests. A nation that has the aggregate resources to promote its interest throughout a region and beyond is of course going to attempt to do so. This is obviously seen in the history of empire from Europe with England, , Russia etc., Mid East with Assyria, Persia, Babylonia, etc., Asia with the Han, Mongols, Japan, etc., and today with Pax Americana. It seems to be the structure and behaviour of people and nations, as history would have us believe.

    From the perspective of empire and national power the US opposition to communism could be seen as competition of the Russian versus the American empire. Both nations had the aggregate resources to promote its interests outside of its own borders and region and were successful in doing so. As they grow there interests come in to contact with the interests of other empires and are seen to be divergent and irreconcilable. That results in competition, which part of a successful national strategy is the demonisation of the oppostion (cue Joh Howard talking about Saddam Hussein's baby shredding machines). Both sides of the Cold War had significant propaganda programs aimed at framing the public opinion of the opposing side in order to create support for national policy.


    The second perspective would be economic and social opposition to policy. Communist/Socialist/Marxist economic policies and principals are in direct opposition to free market/capitalist/Adam Smith policies and principals. They cannot exist together and barely along side of each other. That would mean competition is inevitable when these two economic foundations rely on global proliferation for real success.

    Likewise the politico-social aspects of the two concepts are at direct odds. One promotes consolidated central control of all public interaction that has a relationship to the function of the nation. The other promotes small government and market forces. On the social side of things the centralised control seemed to seep in to control of values as well, maybe more so in China than Russia but a centralised state has difficulty in allowing plurality of opinion. Firstly as it does not wish to legitimise the behaviour of contesting norms given that a one party system relies on simple acceptance. Secondly a centralised state does not wish to see the genesis of thought that may challenge the dominant ideology as they ideology is what gives them power. The small govt of the capitalist-liberal states (are supposed to) emphasise liberty outside of property rights and personal/national security. The situation here blues as to the conceptualisation of national security but that is a whole other discussion in itself. Peoples on either side of the divide had reason to support one economic/social ideology over the other and even to feel threatened by the other.



    Finally and most simply many people on either side stood to gain personally and professionally out of the competition and thus encouraged fear. Joe McCarthy might be a working example from the side of the US. I don't know enough to give a Soviet example.


    Interested to hear opposing views to this.
     
    Fist 666 likes this.
    Walid Jumblat - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    1,728
    - Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
  9. Walid Jumblat

    Walid Jumblat 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,728

    Walid Jumblat - Replied Apr 25, 2012

    /too long, did not proof read


    should be:

    ...England, Prussia, Russia, etc,.....
     
    Walid Jumblat - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    1,728
    - Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
  10. Soup forgot his password

    Soup forgot his password 12oz Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    738

    Soup forgot his password - Replied Apr 25, 2012

    Youuuure kindof missing the gutteral reaction Americans had to Stalin. He was an incredible cunt with no value for life. Americans got a man into space because we spent time and effort in designing the best space ship we could. Russia got a man into space by sending hundreds of dogs, monkeys and astronauts to their death, and eventually one lived. Thats one of Stalin's contributions to astronomy, the ring of dead dogs stuck in orbit around earth. I think it's fair to say before Stalin there were no dead dogs orbiting earth, and now there are.

    You see how Russia tried to take over Afghanistan, how they took over the Eastern Bloc, how their legacy of not-giving-any-fucks-for-human-life continues in China. And from an economic standpoint its an inefficient system. It wasnt until China adopted state capitalism that they rose out of poverty. Communism is an oppressive bunch of bullshit... and what's scary is that Russia is Dmitry Medvedev
    is getting nostalgic for the old commie days. I think Russia is always gonna stick to what they know, sacrificing lives for the motherland.
     
    Soup forgot his password - Rank: 12oz Member - Messages:
    738
    - Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
  11. UPS!

    UPS! 12oz Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,708

    UPS! - Replied Apr 25, 2012

    If you lived in the snow 365 days a year you'd probably be a miserbale bastard with no concern for life what so ever as well.
     
    UPS! - Rank: 12oz Elite Member - Messages:
    3,708
    - Joined:
    Mar 22, 2007
  12. Walid Jumblat

    Walid Jumblat 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,728

    Walid Jumblat - Replied Apr 25, 2012

    Yeah I see what you're saying and it has a lot of truth to it but authoritarianism and brutality are not traits unique to communism, that's just the kind of bastardry that you find in Uganda under Idi Amin, Romania with Nicolai Caeusescu, pre-communist China (think under rulers such as Ci Xi going all the way back to Qin shihuang) DPRK with the Kims, Iran under the Ayatollahs, etc.

    You're definitely right that the revolution and behaviour of the commie leaders in the USSR was part of the reason why communism became the boogy man, no doubt about that. I felt this was kind of addressed in the sentences pasted below:


    On the social side of things the centralised control seemed to seep in to control of values as well, maybe more so in China than Russia but a centralised state has difficulty in allowing plurality of opinion. Firstly as it does not wish to legitimise the behaviour of contesting norms given that a one party system relies on simple acceptance. Secondly a centralised state does not wish to see the genesis of thought that may challenge the dominant ideology as they ideology is what gives them power. The small govt of the capitalist-liberal states (are supposed to) emphasise liberty outside of property rights and personal/national security. The situation here blurs as to the conceptualisation of national security but that is a whole other discussion in itself. Peoples on either side of the divide had reason to support one economic/social ideology over the other and even to feel threatened by the other.
     
    Walid Jumblat - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    1,728
    - Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
  13. Soup forgot his password

    Soup forgot his password 12oz Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    738

    Soup forgot his password - Replied Apr 26, 2012

    They may not be traits unique to Communism, but they go unchecked in communism, and that's where the soviet government becomes dangerous.
     
    Soup forgot his password - Rank: 12oz Member - Messages:
    738
    - Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
  14. eviltrailer77

    eviltrailer77 12oz Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,600

    eviltrailer77 - Replied Apr 26, 2012

    If we are gonna go there let's not sugar coat it... I'm just saying. I'm not disagreeing with the sentiment just the particulars.
     
    eviltrailer77 - Rank: 12oz Elite Member - Messages:
    3,600
    - Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
  15. Soup forgot his password

    Soup forgot his password 12oz Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    738

    Soup forgot his password - Replied Apr 26, 2012

    Another spin you can put on that is America took a hundred or so scientists from Nazi Germany, exchanged their jail time for migrant labor, for the end goal of finally ending the war and keeping Americans and allies safe. We weren't jettisoning jews into orbit while they were in America.

    plus my point was more about scary soviet russia sending dead astronauts into space to scare the world into thinking they had an advanced space program, capable of launching their actually enormous cache of nukes from anywhere.
     
    Soup forgot his password - Rank: 12oz Member - Messages:
    738
    - Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011