Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

Depends on part of Au I think as QLD does have an American feel with all the Bill Board type flat shops etc. but they don't do bigger is better as well as the yanks.

How did you get a poll up they never come up even when I tick it now?

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I'd read something similar but couldn't remember where - I've also read that the British generals rightly got the blame for many things but Aussie top brass and soldiers were also not as brave and selfless as is the common perception.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I think the Aussie top brass and field commanders were trying to impress those senior Brit military figures to some extent. Also where they landed in Gallipoli was just a complete shit of an area to try and gain ground. If they had of landed further down the coast things might have been different.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

'most commonly used Americanism' :rolleyes:

That's just black country dialect, that's the way it's pronounced in your part of the UK.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

Sorry but this is just not true. The yanks didn't even enter the war until 1942. Yes they made a large contribution but so did the Soviet Union (lost more people than any other participant), the British, Australians, New Zealanders, many other commonwealth countries (India, Pakistan etc) etc...... The myth that has grown up that the US won the war single handedly is just getting out of hand (fostered by factually incorrect propaganda films such as U571). If it wasn't for Pearl Harbour the US would have watched Australia be over run by the Japanese without batting an eyelid.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

In World War I, Australia had a population of 5 million, it sent 300,000 men overseas, and 60,000 died. New Zealand had a population of about 1 million, and sent about 100,000 (or an enormous 11%) of her population to fight, and 17,000 died. Canada with a population of 6 million sent 600,000 to fight and 60,000 died. You can see that in percentage terms, Australia lost the most of its soldiers at 20% (tied with Britain), New Zealand lost 17%, and Canada lost 10%. Britain sent about 4 million men to fight and lost around 800,000 of them, which is about 20%.

In terms of losses per general population, New Zealand lost the most at 1.66%, Britain lost 1.53%, Australia lost 1.25%, and Canada lost 0.76%.

None of this really matters. What is important is that we remember that over 21 million people died for basically no reason at all.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

The "yanks" joined the war in 1941 (rather famously), and in fact they were providing material assistance to Britain and the Commonwealth nations well before this. Had they not helped the Australians in the Battle of the Coral Sea then the Japanese would have been able to advance with impunity.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I certainly agree with the absolute horror of it all and I don't want to get into league tables of death.

My point was only that I hear far too many times about how Australia lost so many men in the same breath as "because of those bloody British" or suchlike.

When I speak to some Australians, I have real empathy for younger Germans and Japanese who seem to unfairly carry the burden of guilt for the atrocities of war.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I think your point is an important one. Certainly there has been a concerted programme to portray the British (or more specifically the English) as evil. This has mostly been driven by Hollywood and drivel like Braveheart, or the submarine film mentioned above. All Hollywood baddies are English. In fact the BBC started doing this with its farcical and factually incorrect drama about the Lusitania which it showed recently.

Educated Australians will know that we all lost a lot of blood fighting German (and later, Japanese) expansionism. I would suggest you use this issue as a test: those who say "bloody poms murdering our diggers" etc need to read more history before you continue speaking with them.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I think that I referred to Pearl Harbour in my post and simply mistyped the date. However I stand by the sentiment which is that as time goes by the Americans contribution gets more and more inflated as everyone else's is diminished. This is insulting to the servicemen of the other Allied Nations (many of whom are still alive).

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

Not true. If Australia had fallen to Japan (although history now shows that was never going to happen and was basically impossible for the Japs) then this would have been a disaster for the yanks. It would have meant the World would have been split in two with the Japs spread from China, down through SE Asia, the Philipines, Bornea, Java, New Guinea and Australia. They would have controlled the Indian and Pacific Oceans. The battle of the Coral Sea (which was a draw) was vital to Australia. The Aussies stopped the Japs in New Guinea and The Yanks stopped the Japs at Guadacanal, also vital for Australia. America based major air and naval forces here, McArthur was HQ'ed in Brisbane.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

Are you suggesting a successful Japanese invasion of Australia was impossible outside of US intervention, or because of some geostrategic reason? Just interested by the way.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

I think one of the problems here is that people look at the Second World War with the geo political realities of today in mind (ie the US as the worlds Policeman). Until Pearl Harbour the US was isolationist. It was also only one of the great powers of the time which included the Soviet Union, United Kingdom, Japan and France. Its pre-eminence only emerged after the end of the war when it became clear that the UK and France could no longer substain their level of global influence and Japan and Germany were defeated.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

Awh geez, thats a bit rough! We've still got Dame Edna and Blinky Bill, they also embody something very special. I get goosebumps when I hear "Especially for You" sung by Kylie and Jason too :p

If you didnt meet anybody or anything that embodies the Aussies spirit then you were hanging around the wrong people and you just havent met them yet. What were your expectations by the way? I'm just wondering.

Theres some good things about American culture, like Rock and Roll, I'm glad that we had that influence. But yer..somethings I definately think we could have done without. However, I cannot deny that I like the occasional cheeseburger and KFC chips in moderation.

Apparently the government was considering the idea of giving everything north of Brisbane to the Japanese if things got that bad. Imagine that eh, far out! My beloved North Queensland would be a very different place today, then Slim would have been singing "I'd love to have a sushi with Osakanangka".


Cheers.

Re: Americanisation of Austrlia
 

The issue had nothing to do with the UK monarchy or the British government (neither of whom were involved) so I have no idea why anyone would see it as a source of pro-republican feeling. :confused:

Two people were responsible for the constitutional crisis of 1975: Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam.

Fraser because his opposition party was blocking supply to parliament; Whitlam because he announced his intention to govern without supply, and borrow from the banks to keep the government afloat, if necessary.

With parliament deadlocked and both sides refusing to compromise, the Governor-General (Sir John Kerr) sought advice on the situation from the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia (Sir Garfield Barwick).

Barwick advised that under the terms of the Australian constitution, Whitlam's position was untenable. He also confirmed that the GG had authority to remove Whitlam if the Prime Minister refused to abide by the constitution.

Kerr warned Whitlam that he had the power to remove him, but also offered a choice: return to constitutional practice, or resign. Whitlam chose to do neither, and consequently he was removed from office. (Kerr's dismissal letter to Whitlam is available here).

On every point - moral, ethical or legal - the GG's decision was right, proper, and necessary under the circumstances.

Whitlam's government had proposed a number of excellent policies, many of which were blocked at the time but subsequently brought in under the Hawke government.

However... it was under Whitlam's government (and with his full co-operation and knowledge) that Indonesia invaded East Timor. :frown: