RE: Suggest me a name

Keltic

Wombats are cute and furry…..(some of them are, anyway!!!)

Regards

Wombat

RE: Tony Blair: The little hawk

Until quite recently, the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, seemed to be strongly supportive of Bush in his aims to rid the world of Hussein as well. Public opinion out here has softened since last year and now the PM has had to back off. In my opinion, this is one situation where the world will probably have to let Hussein strike the first blow against another country before we all move in. After all, invading Iraq does not enjoy the unity of all nations in the way that action against Afghanistan did.

I think Blair honestly believes that Hussein represents the greatest threat to world peace and security and must be removed. But how do you achieve that without massive military intervention and the obvious number of deaths which must follow?

Kev refers to the US’s power and the removal of Hussein without massive loss of life. The problem with nations like Iraq, I think, is the mind-set of the general population and their rabid conviction that they have God’s support and we westerners are godless (infidels). Their religious conviction and commitment to the Koran makes it difficult for us westerners, if not impossible, to understand how they can hold some of their beliefs. Can any of us westerners really understand the emotions, the conviction to their beliefs, that Mohammed Atta and his team must have felt during the early hours of the morning of 9/11, when we see them calmly checking through the landing facility at Boston on security cameras, knowing what they were about to do? Can any of us imagine being in the pilot’s seat of the 737’s, heading directly towards the WTC or Pentagon, in the name of Allah?

This is what Bush, Blair et al are faced with. The Iraqi population supports those beliefs en masse. There is no way that Iraq will be a walk-over. Whilst the US and Britain have vastly superior arms, better trained personnel and some international support, the thought of cleaning the world of Hussein comparitively bloodlessly is a dream.

For those British readers on this forum, I think, from the other side of the world, that Blair comes across as a very intelligent, lucid speaker and at least has the guts to be heard. I can’t comment on his economic performance at home – that’s not newsworthy in Oz. I think he is showing a strong and united support for the US, almost as though he believes it is time that other countries stood up as world policemen, instead of always leaving it to the US. If that is the case, then he should be commended for that. His comment about sealing the pact in blood is one of those gaffes that most pollies make at some time in their careers, which they will always regret.

Just as a matter of interest, if Britain did join the US and attack Iraq and Hussein was “removed from office” permanently, how would British citizens feel? Britain has been kicked around almost as much as the US over the years by tin-pot dictators (Mugabe, Amin)and the chance to assert national strength and pride is a powerful inducement to succeed. Remember how you felt after the Falklands? But I believe that success in this part of the world can only come at a horrendous price.

Regards

Wombat

RE: WORLDS MOST POWERFUL NATIONS – 2003!!!

I would like to pose a question for this forum, as I don’t think it belongs on the “developing nations – 2003” thread which is also running.

Where do Australia and Canada fit in?

One reader has stated that both countries are “too small, and have a strange preference for F-18’s.”

Strangely, neither country can be called small, we are amongst the largest (and most sparsely populated) nations on earth, so I guess that comment referred to populations and defence forces.

As for preferences for F-18’s, I can only say that they seem to have served my country pretty well since their introduction, and still have a fair service life expectency ahead of them before they are due to be replaced.

Neither country is under any threat in the forseeable future, though perhaps Canada is just a bit more secure than Australia, as it doesn’t have Indonesia for a neighbour. I don’t know about Canada’s nuclear policy, but nuclear weapons/propulsion/power generation are no-no’s out here. Both countries enjoy political stability (I suppose being half French doesn’t make Canada toooo unstable!) and the need for large, costly defence programs doesn’t exist to the same extent as many other nations. In fact, in Australia’s case, our defence forces are so short of personnel, extensive recruitment programmes for the last couple of years have failed to completely arrest the personnel drain.

Our equipment is good and within Australia’s sphere of influence, we are the best equipped and trained. (That is really something, when you think that our “sphere of influence” includes New Zealand, who just retired our old Skyhawks, which we purchased about 30 years ago, Fiji, Tonga, Papua New Guinea…all major players on the defence scene, of course!) The only real concern to us is Indonesia.

So, where do we fit? We can’t be superpowers, and we don’t fit into the classification of emerging/developing/underdeveloped nations.

Over to you all.

Regards

Wombat

RE: How old are you?

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 02-09-02 AT 08:15 AM (GMT)]Hand

Well, as phounding member of the Phlypast Old Pharts club, I pheel well qualiphied to answer this question.

It’s really all in the mind, but generally, one phinds that as you get to phorty, phriends and relatives start reminding you that you are over the hill. Iph you pheel they are right, then you have unophicially signed up to the Royal Order of Old Pharts.

Phor Phlypast readers, our deep and abiding love oph phlying machines undoubtedly helps to keep our souls young and rephreshed, so perhaps phorty is a bit young.

Dare I suggest that you are only an Old Phart iph you really want to be? And iph you reach one hundred years oph age and still do not want to be known as an Old Phart, then that is entirely your prerogatiph. (should be prerogative, I know, but I’m on a roll!!)

God, what haph I started?

Regards, and luph to all,

Wombat

PMPOPC

RE: To All the Fathers in Australia!

Ja

My dear boy, bless you. I trust your Father’s day was pleasant and you got what you wanted (even if it isn’t what you deserved!!)

Regards

The Wombat

RE: Here’s what I think and why!

PII

I totally agree with you regarding the Wright Flyer and the DC3. They were both in my list and I would find it difficult to think that anybody with a love of aviation could argue with the significance each aircraft holds in aviation history. If some poor Scot did fly before the Wrights, and I had not heard that before, then it is a damn shame that he didn’t think far enough ahead to realise the significance of what he was about to attempt and have a witness and camera present. Therefore, first place to the Wrights.

It is interesting to see the range of aircraft that others have nominated and guys, I think some of you have been just a little bit parochial. Really, only nominating 5 British aircraft or 5 US aircraft is not in the spirit of this thread. Many nations have developed significant aircraft (alas, not Oz amongst them!) and we need to think globally on this issue.

In the meantime, I’ll stick with my original 5 – a nice mix of nationality, and so far, nobody has told me to pull my head in with any of them.

Regards

The Wombat
(Official phounder of the Phlypast old pharts club!!!);-)

RE: I’ll never forget that horrible day….

Being on the other (wrong) side of the world, we Aussies slept blissfully through the whole incident, waking up to our early morning news specials.

I was actually half awake, contemplating another day in paradise )not!!!!!) when my eighteen year old daughter came to our room to ask if we had the TV turned on, because aircraft were attacking America.

In the half daze that accompanies 6 am, I immediately thought that only Canada was close enough to the USA with adequate numbers and types of aircraft to stage an attack, and quickly dispatched that idea. The first thing we saw as the TV focussed was the long range, side-on shot of the second 737 heading straight for the second tower, with the first tower already well alight.

This was immediately followed by the shots taken from the other side, showing the aircraft being swallowed whole by the building before exploding, then the slow motion street level shots looking up at the second tower with some poor bugger sitting over the camera. The nose of the 737 emerges from the left of screen and heads straight into the building, before exploding out the far side, and the bloke in the street flinches then looks up before crapping himself.

These clips are, without doubt, the most remarkable contemporary news films I have ever seen.

As an ally of the US, Australians generally felt sympathy for them, particularly as so many Aussie ex-pats died in the buildings, as well as hundreds of other nationalities. I have to admit that the extent of US bashing that has been seen in various posts on this and other related forums amazes me.

Our government has shown an overly zealous readiness to follow Bush in whatever he decides, and I generally support this, but as far as venturing to Irag to bloody Sadam’s nose, I think that is a no-no.

Regards

The Wombat