Reggie29 Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 We played Afghanistan in an ODI Cricket match only a few days ago in Sharjah, UAE. How things can quickly change. While I don't necessarily support the war, I do support our mates over there. The SAS is the best of the best but nothing can defend against treachery. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8524518/fears-3-aussie-troops-dead-in-afghanistan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe (Liverpool) Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Why did Australia play them? Why not refuse? Probably money I expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chillumpuffer Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Politics should not be brought into sport. Why shouldn't Australia play Afghanistan? I think Reggies view is that 5 soldiers died? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe (Liverpool) Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 I agree, but why did they play? or don't they care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 A tragedy for sure, however 38 fatalities in 10 years of war in Afghanistan hardly merits comparison to the Vietnam War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share Posted August 30, 2012 A tragedy for sure, however 38 fatalities in 10 years of war in Afghanistan hardly merits comparison to the Vietnam War. As far as Australia is concerned it is, considering they are trying to help the country achieve stability through peacekeeping activities as are the other allies who have sustained casualties in this ridiculous conflict. I think 38 is too many, what about you Steve? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missytootsweet Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) We played Afghanistan in an ODI Cricket match only a few days ago in Sharjah, UAE. How things can quickly change. While I don't necessarily support the war, I do support our mates over there. The SAS is the best of the best but nothing can defend against treachery. http://news.ninemsn....-in-afghanistan I'm sorry for the losses of Australia. RIP to those that made the ultimate sacrifice. A tragedy for sure, however 38 fatalities in 10 years of war in Afghanistan hardly merits comparison to the Vietnam War. Steve, whether you think the comparison is accurate or not, to put that comment with the bold on the numbers implies you think Australia's losses are lessened and/or diminished by the lower casualty count compared to others. I find that offensive as an American. I'm sure you didn't mean to word it that way? Missy Edited August 30, 2012 by missytootsweet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) As far as Australia is concerned it is, considering they are trying to help the country achieve stability through peacekeeping activities as are the other allies who have sustained casualties in this ridiculous conflict. I think 38 is too many, what about you Steve? I believe General MacArthur said it all in 1945 when he stated in his farewell address to Congress "there is no substitute for victory". As such, I believe there can be neither too many nor too few casualties in prosecuting a necessary war (as death/destruction is inevitable). However, it's clear Afghanistan is viewed by many as an unnecessary, un-winnable war and this erodes collective moral self-confidence. History suggests Afghani wars are indeed un-winnable, and yet I still believe some level of engagement is necessary. http://www.theobject...for-victory.asp Edited August 30, 2012 by SteveAJones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Steve, whether you think the comparison is accurate or not, to put that comment with the bold on the numbers implies you think Australia's losses are lessened and/or diminished by the lower casualty count compared to others. I find that offensive as an American. I'm sure you didn't mean to word it that way? Missy I wasn't implying anything at all, merely highlighting the defense correspondent inferred 38 KIA in ten years of war in Afghanistan was analagous to Australia's ten years of war in Vietnam. I feel that comparison is misleading given 60,000 Australians served in Vietnam, with 521 killed and more than 3,000 wounded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Victory at any cost it would seem. MacArthur will best be remembered as the general who deserted the Phillipines and left the population and allied nurses to the mercy of your beloved Japanese. It was the Australians and the British who stopped them in New Guinea, not the Americans. Steve, that is factual history and not opinion. Although if you believe (and many Yanks do), Hollywood's spin, America was the only nation involved in any of the modern conflicts Interestingly it took two atomic bombs to end WWII. Why? Because the American people were sick of losing their sons and the same applies to Vietnam except that America and the allies got their arses kicked out of Ho Chi Mihn City (Saigon) and LOST the conflict. No war is ever necessary and only idiots wage them. Vietnam was a doomed campaign from the start. Afghanistan if you know your history, is the only province / country that while being occupied by many including the British and more recently the former Soviet Union, has never been conquered and probably never will. Obviously you are for this war given your military background. Have you ever seen combat, just curious? Thankfully I haven't and hope my sons never will either. Two things come to mind regarding MacArthur and generals throughout history. Arrogance is tolerated bur never respected and Military Intelligence, the ultimate Oxymoron. Next time there is a disaster in America should I just pass it off as necessary and acceptable losses? No because I'm not like you Steve and thank goodness for that. Peace. You do know what that is? Edited August 30, 2012 by Reggie29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetleron Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 sorry to see the sad news about the aussie troops....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Victory at any cost it would seem. MacArthur will best be remembered as the general who deserted the Phillipines and left the population and allied nurses to the mercy of your beloved Japanese. It was the Australians and the British who stopped them in New Guinea, not the Americans. Steve, that is factual history and not opinion. Although if you believe (and many Yanks do), Hollywood's spin, America was the only nation involved in any of the modern conflicts Interestingly it took two atomic bombs to end WWII. Why? Because the American people were sick of losing their sons and the same applies to Vietnam except that America and the allies got their arses kicked out of Ho Chi Mihn City (Saigon) and LOST the conflict. No war is ever necessary and only idiots wage them. Vietnam was a doomed campaign from the start. Afghanistan if you know your history, is the only province / country that while being occupied by many including the British and more recently the former Soviet Union, has never been conquered and probably never will. Obviously you are for this war given your military background. Have you ever seen combat, just curious? Thankfully I haven't and hope my sons never will either. Two things come to mind regarding MacArthur and generals throughout history. Arrogance is tolerated bur never respected and Military Intelligence, the ultimate Oxymoron. Next time there is a disaster in America should I just pass it off as necessary and acceptable losses? No because I'm not like you Steve and thank goodness for that. Peace. You do know what that is? You asked me if I felt 38 was too many and I gave you my answer, which you took as an opportunity to publicly defame the late General Douglas MacArthur. You are either shameless, in dire need of history lessons or both. Firstly, Aussie losses in Afghanistan are less than 10% of Aussie losses in Vietnam. Secondly, MacArthur was ordered to leave the Philippines and did so reluctantly, vowing to return. Finally, it took two atomic bombs to end WWII because Operation DOWNFALL, the since declassified Top Secret plans for a mainland invasion of Japan called for more than 1.5 million combat troops, with 3 million more in support. Admiral William Leahy estimated more than 250,00 killed or wounded on Kyushu alone. General Charles Willoughby, Chief of Intelligence for General Douglas MacArthur, estimated American casualties from the entire operation would be one million men by the fall of 1946. These figures were considered, by many, to be a very conservative casualty estimate given the Japanese propensity for fighting to their deaths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted August 31, 2012 Author Share Posted August 31, 2012 (edited) You asked me if I felt 38 was too many and I gave you my answer, which you took as an opportunity to publicly defame the late General Douglas MacArthur. You are either shameless, in dire need of history lessons or both. Firstly, Aussie losses in Afghanistan are less than 10% of Aussie losses in Vietnam. Secondly, MacArthur was ordered to leave the Philippines and did so reluctantly, vowing to return. Finally, it took two atomic bombs to end WWII because Operation DOWNFALL, the since declassified Top Secret plans for a mainland invasion of Japan called for more than 1.5 million combat troops, with 3 million more in support. Admiral William Leahy estimated more than 250,00 killed or wounded on Kyushu alone. General Charles Willoughby, Chief of Intelligence for General Douglas MacArthur, estimated American casualties from the entire operation would be one million men by the fall of 1946. These figures were considered, by many, to be a very conservative casualty estimate given the Japanese propensity for fighting to their deaths. I am neither shameless nor do I need a history lesson. Australians and the British stopped the Japs in New Guinea and more specifically Kokoda high in the Owen Stanley Ranges. Australia was under threat of invasion. Japan attacked mainland Australia just as they did Pearl Harbour which was not mainland USA. Whether MacArthur was ordered to leave is a moot point and I doubt the survivors of Changi and the Burma Death March would take much comfort in that. People wouldn't think much of human life if they think any loss of life is either necessary or acceptable, in war or peace. You never answered my question, about whether you have seen or been involved in any hostilities? I can only presume you haven't by your no reply? I have spoken to many veterans from professional military to conscripts to volunteers from many countries who have fought for their lives (forget all that jingoistic bullshit about fighting for king and country), the sentiment is the same, war is futile and achieves nothing but death and destruction. Hiroshima and Nagasaki attest to that. Sure you can rebuild and repopulate but there are still lot of people carrying the scars and sickness from radiation etc. While the bombs were effective in stopping the war I wouldn't say they were any more or less necessary and acceptable than a full on land invasion of Japan. Unfortunately there is no shortage of megalomaniacs in the world to satisfy all the warmongers out there who would argue that killing people is justified. I for one do not. Btw, I have nothing against the Japanese today but the regime of Hirohito were evil fanatics and are hardly worth any praise for their do or die ideology of the time, period. Edited August 31, 2012 by Reggie29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross62 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 A sad day. They'll be remembered with pride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jangles Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Very tragic and sad news. Our thoughts go out to their families for their loss and sacrifice. They will indeed be remembered with honour and pride. Lest We Forget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 I am neither shameless nor do I need a history lesson. Australians and the British stopped the Japs in New Guinea and more specifically Kokoda high in the Owen Stanley Ranges. Australia was under threat of invasion. Japan attacked mainland Australia just as they did Pearl Harbour which was not mainland USA. Whether MacArthur was ordered to leave is a moot point and I doubt the survivors of Changi and the Burma Death March would take much comfort in that. People wouldn't think much of human life if they think any loss of life is either necessary or acceptable, in war or peace. You never answered my question, about whether you have seen or been involved in any hostilities? I can only presume you haven't by your no reply? The fact that General MacArthur was lawfully ordered to leave the Philippines is not a moot point of contention when you assert he "deserted" the Filipinos. The Australians & British did stop the Japanese in New Guinea. You may know the United States government decided to liberate Europe before the Pacific. I've always purposefully refused to answer questions about my personal life in this forum, but feel free to live by your presumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted August 31, 2012 Author Share Posted August 31, 2012 The fact that General MacArthur was lawfully ordered to leave the Philippines is not a moot point of contention when you assert he "deserted" the Filipinos. The Australians & British did stop the Japanese in New Guinea. You may know the United States government decided to liberate Europe before the Pacific. I've always purposefully refused to answer questions about my personal life in this forum, but feel free to live by your presumptions. I suppose the military spin would be a "strategic withdrawal", regardless the Filipinos were subjected to Japanese occupation and atrocities. You may also know that Australians assisted in the liberation of the Europeans, flogged Rommel in North Africa and saved JFK from the Japs too. An uncle of mine served in the US Navy in WWII and was killed in action, torpedoed in the Pacific. This box of matches belonged to him. Who wanted to know about your private life? Not me. I just asked you a simple question, no specifics just a yes or no answer would've sufficed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Give it a rest! I am sorry for the loss of the service men and women of Australia and all our Allies. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 regardless the Filipinos were subjected to Japanese occupation and atrocities. As were Allied POW's, including atrocities like the Bataan Death March, the misery of Japanese prison camps, and the Hell Ships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.