Gnadenburg
It really is like trying to nail jello to the wall with you, isn't it?
You stated that offloading A4's to a foreign power, which you were happy to do as a trade in for F16's when it suited, would risk having that hardware and tactics used against you in the future. To add credence to this preposterous argument, you informed us the Gulf War was an undisputable example. It was politely pointed out that Iraqi equipment and tactics-and especially in the context you have used the A4 example as- was predominantly Russian & French.
Firstly, under existing treaties it was the US, and not NZ, who effectively decided where the A4s could be sold. It was never our choice. Note the way they stopped the Swiss selling old F-5s to a nation they didn't approve of. All a matter of record.
Secondly, equipment and tactics doesn't only include aircraft and tanks. If you bother to read the stuff I quoted, you will discover that a lot of the assistance the US rendered to Iraq was of more consequence than their joke of an air force, and their tank brigades. The air force never really came out to play, and the tanks were quickly disposed of.
We all know American foreign policy was for a status quo in the region- a stalemate as such, or inevitable costly defeat to both protagonists- which had limited American hardware find itself supplying both armies clandestinely.
No, it wasn't. The Americans favoured the Iraqis as a) they were extremely concerned that Iran may gain control of the area, and b) Saddam was their friend (at the time).
Stating a 206 with a hardpoint could do the job in Afganistan a fair summary of your logic and arguments to date.
Irony not something you understand too well, is it?
Foreign affairs not your strongpoint as you reference America being the suitable Phillipino ally.
And geopolitics is clearly not yours. Let me help you then. Question: who has the most to gain from a military presence in the Phillippines, the USA or New Zealand? Pretty easy, really. But wait - isn't one of those two countries
already militarily active in the Phillippines? Why, yes...
American and Philippine military forces have launched joint exercises which Washington says signal a new phase in the war on international terrorism. The exercises, which will eventually involve 650 US troops, including special forces, are being staged close to the stronghold of the rebel Abu Sayyaf, a group which the US says has links to Osama Bin Laden.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/1792591.stm
Next...
You have been fortunate not to lose New Zealanders to Phillipino trained bombmakers
Yes, we have been fortunate not to lose any to attacks by rabid West African Swallows as well... talk about a stretch!
You are a lost nation
Well, if we are lost, I don't ever want to be found! I certainly never want our country to degenerate to the levels seen in the West Island...
[QUOTE]since WW2 when you over committed your resources to Europe[/QUOTE
Oh no we didn't. We were asked for help, and we gave it. The European theatre was always more important than the Pacific in any case, if you bother to look at the big picture. We did what we were asked to do. Just like the Aussies, really.
Britain was ungrateful at your sacrifice
Yes, they were so ungrateful that they gave NZ nearly thirty years of unfettered, protected access to UK markets... they must have really hated us...
when you told bigger friends where to go!
I know that in your dark little world, armed forces are the only external indicators of the health of a relationship. Fortunately for us, trade is a much more important indicator, and on that basis we are very good friends indeed!
Surely you can do better...