PDA

View Full Version : NZ nuclear free legislation..


John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 05:15
It is all out there and easy enough to find. There really is no need to make up shyte about it.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 05:20
You don't seem happy when the focus is on NZ. A wee bit defensive.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 05:27
What an idiotic thing to say, I just opened a thread which draws attention to NZ.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 05:48
As a result of the beating NZ has taken in the past hours.

bosnich71
13th Nov 2014, 05:55
John.. I shouldn't worry too much. Some time back a Royal Navy vessel which had problems of some sort was denied entry to Australian ports because the Brits wouldn't verify if it carried nukes or not. The Yanks don't say if theirs have nukes either but they still turn up frequently and are allowed in of course.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 05:58
bosnich71, I am not worried at all but the ignorance, quite possibly wilful, demonstrated by some of our 'friends' verges on the incredible (or perhaps they are just being dishonest).

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 06:00
As a result of the beating NZ has taken in the past hours.

Oh dear! Something terrible has been happening and I didn't notice!

rh200
13th Nov 2014, 06:24
John.. I shouldn't worry too much. Some time back a Royal Navy vessel which had problems of some sort was denied entry to Australian ports because the Brits wouldn't verify if it carried nukes or not.

When the F$#k was that?

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 06:57
When the F$#k was that?

HMS Invincible maybe?

mikedreamer787
13th Nov 2014, 07:04
Ok so NZ doesn't allow nuclear devices on
its shores no matter what shape or form.

I'm sure that's real important to know. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/indifferent/indifferent0018.gif

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 07:13
Some people seem to think so..

tartare
13th Nov 2014, 07:22
Repeal it I say.
Build a lovely reactor up on the Kaipara like those far-sighted learned gentlemen in the 60s were going to before they discovered Maui gas.
Solve the power supply problems in one stroke.
Create a nuclear industry - employ a few people.
And lease 4 Virginia class boats from the `murcans for the RNZN.
Bloody greenies.

mikedreamer787
13th Nov 2014, 07:25
All I recall is that the NZ guvmint left the
ANZUS pact yonks ago (1985?) - cos the
US Fleet carried nukes and that was that.

Scrubbed NZ off the "Hey this place really
matters!" list since.

tartare
13th Nov 2014, 07:28
...weell, not really Mike.
True, they stopped the military exercises etc. til recently.
But our ghostly friends from Fort Meade still paid visits to a place near a lovely vineyard near Blenheim, and a certain building named after a former general in Wellington.
All right under the nose of a proudly nuclear free Prime Minister David Lange, who only found out about it in the early 90s...

mikedreamer787
13th Nov 2014, 07:44
That's right - Lange.

Not saying NZ is a bad place to visit Mr tatare
but if it the two islands suddenly sank into the
ocean I don't think the world would notice it all
that much - its not like its a regional economic
powerhouse with very low taxes or anything.

We'd probly mourn the sheep and Manuka honey
losses for a short time though....

Nervous SLF
13th Nov 2014, 08:00
Considering it's size of population New Zealand has been responsible for a great deal of change in the world over the last 120 years or so.


I say this as a Brit. who feels very honored and pleased to be allowed to not only live here but has been granted citizenship.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 08:37
Nervous SLF, a lot of what NZ and NZers do on the international scene is neither public nor publicised.

bosnich71
13th Nov 2014, 09:05
rh200 .... shortly after the Falklands fracas and I believe that, as JH said, it was the Invincible.
The ironic thing about it was that she had been engaged in manoeuvres with the R.A.N. for some time as she steamed around Oz. Perhaps it would have been better to have gone straight home and then would not have had to rely on their 'Allies'.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 09:12
I dont think rh200 really wants to know the HMS Invincible story.:ok:

rh200
13th Nov 2014, 09:27
I dont think rh200 really wants to know the HMS Invincible stor

Yawn, comparing apples and oranges I'm afraid. I believe there's a difference between docked and on soil, which some think dry docking is. Any way we had commy/socialists in power at the time so leaning towards interpreting the regs that way was only natural.

There's a big difference to that and banning the very armed forces that your relying on for protection from coming and bonking your woman, its not as if Kiwi's do their duty in that regard.

Well maybe the Maroi's do.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 09:41
If, as they say, ignorance is bliss you must be a very happy chappie!:ok:

Dushan
13th Nov 2014, 10:35
bosnich71, I am not worried at all but the ignorance, quite possibly wilful, demonstrated by some of our 'friends' verges on the incredible (or perhaps they are just being dishonest).

Says a man who doesn't know who started the Korean War.

brickhistory
13th Nov 2014, 13:18
Of all the countries in the world, New Zealand certainly is one.

Well done.

Dushan
13th Nov 2014, 14:10
It is all out there and easy enough to find. There really is no need to make up shyte about it.

John, it is permissible, even encouraged, to post more than one line at a time. Can you provide a link to this wonderful piece of legislation. I don't want to mistakenly pick up the North Korean one. It might be difficult to distinguish.

rgbrock1
13th Nov 2014, 14:22
Dushan wrote:

Says a man who doesn't know who started the Korean War.

Are you telling me that John Hill, of he of Kiwi land, doesn't know that Mozambique started the Korean War? What a thunderhead. :E:}

con-pilot
13th Nov 2014, 18:40
Are you telling me that John Hill, of he of Kiwi land, doesn't know that Mozambique started the Korean War? What a thunderhead

Naw, it was either New Zealand or George W. Bush* that started the Korean War.



* I mean after all, George W. Bush caused the fall of the Roman Empire, so it would be a snap for him to start a war in Korea.

And as for New Zealand, got to watch out for small island countries starting wars. :E

radeng
13th Nov 2014, 18:53
Exactly what or which nuclear devices are banned in NZ?

obgraham
13th Nov 2014, 18:57
Exactly what or which nuclear devices are banned in NZ? Well it doesn't really matter, does it?

They're also banned on the campus of UC Berkeley, if I recall.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 18:59
Radeng, I believe it is all here.. New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987 No 86 (as at 01 July 2013), Public Act Contents ? New Zealand Legislation (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1987/0086/latest/DLM115116.html)

...pretty much any 'nuclear explosive device' and nuclear propulsion.

radeng
13th Nov 2014, 19:06
Ah! So not like some of the loonier councils in the UK who would ban all nuclear devices in their 'nuclear free zones'. When asked if that meant things using beta particles, they replied 'Yes' and then got upset when they were told practically every house had a device shooting beta particles at the people in the room - this was in the days of cathode ray tubes in TV sets. Then pointing out that there could be a number of cancer treatments that couldn't be carried out really upset them......and that some local industries would have to close.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 19:27
It is as much about issues of sovereignty than anything nuclear.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 20:15
And how's that? Was the US or other nuclear powered/equipped nations forcing themselves upon NZ John? They all along had the ability to say no, they simply choose to promulgate it when they did.

Some consideration was given to security I imagine, with the consensus being that NZ is a bit player with little to offer to an invader vs the logistical task of going to the bottom of the world. Gave the granola eating tree hugging Birkenstock wearing liberals a warm and fuzzy win with little cost. Appearantly the same thought process went towards dismantling the Air Force.

If NK sat just a few miles off the coast of NZ, I'd be willing to bet the NZ govt of the day wouldn't have been so quick to throw off the protections associated with the nuclear umbrella. They were content with it for many years.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 20:25
Pressure was brought to bear, as it was on Australia and no doubt other countries too, but NZ determined to insist on the right to set the conditions for visiting war ships.

Our 'allies' didn't like that so we were 'allies' no more.

(As predicted by Chicken Licken the sky then fell on our heads, not.:rolleyes:)

Britain, France, US, not really allies and not friends either.

rh200
13th Nov 2014, 20:37
They're also banned on the campus of UC Berkeley, if I recall.

Both NZ and UC are about the same relevance as well.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 20:40
I actually tend to agree with you as far as the allies part. Relationships come and go. Some are never initiated that probably should have. I imagine many in the Ukraine wish they had article 5 protection right about now. Just the same, no one with the means to threaten NZ really wants NZ, you're likely safe, kinda like the chunky ones at the pub come closing time.

BenThere
13th Nov 2014, 20:43
NZ ultimately has a stake in civilization and world order. Some New Zealanders just don't seem to realize that, or are confident others will carry the load to sustain it.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 22:19
John

Curious if the NZ military in GWI and beyond refused CAS from coalition aircraft that launched from ships that were nuclear powered or were suspected of having nuclear weapons onboard them?

ExSp33db1rd
13th Nov 2014, 22:26
I say this as a Brit. who feels very honored and pleased to be allowed to not only live here but has been granted citizenshipDitto. It's not Utopia but it ain't bad and there are plenty worse.

(I just wish New Zealand drivers would learn how to use car indicators when negotiating a roundabout tho' !! It ain't rocket science but they seem incapable of understanding the simplest of instructions - but I won't start that again !!)

Well maybe the Maroi's do.Akcherly - it's Maori. The Maorori were actually here first, ( indigenous ? ) and were duffed up by the Maori, who now proclaim that they were the first here, and swindled out of their land by the Brits. and now want it back, demanding money with menaces to go along with it.

Considering it's size of population New Zealand has been responsible for a great deal of change in the world over the last 120 years or so.Ernest Rutherford for instance ? well, this is an anti-nuclear debate, and I agree with the comment about a Nuclear Power station on the Kaipara, we might get cheaper electricity - and affordable cellphone charges (?) as a result.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 22:43
If NZ had built nuclear power stations when they were being considered they would now be 30 to 40 plus years old and at the end of their life.

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 22:44
Curious if the NZ military in GWI and beyond re..........

You would only argue if I told you so best you Google it yourself.:}

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 22:48
It's not Utopia but it ain't bad and there are plenty worse.

You are up Orkland way, right?

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 22:55
Pragmatism trumps ideology when the bullets are flying, huh John.

Should China become a threat to NZ, the welcome signs will be out for a CVN battle group in record time. Don't think it will as NZ doesn't really offer a real ROI, but you never know. You guys got coal?

Typhoon93
13th Nov 2014, 23:03
Any background to this thread please?

Are we talking nuclear weapons or nuclear power?

Nuclear weapons - I hate them (that also includes biological and chemical weapons too, or 'weapons of mass destruction' as the three are also known as). Although I accept that they can be necessary, only in a last resort situation when all other tactics have been tried and tested and have failed. I am not about to go out protesting like the misinformed loons do to try to convince my government to disarm the country of nuclear weapons, as that would be crazy since we always have the very real possibility of Falklands II or Cold War II, the latter, at the moment, is a lot more likely since there has been a reported surge of Russian activity very close to, and in some cases in, NATO airspace over the last year. We also have the current crisis in Iraq and Syria, and a very real possibility of Afghanistan V in the future. So, yeah... I don't like them, but I understand they have a place, although that place should always be on the seat behind everything else. I should hope a lot of people all over the world bears that in mind, too.


Nuclear power. Again, this is necessary, hopefully it won't be as necessary in the future, although it is the only realistic way of powering submarines and some of the larger surface ships. I should hope this is self-explanatory due to the nature of operations carried out by these vessels.

For providing power to people at home, at the moment it's necessary until technology has improved so as we can mostly rely on sustainable energy resources from the environment. Of course, the only two negatives are disposing of spent fuel rods and when it all goes wrong. As far as I am aware, there has only been one nuclear accident in my lifetime (Japan), and I'm 21 now. Hopefully it stays that way.

West Coast
13th Nov 2014, 23:06
There's a link on page 2.

obgraham
13th Nov 2014, 23:07
Britain, France, US, not really allies and not friends either.You know, John, we understand your great love of US bashing. We're big boys, and we take it for what it is worth.

But that statement is the single most despicable thing I've ever seen from your keyboard. Just who the hell do you think your nation's allies are?

When you disrespect your own country's history, and the contributions in valor made by your own people -- many of whom lie in graves in places half way around the world from their homeland -- then I have lost all respect for anything you might say, and the positions you might take.

brickhistory
13th Nov 2014, 23:10
Interesting to note that John Hill and Kim Jong Un have never been seen, much less photographed at the same place, at the same time.

Just sayin'...

John Hill
13th Nov 2014, 23:29
obgraham, you should take a pause a review what it is you are talking about.

France, entire villages and towns in NZ never recovered from the loss of young NZ men fighting in wars for the defence of France but France saw fit to carry out atmospheric nuclear tests in our atmosphere and sent their terrorists to blow up a ship just a few hundred yards from the Post Office in our most populous city.

Britain, NZers followed, "Where England goes we go!" but when the dust settled and the surviving soldiers, sailors and airmen came home Britain forgot about NZ and formed an alliance with other, so-called, allies and the country of the enemy we had all fought against. NZ's principal markets were suddenly closed to us.
Britain of course did nothing to assist NZ apprehend the murdering terrorists who had sunk a (formerly?) UK registered ship in a NZ harbour and by some accounts actively frustrated investigations.

US, America demanded unlimited war ship access to our cities and expected us to accept what is not demanded of their own cities. When the French terrorists attacked a ship in NZ the US could not bring themselves to condemn them.

Australia, everything you heard about the ANZACs was shown for nought when Australia facilitated the escape of the French terrorists from NZ.

So dont prat on about disrespect when our former friends and allies have seen fit to show so little.


The saga of NZ and nuclear ships and of the Rainbow Warrior demonstrated to those Kiwis who were still reading Beano comics that NZ is an independent and sovereign nation. We learned that treaties were only ever binding on the weaker party and we learned that it is OK to say "NO" when it suits us and to say it like we mean it.

BTW, NZ's relations with the USA are better now than they were in the days when America paid lip service to ANZUS (with respect to NZ). NZ of course never stopped meeting our obligations under ANZUS.

obgraham
13th Nov 2014, 23:38
Are you going to answer John, "Who do you think your allies are?", or are you just going to prattle on with your revisionist view of your nation's sacrifices?

Lord knows, we've had our issues with the French. And with the English for that matter. For centuries. Other than venting on in bars and web-boards about it, though, it does little good to obsess about how our nation might have been done over by some other one.

Do you somehow think that the Austro-Hungarian and German Empires, Nazi Germany, the USSR, China, and Iran would be better countries for NZ to have allied with in this last 100 years?

Fortunately for the good people of NZ, your view does not predominate.

BenThere
13th Nov 2014, 23:51
America demanded unlimited war ship access to our cities

Nothing of the sort ever occurred. The US sought port facilities in New Zealand, and the left wing government in power at the time rejected the US petition. No demand was issued.

My whole point in this discussion is that the time might come when New Zealand might need powerful friends.

As for me, when the US is disrespected or reviled by those who have benefited from our power and commitment to the free world, I remember. My fellow citizens might not, and the majority may not agree with me, but I will remember.

ExSp33db1rd
13th Nov 2014, 23:57
You are up Orkland way, right?

Way past, nearer the Top End, long way to a pint of milk ! Can't afford to move to Orkland now. ( which was Plan B. )

World's Gone Mad.

rh200
14th Nov 2014, 00:08
Fortunately for the good people of NZ, your view does not predominate.

Not sure thats true anymore, not even sure how much that holds over here.

My whole point in this discussion is that the time might come when New Zealand might need powerful friends.

Not likely, have you seen where it is on the map, its not even a good strategic staging point to get into Aus. The only people ever dumb enough to invade where, hmm let me see:p

The fact is, by the time it is in any danger, it will only because the rest of us have fallen. NZ is one of those little irrelevant countries that could declare itself neutral, and it wouldn't matter, bit like some in WW2.

Frankly I don't even see why it persists with any military alliances what so ever.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 00:11
As for me, when the US is disrespected or reviled by those who have benefited from our power and commitment to the free world, I remember. My fellow citizens might not, and the majority may not agree with me, but I will remember.

Am I supposed to be quaking in my boots around about now?

Just to show there are no hard feeling on this I have a big whakapohane for you old chap.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 00:12
Frankly I don't even see why it persists with any military alliances what so ever.

Welcome aboard!:ok:

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 00:16
Way past, nearer the Top End, long way to a pint of milk ! Can't afford to move to Orkland now.

You wouldnt want to anyway, maybe just move a bit further south, 45S, more or less.

BenThere
14th Nov 2014, 00:33
Am I supposed to be quaking in my boots around about now?

I think the only thing you would quake in your boots about would be the effect of global warming/climate change/global cooling and nuclear power generation. Am I wrong?

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 00:37
And running out of Swiss Chese at the Mongolian Bar, BenThere.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 01:35
That's a load of revisionary history John. The French, Brits, Aussies and whomever you believe wronged NZ can speak for themselves regarding your pity party, but regarding the US, you need to go back to the books.

NZ joined ANZUS voluntarily, there was no metaphorical gun to their head. There was a change of heart when labour swept to power. They felt they had a mandate to ban nukes and from what I read, they did have popular support.

I have no issue with NZ banning nukes, that's your business, but don't make it sound as if NZ had no choice as they clearly did, they exercised that right. Like I said earlier, I do recognize the hypocrisy of accepting (on the govts behalf) of CAS from nuke ships, carry nuclear qualified aircraft. I have to imagine the lads on the ground didn't give a rats ass that the Hornet overhead had hard points capable of slinging instant sunshine around.

Dry the tears and move along.

Quizling
14th Nov 2014, 02:05
Originally posted by Dushan,
Says a man who doesn't know who started the Korean War.
referring to John Hill, I presume.
I, too, don't know who started the Korean war. Not that I care all that much but would like to know what you think John thinks about who started the Korean War.

And running out of Swiss Chese at the Mongolian Bar
Again posted by Dushan referring to John Hill.
Perhaps you would like to clarify what that's about (and I'm not referring to your spelling ability).

Those two quotes are subtle variations on a multitude of posts by Dushan in a multitude of threads in Jetblast over 2 to 3 months, including threads that John had not yet posted in.

It's really difficult to think anything other than that Dushan is totally obsessed with John Hill and I don't think "stalking" is too strong a word.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 02:17
That's a load of revisionary history John. The French, Brits, Aussies and whomever you believe wronged NZ can speak for themselves regarding your pity party, but regarding the US, you need to go back to the books.

So you believe the Skippies letting the Ouvéa go on her way was not 'wronging' NZ? The French mounting a military terrorist attack in Auckland was not 'wronging' NZ? The US failing to condemn the French action was not 'wronging' NZ? The US scuttling ANZUS because NZ exercised a soverign right to ban nuclear ships was not 'wronging' NZ? And of course the Poms obstructing the police enquiries into the sinking. Hardly the acts of friends and allies.

None of those countries should be viewed as 'friends' or 'allies' of NZ, they are just other countries who can be expected to always act in their own interests friendship or otherwise not withstanding.

BTW, you can keep the pity for yourself especially as I expect you may need it before we do.



Like I said earlier, I do recognize the hypocrisy of accepting (on the govts behalf) of CAS from nuke ships, carry nuclear qualified aircraft. I have to imagine the lads on the ground didn't give a rats ass that the Hornet overhead had hard points capable of slinging instant sunshine around.

What particular instance are you refering to and would that have been while they were fighting one of America's wars?

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 02:43
Okay, now we know!

So you believe the Skippies letting the Ouvéa go on her way was not 'wronging' NZ? The French mounting a military terrorist attack in Auckland was not 'wronging' NZ? The US failing to condemn the French action was not 'wronging' NZ? The US scuttling ANZUS because NZ exercised a soverign right to ban nuclear ships was not 'wronging' NZ? And of course the Poms obstructing the police enquiries into the sinking. Hardly the acts of friends and allies.

None of those countries should be viewed as 'friends' or 'allies' of NZ, they are just other countries who can be expected to always act in their own interests friendship or otherwise not withstanding.


Blame the French! They did it!!!!!!! :D:D:D:D

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 02:43
It's really difficult to think anything other than that Dushan is totally obsessed with John Hill and I don't think "stalking" is too strong a word.

Quizling, sorry about the misspelling of cheese and anything else that didn't pass scrutiny.

Obviously you weren't around when JH was asking "who started the Korean War" and his stories about the fun times he had in the Mongolian bar in Pyongyang with his "minders". I guess I am as "obsessed" with him as he is with bashing America and everything American.

What's it to you?

It's JB FFS...

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 02:45
Okay, now we know!



Blame the French! They did it!!!!!!! :D:D:D:D

But for once, they did something right.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 02:50
Don't worry Dusan, blame the French!!!!!

Now why that caused JH's paranoid and pathological hatred of the US and all things American, I don't have a clue.


And Quizling.

I, too, don't know who started the Korean war.

Try reading a frickin' history book. :rolleyes:

Not one written and published in a Communist country.

As there are only two left, shan't be too bloody hard.

brickhistory
14th Nov 2014, 02:50
Psst, John, ever wonder why the French (the French, for Gawd's sake!) did what they did to the Rainbow Warrior?

Because they knew they could.

Not having a stick, never mind a big one, has consequences. Ankle-biter comes to mind.


Finally, while there are some really fine New Zealanders that I don't direct this to, but it's New Zealand.

Who cares?



As to Q's self-appointed role of internet defender, you have missed the good parts of John Hill and his stalwart defense of North Korea and its put upon history (some folks could say made up history, but that's just quibbling). Not a word about John's attacks, trolling, or outright lies?

There's always two sides to the story. In John's case, there's an infinite number as he will rewrite the story every time, and there have been very, very many, he gets caught in a falsehood.

Quizling
14th Nov 2014, 02:52
Obviously you weren't around when JH was asking "who started the Korean War" and his stories about the fun times he had in the Mongolian bar in Pyongyang with his "minders".

Obviously. So point me there.

brickhistory
14th Nov 2014, 02:57
Top of the page, instruction bar, "Search."

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 02:58
Obviously. So point me there.

The search function seems to be on a fritz, these days, plus some of these threads were deleted due to threats of litigation by, wait for it… John Hill. Others, started by him, were deleted, most likely by him, in a transparent effort to re-write history, even if it was just history of Jet Blast.

Try searching for posts/threads with North Korea or NK in it. Some other key words, of note, are Mongolian Bar, Bowling Lanes, minders.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 03:04
The search function seems to be on a fritz, these days

No kidding, I looked for an short, funny, fictional story that I wrote about St. Maarten Island's airport a few years ago. It took me ages, way too long.

And I had not deleted any posts or threads as our friend has.

And;

Some other key words, of note, are Mongolian Bar, Bowling Lanes, minders.

You forgot the most infamous post/words by JH, "who started the Korean war". :=


:E

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 03:11
You forgot the most infamous post/words by JH, "who started the Korean war". :=


:E

I think that was the title of the thread, by him, but probably long gone.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 03:19
I think that was the title of the thread, by him, but probably long gone.

Oh God! You're asking me with my memory? :p


Okay, I think it was a thread started by someone else about one of North Korea's latest inane acts and John Hill showed up from out of nowhere talking about how great Little Un is, the Mongolian Bar and asking "who really started the Korean War", as one of Bill Cosby's fictional girl friends wandered around asking, "Why is there air?".

At least that is what I remember.

For what that is worth. :\

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 03:21
Umm, OK, it's not like I am so far behind you with my age and misspent youth taking the toll on the brain cells.

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 03:23
Oh, oh, oh, and don't forget all the defence of Castro bros. He teamed up with El Grifo, there.

Matari
14th Nov 2014, 03:24
All I know is Young Hill Jon is digging' the attention. I'm happy to contribute my bit for his fix.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 03:25
Umm, OK, it's not like I am so far behind you with my age and misspent youth taking the toll on the brain cells.

Well as you don't drink, you cannot use my excuse for my poor memory.

BOOZE!


Works for me. :ok:

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 03:48
Where is the head tag team troll? He should be here soon?

rh200
14th Nov 2014, 03:55
So you believe the Skippies letting the Ouvéa go on her way was not 'wronging' NZ? The French mounting a military terrorist attack in Auckland was not 'wronging' NZ? The US failing to condemn the French action was not 'wronging' NZ?

Nope, thats what you get for harboring terrorists, opps I mean the rainbow warrior. frankly the Japs could do the same thing in one of our harbors to the sea sheppard ships and I wouldn't bat an eyelid.

The US scuttling ANZUS because NZ exercised a soverign right to ban nuclear ships was not 'wronging' NZ?

Yep, its to our forever shame that we maintained an alliance with NZ in those circumstances. We where at war, a cold war to defeat evil, undermining your own side is unforgivable. Who knows how long the cold war was extended due to spineless nations and people. Giving aid and comfort to the enemy its called.

And of course the Poms obstructing the police enquiries into the sinking.
See above

Hardly the acts of friends and allies.

No its the act of friends who felt betrayed by the actions of another.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 04:09
An interesting theory!

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 04:10
Where is the head tag team troll? He should be here soon?

You mean like your members of your Tag Team Trolls on the US gun thread?

Those who live in glass houses should not throw boulders*. :p


* That would be really, really big rocks John. :E

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 04:13
I hope you are not offended con-pilot if I say that I see you as one of the run-alongs in the troll team not the pack leader.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 04:14
John

Convenient you passed right by my comments about the US and ANZUS. You have a history of that when cornered. I'll put it a W in my win column unless you can adequitely explain your comments about how the US forced nukes on NZ.

As to sinking the ship, I actually agree with you. Bad form. Look, the Brits burned down DC (and I invite them to do it again) Japan bombed PH, we nuked them and we're all on good terms. Despite the tragic loss of life, the sinking was a long time ago and all you're doing is milking it for sympathy and a few thread points that have failed to score.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 04:19
West Coast, where did I say the US forced nukes on NZ?

Don't bother answering if you don't want too and I will be sure to understand.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 04:20
I hope you are not offended con-pilot if I say that I see you as one of the run-alongs in the troll team not the pack leader.

Offend me! You?

Now that is funny. :D:D:D

Nice dodge though, too bad it didn't work. Better luck next time.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 04:26
West Coast, where did I say the US forced nukes on NZ?


As you wish. Don't play stupid, you knew exactly what I meant by nukes. Simply admit you were wrong in saying the US forced anything on NZ wrt nuke powered ships, you gain a modicum of respect with me. Otherwise, keep digging.

US, America demanded unlimited war ship access to our cities and expected us to accept what is not demanded of their own cities.

There ya go john. The ships of course were nukes as that's what got labours panties in a wad.

Quizling
14th Nov 2014, 04:28
So, Dushan made the two postings that I asked about within the last 24 hours, but cannot now remember what they refer to.

I've waded through 34 pages of NK thread (all that Google found) and found none by JH. True, he may have deleted posts, but he couldn't delete responses to his posts. Couldn't find any of them either.

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 04:35
The only NK thread, still in existence, is the one with pictures and funny captions. John Hill does not participate because it is making fun of his idol, Kim Fat Un. All the others were deleted, some by thread starters, some by mods.

I suggest you send him a PM and ask if any of what I said earlier is true. He won't admit it here, but maybe he will to you.

I don't quite understand the first part of your post.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 04:56
Quizling

He asked that, there is absolutely no reason for this many of us to make that up.

If you cannot find any such statement/question, you did not try hard enough.

Or you didn't try.

Either reason, I simply, 'don't give a damn.'*


* Apologies to the Rhett Butler. :p

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 04:56
West coast, here you are then
Then Prime Minister Robert Muldoon said during debates on the nuclear free Bill that US Secretary of State, George Shultz, told him at the Anzus Council meeting in 1984, “no ship visits, no ANZUS”, see Working Paper No.8, p.20.

Just admit you are wrong and we will call it a day!:ok:

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 04:57
You Tag Team Trolls having a little problem remembering your lies?

BTW, while you are searching the archives find what I said about the Castro brothers.

obgraham
14th Nov 2014, 05:01
Still waiting to hear which countries would have made the best NZ allies this past 100 years.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 05:04
obgraham, I am sure you can find that online somewhere.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 05:06
You Tag Team Trolls having a little problem remembering your lies?

As we are not members of any so-called Tag Team, at least I’m not, I guess that it is up to you, a real member of a Tag Team of Trolls to tell us.

When they made the definition of a Troll, they used you as an example.

Hey, it's fame John, take it for what is it is. This is your fifteen (15) minutes of fame.

Work it dude, work it. It's all you got in life.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 05:08
Well, you are certainly not the head troll but if you try really, really hard, who knows?

obgraham
14th Nov 2014, 05:11
obgraham, I am sure you can find that online somewhere.But I want to hear your opinion John. That's what give and take on a chat board is all about.

con-pilot
14th Nov 2014, 05:12
Seeing I'm not a troll, like you John, I'm not worried about it.

You on the other hand, seem to care a great deal about being a troll and take pride in being such.

Fine with me, go with what you've got John.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 05:14
But I want to hear your opinion John. That's what give and take on a chat board is all about.

Oh! You want a bit of give and take? Here is an original idea for you to consider "Hows about you post your opinion and we can discuss it, or maybe ignore as the case may be?"

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 05:20
Not just any kind of troll con-pilot, what we have on here are tag team trolls. Groups who gather together to attack one other poster with whatever, usually dishonest, tactics they can employ.

obgraham
14th Nov 2014, 05:53
Oh! You want a bit of give and take? Here is an original idea for you to consider "Hows about you post your opinion and we can discuss it, or maybe ignore as the case may be?"Great. Glad to.

Being a proud democratic nation, I would expect New Zealand to ally herself with other nations of a similar tradition: USA,Canada,Britain, Australia,Most of Western Europe,Israel would be good as starters. You know, the places where Kiwis have played a role on the world stage in the past, and which are standing against authoritarianism now.

(If you all just like the idea of not being tied to the big players, there are others which might suit, less dependable they might be as allies: India, Singapore, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, Chile, Brazil, and on.)

Back to you, John: what would your choices be?

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 06:21
obgraham, NZ is a small country with the population of a modest city and limited resources that we must carefully husband.

In my opinion NZ does not need allies. WWI kicked off the way it did because everyone was an ally of everyone else.

Friends are nice to have, we can talk trade and tourism and all manner of exchanges without them pressuring us to join their wars.

We can always go to war alongside a friend if we choose to but no one wants to be allied to a country that goes off to war just about every year and expects you to tag along.

Like I said, NZ is a small country and no ally will come to our aid unless and until it suits them. If it is in their interests they will come regardless of what we have to say about it. Did America have to be asked to go to Grenada? Did the USSR have to be asked to go to the aid of the socialist government in Afghanistan? Would America have gone to war over Ukraine if there was a treaty requiring it?

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 06:29
Very weak reply John.

NZ willingly entered into ANZUS. No arm twisting was needed, frankly there would have been no reason for the US to twist an arm as NZ brought virtually nothing to the table. NZ was a free rider essentially, enjoying that position for many years. After ANZUS, had to up its defense spending nearly 20% as it realized all the lost military benefits ANZUS had provided, but that's for another day.
NZ lived happily under that nuclear umbrella for many years, guaranteed in large part by a nuclear powered and nuclear equipped USN. When you boot your your largest ally who is largely equipped with nukes of some sort, it made the alliance non workable. Schultz was simply advising the NZ govt that the treaty had been fundamentally altered by NZ to the point that it was unworkable for a nuclear navy.
Wasn't a threat, wasn't arm twisting, it was simply letting your boys know there were repercussions to their actions. They choose to foolishly press on, and that's fine. No one forced anything on NZ. The US was better off without the drag and expense of dragging a bit player along.

So john, I ask again. When did the US force nuclear ships on NZ?

It's a rhetorical question because they didn't. History shows they didn't given the ban on them which the US has respected.

Keep at it John. Someone out there might be convinced.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 06:35
Would America have gone to war over Ukraine if there was a treaty requiring it?

Under title 5, the answer would be yes if Ukraine had belonged to NATO.

obgraham
14th Nov 2014, 06:50
I guess, then, that John is in the right place in the world. A little country stuck on the bottom bit, where no self-respecting invader will tread. (Well, there was that Japanese threat once, but I digress.)

In this hidden spot, he's free to stick his head in the ground and ignore the rest of the world hoping they will never covet his land or his sheep, that crowded countries might never seek his spot, and that jihadis will never become seafairers. And ignoring the cultural history which made NZ what it is today.

This is my real question, though: If he is content in his isolation, why the heck does he obsess so much about how we do things in America, and go on at such length about guns, politicians, health care, and social issues in a country he wants nothing to do with?

It's confounding, it is. I'm only glad his countrymen can still raise such superb lamb.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 06:54
Very weak reply John.

Words of US Secretary of State, George Shultz, not good enough for you eh?

Mind you, I can kind of see your point, Secretary of State Colin Powell told a few porkies at the UN so why expect too much from anyone else in that position?

rh200
14th Nov 2014, 06:55
It's confounding, it is. I'm only glad his countrymen can still raise such superb lamb

Its all in the seasoning:E

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 06:56
What is really confounding is why obgraham would think I spend all my life in this country.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 07:05
Words of US Secretary of State, George Shultz, not good enough for you eh?

Nope, telling you the alliance is tits up because you shunned one of your partners isn't pressure, its a gentle reminder of the consequences of your actions. If any pressure was exerted, it was from NZ to the US to knuckle under, don't send your nukes, make specific allowances for NZ but get nothing in return but keep us under the umbrella.

Hanging your hat on GS's comments as the example of the US forcing nukes upon a nation that just said no nukes. Got it.

I'm putting this in the win column for me unless you have something much better.

mikedreamer787
14th Nov 2014, 07:14
Its all in the seasoning:E

That's put me off roast lamb for a while....:yuk:

obgraham
14th Nov 2014, 07:21
That's put me off roast lamb for a while....:yuk:Then you've never had the "herb rubbed grilled lamb chops" as per the recipe in the old Betty Crocker book. Get a lamb crown roast imported by Costco from NZ, slice it up, rub it (fondle it if you like!), grill it to crusty outside and red in the middle.

Makes me wanna be sure NZ remains a staunch ally. Over the objections of a small minority.

mikedreamer787
14th Nov 2014, 07:35
rh200 was referring to a popular form of locally-injected "seasoning" Mr graham.

For the sake of the thread I won't go into graphic sheep-shagging detail...

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 07:37
I think the term is "de facto ally."

mikedreamer787
14th Nov 2014, 07:44
And then there's "de facto ovinity"! ;)

AC Busted
14th Nov 2014, 07:54
Like many Kiwi teenagers in the early 1980's my mates and I soaked up American social culture through TV and the movies.

For me, I considered myself extra lucky because we had a US Navy Antarctica support base at my local airport in Christchurch. The support staff and the aircrew were a great bunch of guys and would always happily put up with our regular visits to see the aircraft - there was zero (or perhaps subtle) security back then!

We viewed the US as the greatest nation on the planet - and the 'best'.

When Ronald Reagan came to power and the Cold War seemed to be on the brink of hot, I saw on the news that my airport, Christchurch, would be targeted by a Soviet nuke or 2 in event of WW3 breaking out.

Frankly, that was a scary thought to a kid of 14. I was unable to grasp how the Soviets could justify incinerating me in my home situated about 5km (3 miles) from the airport but an older sibling said it was because of the US base.

My father told me that the US would protect us in the event of an attack but I couldn't picture anything being left to 'protect' in the event that war kicked off. I felt that me and my family would be wiped off the face of the earth because some guys with too much power were waving their dicks around in my little corner at the bottom of the world.

I was more than happy when we said no to nukes because I felt it may give me a chance to grow up and have a family and, at the time, naively thought if the whole world said no to nukes we'd all live happily ever after. Hilarious, I know.

Times change though, now it's America pulling us one way and China pulling the other, both trying to cement that sphere of influence that the worlds great nations crave. We, as an independent nation are f***ed.

John Hill, it's hard to tell if you're trolling. Again.

tartare
14th Nov 2014, 09:10
Oh come on John.
I'm as kiwi as you are - I find our neglect of defence embarrassing.
We just don't pull our weight in terms of GDP expenditure.
The NZSAS are world class; the poor RNZAF are absolute professionals; but really...
A few NH90s and Seasprites as a sop?
Worn out Orions and Hercules that bloody leak water from above the pilots on approach??? (I speak from personal experience).
A bloody 757 and that idiot of a Defence Minister (I can;t remember his name - Max someone) who bought 150 LAVs????
New Zealanders have the luxury and ignorance of distance (tyranny I think the Finns called it, no?).
There is a degree of contempt for the military that you just don't see here in Australia, or in the UK for that matter.

MagnusP
14th Nov 2014, 09:44
I vote we add the phrase "tag team trolls" to the JB buzzword bingo.

Solid Rust Twotter
14th Nov 2014, 09:51
Would that be the special cream sauce, Mr Dreamer?:E


Got to say the Kiwi mil I worked with in East Timor were top blokes. Always good for a laugh and a real hoot on the piss at the Dengue Bar.:ok:


Fook knows how they ended up with JH...

Matari
14th Nov 2014, 12:36
Still trying to figure out where our John Hill gets the idea that the US failed to condemn the French for the Rainbow Warrior bombing. Fiction that fits a narrative, probably.

West Coast
14th Nov 2014, 14:14
I vote we add the phrase "tag team trolls" to the JB buzzword bingo.

Added to psychiatric journals as well as a coping mechanism.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 18:08
Tartare, have I anywhere advocated reducing or neglecting NZ's military capabilities? I fear you have been misled.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 18:13
Not only did the US fail to condemn the French terrorist bombing in downtown Auckland they allowed one of the those implicated (Louis-Pierre Dillais) to live freely in the US.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 18:15
Twotter, if you have a personal problem with me then spit it out man instead of addressing the tag team gallery.

Lonewolf_50
14th Nov 2014, 18:43
John.
The year of this bombing?

BenThere
14th Nov 2014, 18:50
Fact is, though, that Green-motivated interference with lawful commerce or a nation's sovereign imperatives is itself unlawful.

The French, and I admire them for it, determined not to put up with it. They weren't terrorists any more than the various aggressive Green impediments are terrorist.

Greens need to understand that when they undertake their attacks they might face resistance from time to time.

Laws are in place and in force. If you want to change them, go through the process in your own jurisdiction.

Anyone know where I can find a nice baby seal fur ear warmer for my wife's Christmas stocking? Macy's doesn't stock them here.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 18:54
Lonewolf 50, 10 July, 1985. A French military team bombed the ship Rainbow Warrior while she was berthed in downtown Auckland. Although there were many on board at the time all but one managed to escape.

This, minor incident in the world wide scheme of things, opened the eyes of Kiwis to the worth of 'friends and allies', not just the French but also Australia, UK and US.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 19:02
Far canal!

Fact is, though, that Green-motivated interference with lawful commerce or a nation's sovereign imperatives is itself unlawful.


Laws are in place and in force. If you want to change them, go through the process in your own jurisdiction.

Go through the process or just blow the bugger up eh? :ok::ok:

BenThere
14th Nov 2014, 19:14
No, go through the process before you endanger crews and deprive seafarers of their rights and livelihoods with your misguided crusades, or accept the occasional response.

John Hill
14th Nov 2014, 19:32
Try all you like but it is not possible to justify the use of military force against a non-belligerent civilian target while in country of a, so-called, friend and ally.

That might be the way America works but the world expects better of the French.

Dushan
14th Nov 2014, 20:39
Anyone know where I can find a nice baby seal fur ear warmer for my wife's Christmas stocking? Macy's doesn't stock them here.

No baby seals, they are all at Brigitte Bardot's house.

seal fur | Hudson's Bay (http://www.thebay.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/en/SearchDisplay?storeId=10701&catalogId=10652&langId=-24&pageSize=12&beginIndex=0&sType=SimpleSearch&resultCatEntryType=2&showResultsPage=true&pageView=image&searchSource=Q&searchTerm=seal+fur&x=27&y=12)

There is Fox Fur Earmuffs. PM me if you want…

Here is one more

http://www.furhatworld.com/fur-ear-muffs-c-90_88.html?gclid=CjwKEAiA7ZajBRCpur2xi47n1zkSJADqV2WlQFFLep6 rFIr_Gy0OwcTyqEkzG0ylUX0MJarV95PsLhoCg1nw_wcB

prospector
14th Nov 2014, 21:11
Lonewolf 50, 10 July, 1985. A French military team bombed the ship Rainbow Warrior while she was berthed in downtown Auckland. Although there were many on board at the time all but one managed to escape.

If you wish to quote this incident do some research and get your facts straight.

The reason the French team were caught was because they delayed the explosion because there was a party onboard, with many people. Because of this delay they had trouble getting their rubber dinghy out of the water as the tide was way further out than was originally allowed for. Because of this unusual activity at this time of night their actions were noted by casual observers. If the bomb (mine?) had of been detonated at the planned time this would not have happened and the chances were they would have left no incriminating evidence to point the finger at them.

The one person that lost their life in this event was a photographer who disobeyed the Captains order to abandon ship and went below to collect his photographic equipment. As he was aware of the situation he was the author of his own fate.

Try all you like but it is not possible to justify the use of military force against a non-belligerent civilian target while in country of a, so-called, friend and ally.

There are many who would classify Green Peace in its modern form as a belligerent civilian target, The fact that the act was committed in New Zealand was not an act against NZ

Lonewolf_50
14th Nov 2014, 21:25
Thank you John for being specific.

Green Peace has demonstrated by its works that it chooses to act as an extra-national organization, and has more than once chosen to act as and support eco terrorists.

My criticism of the French in this matter is limited to my sincere concern over them acting with due care to keep collateral damage to a minimum or even to nil. Prospector's post suggests to me that they acted with some care in that regard. Your bitch is with the French, not with America on this matter.

That New Zealand chose to harbor an eco-terrorist organization in their port in Auckland is of some concern in a general sense, but not a large one given that there are much bigger fish to fry in this world.

Your perspective is noted and even appreciated. Since this event happened on your home turf, I can see your being upset by the French acting as they did. A reasonable position to take. Using that event as an excuse to be upset with the U.S. strikes me as a load of bollocks.

My guess is that within the US government at the time, the views on this incident were mixed: some pissed at the French, others in support of them. As I don't know, I'll leave it at that.

rh200
14th Nov 2014, 21:30
Try all you like but it is not possible to justify the use of military force against a non-belligerent civilian target while in country of a, so-called, friend and ally.

Are ISIS civillians? Green peace, Sea Shepard etc. are all the same philosophically, they can break the law to what ever extent they feel fit under so called moral authority.

If one wants to operate that way, then whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

As for an Allie, I think we already proved who was an Allie and who was the enemy in regards to the ANZUS alliance and your back dooring of the Yanks.

Lonewolf_50
14th Nov 2014, 21:35
rh:

Losing Oz as an ally would hurt the US.

Losing the Kiwis hasn't, and won't ... but I don't think we've lost the Kiwis as allies.

About ten years ago, there was a an operation going on in Afghanistan wherein we worked with some solid pros from the Kiwi special forces.

As with our other allies, like the Germans, Greeks, Dutch, Italians ... we mostly get along, but on some particular points we have issues with one another.

John Hill
15th Nov 2014, 01:38
Quote of the day...

Are ISIS civillians? Green peace, Sea Shepard etc. are all the same philosophically.


:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Dushan
15th Nov 2014, 01:40
Are you agreeing or disagreeing with this quote?

John Hill
15th Nov 2014, 01:42
Lonewold_50, I was in Afghanistan myself, several times from 1999 through to about 2006, I was also in Iraq in 2003. But I was not in uniform so maybe that does not count.

Matari
15th Nov 2014, 04:16
No John, the US did condemn France for the Rainbow Warrior bombing. But I won't give you a link, you can Google it yourself, along with "who started the Korean War."

Now, once you find the articles showing that yes indeed the US condemned Paris (hint,...it's in the keywords), you can then moan that the US took too long to condemn France.

But see how this works, John? If we had rushed to judgment and condemned France before facts were in, then France would get to complain that we were....you guessed it....rushing to judgment.

See, it is tough being relevant in the world. Someone always has something to bitch about, and it is damned difficult to please everyone. Intervene, don't intervene, too early, too late, too little, not enough...that's the way it goes when you're the big dog.

But New Zealand, on the other hand, lovely place and all, but who really cares?

obgraham
15th Nov 2014, 07:00
At John's suggestion, a bit of googleying produced a 25 page paper by a Harvard PhD on why NZ decided to make a stink out of the issue of the nuke policy versus the USA. Strangely, at the onset of the issue, polls showed more NZ'ers wanted the US ships to stay, than wanted the no-nuke policy.

And then, after pages and pages of debating who said what to who first, her conclusion was that the question boiled down to "we can't have the damn Yanks telling us what to do".

Now why it took a well paid Harvard PhD to realize this when any self respecting Pruner knows that when it's the big dog versus the little dog, it will always finish up this same way.

John Hill
15th Nov 2014, 07:11
Even a phudd can be expected to get the right idea eventually!:p

BTW, why did the Yanks play the game with such enthusiasm?

I guess there is only one thing more likely to stir the emotions than a little dog being told what to do by a big dog and that is when the little dog stands his ground.

West Coast
15th Nov 2014, 16:16
What game john?

Telling a token bit player that fundamentally altering the ability to operate has ramifications is reality, not some enthusiastic brinksmanship. As I've said, the US was better off minus the parasitic drag of NZ. NZ brought nothing of substance to the table wrt military capabilities.

radeng
15th Nov 2014, 17:58
20th May 1982. New Zealand sent HMNZS Canterbury to Hong Kong to release the frigate there for service in the South Atlantic. In 1939, what was then the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy had HMS Achilles involved in the Battle of the River Plate.

The Kiwis have been pretty staunch supporters of the UK in the past, but the treatment of NZ in favour of the EC, especially in the way it has developed, makes one wonder how long that will last.

chuks
16th Nov 2014, 06:54
Hi, John. I've just been to Tibet, or as you might like to name it, The Autonomous Tibetan Region of the People's Republic of China (who-did-not-send-regular-troops-to-fight-in-the-Korean-War-no-not-at-all-those-were-all-volunteers). Details to follow ....

Admit it, John, you like wearing your little crown of thorns, don't you, stray tufts of wool caught on its barbs, waving in the breeze? Brave little New Zealand, being kicked from pillar to post by the Great Satan ....

What's the genesis of your troubles with us? Did some loutish Yankee pee in your toy train set's transformer?

West Coast
16th Nov 2014, 06:57
Wouldn't that arc back up and....

chuks
16th Nov 2014, 08:51
Not with a GFCI it wouldn't, no, and I am sure that our man in Pyongyang was the first one on his block to install one of those. (Just because he doesn't know who started the Korean War doesn't mean that he's totally in the dark; give the guy a break!)

Oddly enough, the "Kim Jong Un haircut" seems to be quite popular with the Chinese; I guess Li'l Kim just copied it from them, although it might have gone the other way. (Maybe John knows the answer to this question, if he's in the mood to tell us.) I saw no baggy pants though: that must be an original fashion notion of the Tiny Tyrant's.

Dushan
16th Nov 2014, 15:19
Chuks, in you absence we held our own, but I have to tell you that the recent anger from the two-island nation was directed towards the French. Looks like it is going back to the 80s when something rally bad happened to a photographer in Aukland harbor.

Could be more recent though. Maybe the French stole some of John Hill's sheep. They do like their lamb, the French.

chuks
16th Nov 2014, 18:14
You mean there really isn't such a thing as the "tag team trolls," that we all operate independently? I kind of liked the idea of a hive mind, all of us buzzing in synchrony, but now I guess I will have to drop that vision.

The part I now want to know about is, "So how is this nuclear-free thing New Zealand is running supposed to work when a big bucket of instant sunshine gets dropped in from someplace such as North Korea?

Is this the point of having this good-will ambassador working the Mongolian Bar, to keep Li'l Kim sweet? "If I laugh at your jokes, except for that haircut, will you promise not to nuke us?" Is it something like that?

We solved that last great mystery, "Who started the Korean War?" so that I think we are ready to move right along, to trying to find out the justification for the existence of this, this, aaah .... Him.

What's the point? Is it like the vermiform appendix?

John Hill
16th Nov 2014, 23:33
I was talking to a fellow from Nigeria, Lagos actually, he was there about the time Princess Di got killed. It was a very interesting discussion..quite amusing too!

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/1d/1dbc58495eef68075bcd748204b3ed751db6d0f804d2f271e58156be065e 226f.jpg

West Coast
16th Nov 2014, 23:48
It got your attention all the same. You should be careful John, don't want to alienate those who give you what you desire, attention.

brickhistory
17th Nov 2014, 01:35
Still wonder if our resident historian can figure out why France felt it could get away with such an operation?

Because they did.

obgraham
17th Nov 2014, 03:05
John's still upset, 30 years later, that the Frogs just snuck into Auckland and took care of business as they saw fit.

Well here's a thought: how about establishing some sort of national defense policy, so that furriners wont wander in and wreak havoc whenever they please?

Not to worry, though, US is rapidly following NZ's example.

John Hill
17th Nov 2014, 03:11
I am more upset at the actions of the so-called friends and allies who helped the perps to escape but on the other hand I am grateful for the eye-opener their actions were for the majority of Kiwis.

con-pilot
17th Nov 2014, 03:14
I am grateful for the eye-opener their actions were for the majority of Kiwis.

Yup, more disarmament of your military making it easier for France or anyone else to come and do the same thing, or worse.

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 03:24
Perhaps you shouldn't let Eco terrorists dock in your country. I know they weren't nuke powered and all, but a PITA when you have to scrape the boat off the bottom of the harbor.

John Hill
17th Nov 2014, 03:32
I think you lads should go and polish your guns or something as surely you need to the always on the alert for bad folks breaking down your front door?

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 03:36
Multi tasking John. Can put a beatdown on you liberals and watch the frontdoor all at the same time.

mikedreamer787
17th Nov 2014, 03:41
Australia - Invade New Zealand Tv Ad - YouTube

rh200
17th Nov 2014, 04:21
I am more upset at the actions of the so-called friends and allies

I must be getting senile, I thought we had worked out that the frog incident happened after the divorce? Hence no problem. If that was the case you cry foul:ugh:

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 06:58
I also found John's characterization odd.

It must drive him batty that the french blew up the ship and then were threatened by economic sanctions by the same French government if they didn't release the French agents back to the French. The US didn't have the balls the French had to throw their weight around. Worked as the weak knee NZ govt capitulated and handed them back. So John, when you gloat about standing up to the big dogs recall how the French gave you the the two fingered salute and make your govt do exactly as they were instructed.

John Hill
17th Nov 2014, 07:13
Yawn, do a bit more research then come back here..:rolleyes:

chuks
17th Nov 2014, 08:01
John, you seem to be rather averse to research; that only denies your various idees fixes. (That's French, sort of, a reference to you usually having your head firmly stuck up a certain dark passage.)

Let's just bat the old shuttlecock back and forth for a while longer, using opinion rather than fact, until you spit the dummy and go flouncing off yet again, in a state of high dudgeon, "floundering about," as you like to have it. That's what I like to see; it's the reason for the popcorn and all. Otherwise, why wade through the bad grammar and the ill temper, all this contumely towards the USA?

Please, John, now that you are in such a chatty mood, tell us how this fatwa against anything nuclear (or "nucular" for my Southern brothers) is meant to work when your little pal with the funny haircut goes into a bate, deciding to "drop the Big One now." You know, to start small by nuking the Kiwis, to fire off a spotting round, so to speak, on his way to World Domination.

What's the Kiwi Plan A if Kim Jong Un ignores your half-baked attempt to keep out anything nuclear, so that he does something extremely naughty? You know, I don't think you guys have really thought this one through! Just what are you going to retaliate with: posts here on Jet Blast? You can't even handle your so-called trolls, so how are you going to cope with having to pull on a set of lead BVDs, any time you need to leave the bomb shelter?

radeng
17th Nov 2014, 09:25
Being the wussy tree hugging sandal wearing liberal that I am, if I had been running the NZ government at the time, a prison van carrying the Frenchies would have had an unfortunate accident and caught fire, and it would not have been possible to get them out.

'Oh dear, how sad, what an unfortunate accident, we're so sorry'.

tartare
17th Nov 2014, 10:00
Fascinating operation.
Satanique - authorised by Hernu and Mitterand himself, an escape by the Ouvea, scuttled and the rest of the crew onto the Rubis, to vanish.
A balls up - but very ambitious...

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 16:05
John

What area of the sinking should I research more?

Did the French bomb the ship? YES

Did the French threaten economic sanctions that the NZ govt. considered potentially damaging to its economy if the agents weren't handed back to
France? YES

Did the French release the agents before the agreed upon time of
Imprisonment? A big fat YES

When you stood up to the big dog US, we honored the nuke restriction. However see what another big dog is capable of, twice humbling a small nation who choose to alienate itself.

John Hill
17th Nov 2014, 17:48
West Coast, the research you should have done was to review what I have said on this topic.

I said that countries like NZ did not need allies, friends are OK, but not allies. UK,France, US and Australia are not allies of NZ. I said the Rainbow Warrior incident demonstrated this to the people of NZ.

You have been arguing my case for me. Thank you.

con-pilot
17th Nov 2014, 18:49
Right then, I think I have it sorted.

Next time, we'll nuke France.*

Maybe that will make John happy.




* Even if France is not the guilty party next time, we'll just nuke them anyway, just for principle. :p

John Hill
17th Nov 2014, 19:21
Logically, the US is the country most likely to suffer a nuclear attack.

BenThere
17th Nov 2014, 19:24
That's a good basis for a bet. What country will suffer the next nuclear detonation?

I think the best bets are Iran, India and Pakistan - in that order.

con-pilot
17th Nov 2014, 19:43
India and Pakistan

I'll take India and Pakistan for 500 Alex. :p


Okay, seriously, India and Pakistan have come close a couple of times already. As touchy as that area is, it wouldn’t take much.

Course one of them could miss and hit New Zealand.*





* Just trying to stay on topic there.

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 20:09
Id throw NK into the mix. Sorry John, I know that's near and dear to you.

West Coast
17th Nov 2014, 20:14
Ok John. To be clear, France pissed all over your government. Twice. Where's the standing up to the big dog attitude? More like your tail was between your legs. NZ has come scampering back to the fold, of late, so who knows, maybe allies again soon.

Flash2001
17th Nov 2014, 20:53
I need to learn a bit about Nuclear Free Zones. Toronto is one such, deriving most of its electrical energy from 20 large nuclear reactors located nearby. There are a wide variety of universities and industrial plans located in the vicinity. Can the universities not teach the physics that might lead to advanced work in the nuclear field? Seeing as how there is a great deal of commonality between nuclear science and engineering and other disciplines I see some difficulty in separating these out. Can the industrial plants not make things like fasteners that might make their way into a bomb or a reactor? Can the investment dealers not sell shares in mining and prospecting ventures that might extract or discover uranium? Where do we stop?

After an excellent landing etc.

Dushan
17th Nov 2014, 21:01
I need to learn a bit about Nuclear Free Zones. Toronto is one such, deriving most of its electrical energy from 20 large nuclear reactors located nearby. There are a wide variety of universities and industrial plans located in the vicinity. Can the universities not teach the physics that might lead to advanced work in the nuclear field? Seeing as how there is a great deal of commonality between nuclear science and engineering and other disciplines I see some difficulty in separating these out. Can the industrial plants not make things like fasteners that might make their way into a bomb or a reactor? Can the investment dealers not sell shares in mining and prospecting ventures that might extract or discover uranium? Where do we stop?

After an excellent landing etc.

Flash, that was probably one of David Miller's hair brained schemes with Adam Vaughan, and the like, supporting it. Means nothing. Nothing to see here. Move on.

John Hill
18th Nov 2014, 04:02
Ok John. To be clear, France pissed all over your government. Twice.

I know you feel much better after posting that but there are a few details you seem to be overlooking. The Rainbow Warrior sinking, and NZ's exposing of it, led to the resignation the the French minister of Defence, an apology to NZ and the payment of compensation. IIRC the head of the DGSE lost his job and compensation was also paid to Green Peace and/or the family of the Fernando Pereira.

Where's the standing up to the big dog attitude? More like your tail was between your legs. Ha ha, thats why they found themselves standing on the mat in the headmaster's study?


NZ has come scampering back to the fold, of late, so who knows, maybe allies again soon.
Again, you do tend to leave out the pertinent bits of your story! US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Wellington to sign documents relating to the “normalisation” of US-NZ relations, not the other way around!

I am sorry if keeping abreast of these matters is such a trial for you, maybe you should just make something up and pretend it is the truth.


I feel I have wasted more than enough of my short life humouring your pathetic trolling and, if you dont mind, I will now put you in the same box as your tag team trolling mates. Bye bye.

John Hill
18th Nov 2014, 04:17
Id throw NK into the mix. Sorry John, I know that's near and dear to you.

Yes, definitely going to pop you back in your box too.

West Coast
18th Nov 2014, 05:24
I guess I'd try to do damage control as well if I was in your position.

The ship was sunk, the mission was accomplished. The French achieved their goal. A standard maxim in military service is mission accomplishment then troop welfare. They did indeed do that. After the mission was complete, the French came back for their agents, and got them. Told the NZ gov to turn over the people who just bombed the ship, to which NZ said where and what time?

After further evaluation, NZ was shamed three times, the bombing, forced to turn over the agents and then the agents returned to France long before the agreed upon date. Both agents were promoted and were quite successful in their careers.

In return, you got....a few resignations and some remuneration.

Those resignations potentially would have come as the mission wasn't completed as planned. I don't believe Greenpeace got anything. Not sure, if you can prove otherwise, do so.

If you can save face from that, so be it.

I wonder if the French nuke sub violated NZ territorial waters as well?

chuks
18th Nov 2014, 07:56
There was a small town in the American Deep South that had a viaduct over the main rail line. One of the town's denizens knew the timetable and would pose on the viaduct waving the Streamline Special through on its way to Memphis. He thought he was in control of that sort of thing.

Here we have someone telling about how he's going to pop someone else back in his box. I want to see that happen.

Dushan
18th Nov 2014, 13:54
If he "popped" everyone in the box, as he claims, he'd get no attention and his purpose would be voided.

Big talk, small man. Remind you of someone? Wonder what his haircut looks like?

MagnusP
18th Nov 2014, 14:37
Edinburgh castle has a cannon which fires daily at 1pm. Calton Hill at the east end of town has a large white ball on a tower which drops at 1pm to signal the time to ships on the Forth estuary. I've been told of an old chap who'd stand on the North Bridge in between the two and would stand with his pocket watch, hear the gun go off, watch the ball drop and mutter "Damn fine shooting". :p

obgraham
18th Nov 2014, 17:05
At least John is consistent. Makes some ridiculous claim, repeats it hoping that will make it so, refuses to answer questions when challenged, then picks up his wicket and heads home.

But is never quite able to stick to his "ignore" plan.

nonsense
7th Dec 2014, 09:05
"France has no friends, only interests." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle#Most_famous) - Charles de Gaulle.

"America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger#1980s) - Henry Kissinger.

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." (http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1848/mar/01/treaty-of-adrianople-charges-against) - Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston, 1848.

rh200
7th Dec 2014, 11:16
Nothing like a little does of world reality:p

mikedreamer787
8th Dec 2014, 04:38
Even if France is not the guilty party next time, we'll just nuke them anyway, just for principle. :p

+1 :ok:

A French free EU - would that make it better?

Hmm....

Nah.

It would still have the bloody Belgians.

Blacksheep
8th Dec 2014, 14:05
New Zealand doesn't need nuclear weapons.

They have the Haka. :ok:

Ancient Observer
8th Dec 2014, 14:25
I am spending most of Feb 2015 on holiday in NZ.

If it is going to be nuked, would you please fix it to happen after March 2nd.

And if you are feeling really good, after the cricket, but while ALL the All Blacks are in NZ.

The only way to stop them winning the Rugby in 2015.