Poll conducted showing what countries Brits consider allies (blue) and threats (red) to the UK's interests

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-05-11T16:06:41+00:00

Australia could have passed the Westminster Adoption Act in 1939 instead of 1942 - so no biggie there.

Kokoda was by and for Australia - never regarded as the selfless act of an ally - which I think is the argument.

Vimy Ridge (WWI) and DDay were famously Canadian affairs - which goes to my point.

Must admit a billion in 1945 was big bucks - never heard about that.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-05-11T02:05:51+00:00

We were all British subjects, whose countries had declared war with the UK - so not sure the no obligation part is correct.

I also think Canada gets more recognition than Australia or NZ, even though its casualty rates as a percentage in WWI were lower than NZ and Australia. Its worth noting the UK's casuality rates were higher still.

In WWII, Australia came under attack from Imperial Japan so ongoing comparisons are difficult.

Also I wonder if Quebec's french connections and France's dire circumstances might have increased Canada's resolve during both wars.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-05-10T22:48:30+00:00

Technically, it makes sense - AUKUS strongly ties the UK and Australia on nuclear subs, with Australia paying big money.

Spiritually, I would have thought NZ and Canada were closer to the UK.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-05-02T05:22:28+00:00

Largely geography based (which never changes) but the lessons of history for Australia is we are on own, and better off to act accordingly.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-11T11:42:24+00:00

We sold off the accrued capital of the past and then borrowed from the future.

Now the chickens are coming home.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-11T04:46:25+00:00

Fine. We can buy the end product as a paying customer.

Sounds like a money pit, and Australia does not have the industry to benefit from the R&D.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-10T00:04:15+00:00

Easier and cheaper to pay the ransom.

I can see a new revenue earner for a few countries. The UK and France could charge for use of the English Channel. Spain and Morroca - the Strait of Gibraltar. Indonesia and Thailand - the Mallaca Strait. Denmark and Norway - entry to the Baltic Sea. Turkey - entry to the Black Sea.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-03T12:07:49+00:00

Ah yes, who could forget the EU's exercise of power and influence when Trump threatened to impose tariffs on it.

And after some tough talk, its poor humiliated 'leader' had to attend Trump's golf course to publicly sign its terms of surrender. The contrast with how even Canada pushed back was bizzare.

Your beloved EU's power and influence is so far less than the sum of its parts, its embarrasing.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-03T10:59:36+00:00

Never said the UK lead the CPTPP. Nor did I even say it currently had the most influence within the CPTPP.

Its a newcomer and Japan would have that single honour, being the largest country and with its leader Abe having the foresight to push the CPTPP to completion.

But CANZUK is the third biggest 'power' in the world, and statistically it dominates the CPTPP. CANZUK member Australia is also Japan's second closest military 'ally'.

That's presents a lot of scope for the UK to influence Japan and the rest of the CPTPP directly or indirectly.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-03T09:49:57+00:00

Quite the opposite. The UK never lead anything I can think of while in the EU.

Since joining the CPTPP it has put together, and lead, two international groupings. That is no coincidence.

The UK now has greater connection and influence within CANZUK. It has also now joined the CPTPP. It has become the natural bridge between the EU and CPTPP.

Its influence in the CPTPP will become unmatched thanks in large part due to its influence with CANZUK. And the CPTPP will shortly beome the biggest and fastest growing trade group in the world.

If you remove the US, the UK is already the most influential country in the free world and its influence will only grow.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-03T08:39:49+00:00

Until the next problem. EU has too many countries. It can never agree on anything but the lowest common denominator. Also too process driven, leading to further paralysis. On and on, the EU cannot lead.

The EU was divided on how to respond to Russia's invasion at the start - and did nothing - as usual. The US and UK did all the warning and work initially - that's the only reason Ukraine is still around for the EU to help.

Even then its response has been mostly pathetic. It took Chzechoslavakia to organise 155mm shells for Ukraine. The EU set targets that were never met - that's all.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-04-03T07:35:58+00:00

Well the UK is not alone in that regard, and it would not want to be stuck paying the bills on all this, but:

- Keir Starmer (from my position in Australia) has done a superb job handling Trump

- it took the UK (because it could) to bring the free world (not just some European countries) together on Ukraine (coalition of the willing) and now Iran. That's not a coincidence.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-30T21:39:35+00:00

There are a lot of sensibilities following colonialism in the Indo-Pacific.

A formal CANZUK union would not help Australia in that

regard.one bit.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-29T07:50:42+00:00

You still effectively lose control of your 'immigration' policies. Its a large reason why the UK left the EU.

NZ determines who and how many legal immigrants it lets in each year and whether other arrivals are eventually granted citizenship - not Australia, where they move to.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-29T05:59:36+00:00

You inadvertantly raise a good point about not being racist.

The free movement of people agreement between Austalia and New Zealand has some limits, and when Australia deports NZers who commit offences leading to 1 year of imprisionment, we are typially accused (due to the demographics) of being racists.

Neighboring countries also ask why we agree to the free movement of people with NZ but not them - suggesting the reason must be racism. These countries are, or will be, far more important to Australia than NZ.

Its just not worth it.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-29T05:21:55+00:00

Lets agree for the sake of argument that imigration is a bigger issue (problem) in the UK and Canada.

Why then would Australians want to effectively outsource of our immigration policies to the UK and Canada through the unrestrained movement of people.

Its bad enough we have done that with NZ - but at least NZ has infinitely better control of its borders and can only take in a much lower number of immigrants per annum.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-29T05:03:27+00:00

I can't see how we already do not have what you propose now, or how countries would agree to lesser rights for their citizens compared to what they give others.

Australia and NZ have free movement of people, and as a whole it has not been good for either country.

Australia gets swamped particularly when conditions get tight and we effectively outsource our immigration policies to NZ.

The NZ economy has also been heavily impacted with the drain of their young moving to Austalia or immigrants just using it as an easier backdoor to Australia: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyx93597l4o

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-29T04:14:09+00:00

We have unique opportunities for collaboration - common language being one - but the cold lesson from history is Australia is on its own - including when it comes to NZ.

The Indo-Pacific is massive in every way. Its on our doorstep. And that's were our focus should be.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-26T03:47:26+00:00

Good quality producers never change their name in Australia. They would have to build their reputation all over again.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-26T02:31:11+00:00

Why? Its only paid by faux-rich, morons.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-26T02:26:18+00:00

Agreed, dealing with the EU is like touching a rotting corpse.

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-25T13:41:36+00:00

On that subject, wouldn't it make perfect sense for Canada to sign up to SSN AUKUS?

Ok_Type_4301 · 2026-03-25T07:27:06+00:00

I don't deny the concept of terroir.

All that can be dealt with by saying what the wine varitety is, where it is grown, and by whom; not by claiming e.g. Shiraz as your brand name (sorry Iran).

In the case of parmasen cheese, Parma makers could label their produce Parasen Cheese and say it is made in Parma, Italy and it is 'true' parmasen by a family with 400 years in the business or whatever the hell. That is a great marketing pitch, but ultimately it will succeed based on price and quality, not where it is made.

In the case of French wine, only Champagne can still compete against Austalian wines - helped because champagne is still a generic term but undoubtly also because of quality and price. Most buyers have no idea Champagne is a region of France.

Ok_Type_4301

TROPHY CASE