[tallhappy]

He didn't need to say that - it's there in the treaty.

It was total nonsense meant only to appease the communist regime in China whom he was toadying up to at the time.

What war is there going to be where US forces are not attacked? It's not a war if they aren't attacked.

[naturalman1975]

OK, hypothetically, a war in which the United States launched a pre-emptive attack on China would not invoke ANZUS.

A war in which vessels of the United States were attacked in the Indian Ocean, would also not invoke ANZUS.

A war in which US troops ashore in China were attacked would not invoke ANZUS.

There are plenty of hypothetical circumstances in which the ANZUS treaty is not relevant.

In any of the hypotheticals above, Australia might well go to war in support of the United States - but it wouldn't be under the ANZUS treaty, just as the recent war in Iraq, was not under the ANZUS treaty.

The journalist was trying to portray it as a blank cheque. It isn't.