Mate, I don't want to get you barking and howling, but you're out of line talking to my Trans-Tasman brothers like that. I've lived in the US for 25 years and the arrogance of the reply i've quoted is still pretty galling -- but far from unusual.
For starters, the Kiwis and Australia have every reason to be upset about nukes. The bloody French were letting them off at muroroa, in the atmosphere and underwater until just a couple of years ago, and poisoning half the pacific. Australian milk still has some of the highest strontium 90 levels outside the chernobyl fall-out shadow. Tempers got so frayed about it that someone burned down the french consulate in Perth.
The NZer's had every right to say no to nukes. Just as they've got every right to tax themselves to oblivion, lacerate themselves with white guilt, and win the America's cup. It's their country after all. The Reagan administration over-reacted, which in turn sparked an even greater anger in New Zealand. Today, the legacy of that Reagan era arrogance manifests itself in Helen Clark's antipathy. It's wrong, but that's the history behind it -- and it could have been avoided if the US had demonstrated a bit of diplomatic savvy.
As for the presumption that the US has been a four-square ANZUS partner, I think not. Once again the problem is arrogance.
Look what the U.S. did to Australian and NZ lamb exports. Stopped 'em cold. All this talk about free trade from Washington, and the moment a few sheep shaggers in montana or wherever buy the ear of a congressman, Kiwi lamb exports get taxed off the US market and the NZ economy gets sacked.
OK, so you probably think they deserve it for banning your nuke warships. So what about Australia? It always welcomed any ship the US sent, and what did Washington do: It banned Australian lamb, too. Thanks very much, our great and powerful friend!
Now don't get too upset, on the grand scale of humanity, America still comes up with a pretty decent batting average. But at a time like this, when people of goodwill all over the world want to support the US, that sort of arrogance doesn't make it any easier. High-tax statists like Hulun Cluck remember the petty slights, the same way you would if a visitor to your home and dropped his cigar in your orchid pot.
It loses more friends than it gains. Anyway, the Kiwis have enough on their plate. The Prime Minister is an economic illiterate and the country's moral compass is set by social workers. If they couldn't go to Australia, they'd have nothing to look forward to.
Finally, here's a song to serenade the next Kiwi you meet. It's sung to the tune of Amore and it goes like this:
When you see
Two black feet
On the street
In Bondi,
It's a Maori!
Kiwis always enjoy fine music.
I will also add that it makes it a little hard to have offered all support we possibly can and be spat at by the likes of damian5. Thankfully his support seems to be dwindeling down to just himself.
It does make me angry when they also tell us that we are the bad guys because a small newspaper prints out an inaccurate story. Even when the facts become clear, "people" like damian5 still want to hate.
As said in the previous forum, my brother was supposed to be in a meeting in the tower except for a missed connecting flight, I have friends who have flown to New York to be beside the bed of a very close relative with 60% burns from being a survivor - her husband was identified by the watch on an unattached arm found in the rubble.
Some of the beef about ANZUS seems to be that we would not allow nuclear ships into our ports. This did indeed have the effect of stopping all US ships to our ports but surprisingly, the US did make a concession to Japan and sent a stated non-nuclear ship to their port when one of theirs had the same policy. We were never an enemy in war, yet the USA preferred enemies to friends.
In the previous forum I also related the instance when we were under terrorist attack and both Britian and the USA put pressure on Australia to release the terrorists as the USA much preferred to deal with France where the terrorists came from, than with it's friends (a full member of ANZUS at the time) New Zealand.
I am wondering why, after doing so much and offering so much, when we are spat at, threatened with nuclear attack and invasion and turned away from, we are even considering the US amongst friendly nations. Except that I can clearly see now that the rhetoric from those such as damian5 are as much as an embarrasement to Americans as Helen Clark (and most of the members of the NZ Parliament) are to most New Zealanders.
1. Agree entirely with your take on Helen Cluck. Makes you long for Bolger, doesn't it? Porbably almost any other PM, come to that.
2. Laughed out loud at your line about Kiwis not having anything to look forward to if they couldn't go to Oz.
3. I've been fuming about the row over lamb exports for some time now. It's not only wrong, it's obtuse of us.
4. The Reagan Administration may have been a little high handed in 1986. But you can hardly say Lange handled the affair with silk gloves. I know more than a few Kiwis who felt he was playing for the crowd more than anything else. Perhaps it kept the Helen Clarks off his back while Douglas dismantled the welfare state.
5. I well understand antipodean sensitivities to nukes given Mururoa et al. But they seem rather misdirected when pointed at the U.S. rather than France. I think a deal could have been worked out if Lange's objection was just to warheads. But he didn't want nuclear powered ships, either, and that's pretty much most of our Navy, save some auxilliary ships.
France - now *there* is a country that's been high handed in the South Pacific.
Good to hear from you.