AUKUS makes no sense in that China is our biggest trading partner.
A few years back the partnership was ANZUS, but the Kiwi's decided they was too far into the pacific to be of any military value to anyone, so said they were out, and put that money elsewhere.
As one of the 11 disciples (my partner is another) thank you for the post Mark. I use the wisdom learned at your feet, and those of the links you point to, to try to influence my fellow Kiwis to a Wauckian insight of world affairs. It is not an easy task.
For example , on a forum which Don Brash is a principal of along with two others, he and Helen Clarke have twice presented a joint piece suggesting a very circumspect approach to the Aukus prospect and maintaining a respectful relationship with our major trading partner, China, and twice been roundly condemned for it. We have a FTA with China; US will not negotiate one with us.
Interestingly , they are from opposite political persuasions, but in complete agreement on this matter. NZ owes Helen a debt of gratitude for declining Bush's invitation to join the coalition of the willing in Iraq when she was PM.
Of major concern to me is the aggressive attitude the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the current govt, Winston Peters, has. I think it likely the sage advice re Aukus will not find a listening ear there. Nor do I think the general populace, which seems definitely more pro USrael and Ukraine than otherwise, will hear the message. Like yourself, I despair for the direction of my country's leadership
Swag - the benefit Australia and New Zealand gets is domestic spying through 5 eyes.
Plus Davos politicians seem to be anti China. My guess more woke politics. Idea of China can be broken apart or government changed, if just a little pressure applied.
As one of your 11 Aussie subscribers thank you :-) I've always been skeptical about AUKUS. Australia is a very large resource-rich continent (about 3/4 the size of the US) with a huge border and a very small population (25 million). Our best strategy is to be a friend and partner to our South East Asian and Pacific neighbours. Aligning with the US and UK militarily is an expensive and losing strategy. I've always said that the Chinese don't need to invade us when they can buy us - which is what they've been doing for a very long time. They own mining companies, farmland, key companies, real estate and even the 99 year lease on the highly strategic port of Darwin. Why would they bother invading?
Before AUKUS it was called Five Eyes, the mutual domestic spying agreement to get around things like our Constitution.
Five Eyes was a Cold War psy-ops driven by the Brits, since they could no longer be what they were prior to WWII, along the lines of what they put in place by way of Canada in DC in 1940 - plant stories in the media, work directly on and blackmail US politicians.
Who is it that really drives the anti China chatter? Recall that it was Britain that got directly involved in domestic Chinese culture and politics in the 1840s. Opium Wars and religious wars that led to 25-40 million dead Chinese. When the anniversary of Magna Carta came up some years ago, and the Brits were using their embassies to promote it, the Chinese said - we remember what you did, and what you have continued to do…so keep it in the Embassy.
The Chinese have continued to say that the Americans have been pushed by and taken up for the Brits, describing them as our bosses.
See this exchange a few years ago between Cheney, a Brit and a Chinese diplomat (I apologize for not having his name). It is very straightforward on both sides.
So why will AUKUS do nothing more than attempt to move public opinion? Because it no longer works as it once did. Globalism is dead as a doornail. No going back.
The new paradigm is what we call Three Spheres: West, East and Digital. Think civilizations not politics. The East, driven by China, and the Digital spheres are in the rise. The West is not. Ubiquitous adoption of Digital tech is changing the entire world and it won’t follow the West without morality.
So what comes next in the Digital Paradigm? Everyone wants answers to this question.
Another Aussie, huzzah!
An interesting aspect of AUKUS deal was the breaking of the French contract for which Australia was required to pay massive compensation.
One wonders what was the US motivation.
I am also one of your 11 subscribers.
AUKUS makes no sense in that China is our biggest trading partner.
A few years back the partnership was ANZUS, but the Kiwi's decided they was too far into the pacific to be of any military value to anyone, so said they were out, and put that money elsewhere.
Mark…I’m here…downunder.
A veteran of the forever wars.
In a wilderness of sentient thought & any form of reasonable discourse.
Keep doing what you are doing.
👌🍀
Thanks, will do!
As one of the 11 disciples (my partner is another) thank you for the post Mark. I use the wisdom learned at your feet, and those of the links you point to, to try to influence my fellow Kiwis to a Wauckian insight of world affairs. It is not an easy task.
For example , on a forum which Don Brash is a principal of along with two others, he and Helen Clarke have twice presented a joint piece suggesting a very circumspect approach to the Aukus prospect and maintaining a respectful relationship with our major trading partner, China, and twice been roundly condemned for it. We have a FTA with China; US will not negotiate one with us.
Interestingly , they are from opposite political persuasions, but in complete agreement on this matter. NZ owes Helen a debt of gratitude for declining Bush's invitation to join the coalition of the willing in Iraq when she was PM.
Of major concern to me is the aggressive attitude the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the current govt, Winston Peters, has. I think it likely the sage advice re Aukus will not find a listening ear there. Nor do I think the general populace, which seems definitely more pro USrael and Ukraine than otherwise, will hear the message. Like yourself, I despair for the direction of my country's leadership
It's hard to figure how people in countries that align with the Anglo-Zionists can fail to see the trouble they let themselves in for.
MSM
Swag - the benefit Australia and New Zealand gets is domestic spying through 5 eyes.
Plus Davos politicians seem to be anti China. My guess more woke politics. Idea of China can be broken apart or government changed, if just a little pressure applied.
Didn't Ardern's regime pull out of Five Eyes so as not to upset the Chinese a short time ago? How times have changed
As one of your 11 Aussie subscribers thank you :-) I've always been skeptical about AUKUS. Australia is a very large resource-rich continent (about 3/4 the size of the US) with a huge border and a very small population (25 million). Our best strategy is to be a friend and partner to our South East Asian and Pacific neighbours. Aligning with the US and UK militarily is an expensive and losing strategy. I've always said that the Chinese don't need to invade us when they can buy us - which is what they've been doing for a very long time. They own mining companies, farmland, key companies, real estate and even the 99 year lease on the highly strategic port of Darwin. Why would they bother invading?
Thanks for weighing in. White makes a reasoned and persuasive case.
Here is the video link: https://youtu.be/Fl7OmvY-j6I?si=69zWoeSzyojokfd7
Before AUKUS it was called Five Eyes, the mutual domestic spying agreement to get around things like our Constitution.
Five Eyes was a Cold War psy-ops driven by the Brits, since they could no longer be what they were prior to WWII, along the lines of what they put in place by way of Canada in DC in 1940 - plant stories in the media, work directly on and blackmail US politicians.
Who is it that really drives the anti China chatter? Recall that it was Britain that got directly involved in domestic Chinese culture and politics in the 1840s. Opium Wars and religious wars that led to 25-40 million dead Chinese. When the anniversary of Magna Carta came up some years ago, and the Brits were using their embassies to promote it, the Chinese said - we remember what you did, and what you have continued to do…so keep it in the Embassy.
The Chinese have continued to say that the Americans have been pushed by and taken up for the Brits, describing them as our bosses.
See this exchange a few years ago between Cheney, a Brit and a Chinese diplomat (I apologize for not having his name). It is very straightforward on both sides.
So why will AUKUS do nothing more than attempt to move public opinion? Because it no longer works as it once did. Globalism is dead as a doornail. No going back.
The new paradigm is what we call Three Spheres: West, East and Digital. Think civilizations not politics. The East, driven by China, and the Digital spheres are in the rise. The West is not. Ubiquitous adoption of Digital tech is changing the entire world and it won’t follow the West without morality.
So what comes next in the Digital Paradigm? Everyone wants answers to this question.
Did you mean to attach a link to the discussion you referred to?
https://youtu.be/Fl7OmvY-j6I?si=69zWoeSzyojokfd7