Washington Post: HOLMES: U.S. backtracks on missile shield

Oakman

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

would not have seen any kind of support from Britain

But I wasn't asking about support. I was asking about defense of the US homeland to match the defense of the UK that our bases provide. It's not a matter of whether your heart is in the right place, but whether you have enough men and material to help protect us, if we are attacked.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Lost User

Josh Gray wrote:

I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive.

Errr... because you think we should not act like we're the world police? Neither do I. I want us to stop. Or because you think it's OK that we have military presence in 130+ countries?

Josh Gray wrote:

In the real world some presence in other countries is required for your own defense. The example of Pine Gap that I gave earlier is an example of this. Quote Selected Text

I could more easily handle joint intelligence & command/control installations like Pine Gap if there weren't so many other bad examples.

Oakman

Chris Austin wrote:

Wasn't the reasoning basically that they needed the income from the base to support a portion of the local economy

I remember something of that - and every closure of every base even within this country is bitterly fought by the congressional delegation of the State that is losing a cash cow. My guess is that if the U.S. pulled all of its forces out of NATO (an organization than no longer has a purpose) a number of countries in the EU would be effected very negatively. Germany would be in danger of doing an Iceland.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Oakman

Josh Gray wrote:

SAS

Those guys are scary. Like Delta Force only with backup. I wonder how many of them have gone into private security work?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Lost User

Oakman wrote:

I wonder how many of them have gone into private security work?

No idea. They are pretty clandestine even within Oz. I've read a few times that they were among the first troops into Iraq months before war was declared.

Lost User

Personally, I wouldn't want to go cap-in-hand to any charity. It is demeaning. I am better than that. My family would deserve better than that. And if it means government taking a small amount of money out of my salary each week/month for the benefit of all citizens then I am quite happy for that to happen. Everybody without exception benefits. And these benefits I talk about are not supplied by "means testing" and the begging bowl never needs to see the light of day. As you say, freedom is the right to choose. And in Britain, I choose benefit of health care for all. Stan, I believe we both will never agree on what kind of health care is best. Thus, we must therefore agree to disagree.

Lost User

Mike Mullikin wrote:

I find the attitude that many Americans have of yourselves being the World Police offensive. Errr... because you think we should not act like we're the world police? Neither do I. I want us to stop.

Because you dont act like police in any sense. You look out primarily for your own interests as you should and as other countries do. Dont try and dress it up as some kind of charity that the rest of us should be grateful for. To do so is offensive.

Mike Mullikin wrote:

I could more easily handle joint intelligence & command/control istallations like Pine Gap if there weren't so many other bad examples.

Which was my original point. Your comment that I responded to... "In fact, I'd take it even further and pull ALL U.S. military personnel, hardware and bases from all foreign countries - Japan, South Korea, Germany, UK, etc... All of it comes home and defends our ports and borders." ... is again overly simplistic, misleading and nationalistic because there are examples of US military presence overseas that is very important to your own security. Suggesting that they are here in OZ solely as a "farvour" to us, your poor cousins is again offensive. For me to suggest that you should be grateful to us for allowing them to be here would be similarly offensive because there is obviously a direct benefit to us as well. And your assumption that you paid for the hardware is also most likely wrong, probably unprovable and further evidence of your own poorly informed attitude.

Lost User

Britain has nowhere near the size of armed forces that the United States enjoys, and you know that as well as I do. Consequently, we don't have the same quantity of equipment available at our disposal as is evident given my first sentence. But whatever men and materials there exists would no doubt be made available as part of your defence. And if I were 25-30 years younger, I'll be rubbing shoulders alongside you. Size isn't everything, but we would do whatever we could possibly do.

Lost User

Josh Gray wrote:

Because you dont act like police in any sense. You look out primarily for your own interests as you should and as other countries do.

I disagree.

Josh Gray wrote:

Dont try and dress it up as some kind of charity that the rest of us should be grateful for.

I try not to, but my taxes are entirely too high already and the current bail-outs are gonna eventually make them sky-rocket. Excuse me for asking that we cut back in places.

Josh Gray wrote:

Suggesting that they are here in OZ solely as a "farvour" to us, your poor cousins is again offensive.

Where did I do that?

Josh Gray wrote:

And your assumption that you paid for the hardware is also most likely wrong, probably unprovable and further evidence of your own poorly informed attitude.

Except I didn't assume, state or imply that. Who is poorly informed?

Lost User

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

And in Britain, I choose benefit of health care for all.

Do others in Britain get to choose not to contribute to national health care?

Oakman

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

we would do whatever we could possibly do.

I never questioned that, and if something I wrote implied otherwise, I apologise. I have great respect for the UK - and for all of the other countries from whom we are separated by a common language. We are a bit like a family. We can get really pissed at each other, but it's really not a good idea to go after one of us unless you are ready to take on all of us.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

_Damian S_

ah, back to normal I see... ;P

Knowledge is knowing that the tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in fruit salad!! Booger Mobile - Camp Quality esCarpade 2010

Stan Shannon

Oakman wrote:

My impression is that the Canadians, one on one, are just as tough as the Americans.

Quite a lot tougher, I would suspect, considering the climate they have to put up with.

Oakman wrote:

Why should they? If we stop, they will start.

With what? There is no way they are going to dismantle the welfare state. It will continue to grow, consuming their economy and finally their society.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Lost User

As I said I dont imagine that our discussion will be worthwhile.

Stan Shannon

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

It is demeaning.

So, you are too good to ask me for my money, but empowering the state to reach into my pocket and take my money away from me in order to give to you is a source of pride for you? Are you even capable of thinking about how ridiculous and dangerous that is?

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Lost User

Nice response. Accuse me of all sorts of things... then when I ask "where/what/when" - you bail out.

Lost User

Mike Mullikin wrote:

Nice response. Accuse me of all sorts of things... then when I ask "where/what/when" - you bail out.

Sorry I'd assumed you could reread your own posts for yourself.

Lost User

Josh Gray wrote:

Sorry I'd assumed you could reread your own posts for yourself.

I read them the first time. I never stated or implied that US presence in Australia was a "favour" to you. I never stated or implied that the US paid for all the hardware at Pine Gap.

Ilion

_Damian S_ wrote:

ah, back to normal I see... ;P

Rather depends upon "normal," doesn't it? Is "normal" that CG and company can vanish my posts? Is "normal" that CG and company can call me "full of shit" and then vanish the post in which I show the reverse to be the actual case? Is "normal" that CG and company can attempt to insult me and then pretend that I am "the problem" if I happen (which happens with amusing frequency) to top them? Or, is "normal" that CG and company must be man enough to get back what they want to serve -- or modify their behavior?

Lost User

National Insurance [^] and PAYE (Pay As You Earn) is a form of income tax on employment [^]. Both are a source (not the only source) of revenue for all government spending including healthcare. These contributions are compulsory, but contributions are not equal. This means the more you actually earn the more you'll end up paying upto a certain ceiling. BUT if you would much prefer to go private then BUPA membership is available [^] and if provided by an employer, it is a taxable benefit in kind. But that is not an either-or situation, as said, National Insurance and PAYE is compulsory irrespective of any private arrangements that exist. So to answer your question, NO, you can't opt out of contributions.