Australia gains from UK military

Dub13

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/australia-gains-from-uk-military/2006/10/07/1159641577265.html

HUNDREDS of highly trained British defence force personnel are quitting their jobs and their homeland to join the Australian military.

Over the past four years, more than 300 soldiers, sailors and air crew transferred to the Australian defence forces and migrated with their families. The majority leaving their posts were officers.

Now a team of military recruiters is heading to Britain next month hoping to recruit even more military personnel, with the announcement of up to 11,000 voluntary and enforced redundancies from the Royal Air Force.

Many of the service men and women coming to Australia have served in war zones, and are in their late 20s and 30s.

The recruits are given immediate permanent residency and citizenship can be speeded up.

the_syco

Still seen by some as British soil, and they won't be brought to Iraq to die. Complain, and you're f*cked. Move and you're grand, it would seem.

lostexpectation

come to australia east timor has rainy season so much nicer to colonise for fossil fuels then iraq

cushtac

Australia has around 900 troops in Iraq and about 700 in Afghanistan.

British troops are hardly being sent to Iraq to die either. Despite deploying a total of almost 90,000 troops to Iraq over the past three years (figures found here) the British have only lost 113 killed. That's an extremely low casualty rate.

vesp

There was always close ties between the two countries anyway. I remember when I was in Australia many Aussies proudly telling me they were all British originally. If it were not for the close links, they not only would not have got the harbour bridge in Sydney built but they would probably all be speaking Japanese now.

Del2005

If it were not for the close links, they not only would not have got the harbour bridge in Sydney built but they would probably all be speaking Japanese now.

I think the Americans and a lot of Australians would disagree with this.

The English had thousands of Aussie troops in Europe and North Africa when the Japanese where treating Australia and wouldn't send them home to defend their homeland.

And the hundreds of thousands of Americans who fought and died to retake the Pacific may also disagree.

vesp

Del2005 wrote:

I think the Americans and a lot of Australians would disagree with this.

The English had thousands of Aussie troops in Europe and North Africa when the Japanese where treating Australia and wouldn't send them home to defend their homeland.

And the hundreds of thousands of Americans who fought and died to retake the Pacific may also disagree.

Where in Europe were thousands of Aussie troops "when the Japanese where treating Australia" ? What does "treating" mean ?

The Americans only came in to the war after Pearl harbour.

Do not forget the hundreds of thousands of British and Aussie servicemen who served together, often in places like Burma...and sometimes under horrific conditions at the hands of their Japanese captors. The war was not just fought in the far east by the Americans.

Del2005

vesp wrote:

Where in Europe were thousands of Aussie troops "when the Japanese where treating Australia" ? What does "treating" mean ?

The Americans only came in to the war after Pearl harbour.

Do not forget the hundreds of thousands of British and Aussie servicemen who served together, often in places like Burma...and sometimes under horrific conditions at the hands of their Japanese captors. The war was not just fought in the far east by the Americans.

What I meant was when Japan was planning on invading Australia after capturing all the English and Aussie troops in the Pacific region. Yes they served together and where captured together in Asia, but there where more troops in Europe that could have been sent back to protect Australia but they didn't.
The Americans wheren't alone fighting in East but they did beat the Japanese not the English.

Capt'n Midnight

Del2005 wrote:

What I meant was when Japan was planning on invading Australia after capturing all the English and Aussie troops in the Pacific region. Yes they served together and where captured together in Asia, but there where more troops in Europe that could have been sent back to protect Australia but they didn't.
The Americans wheren't alone fighting in East but they did beat the Japanese not the English.

Not without another 10 divisions they wern't, most of their army was in China, Oz would have been too big to hold without a capitulaition like Singapore.