Random Play: The Key’s under the Matt
66 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
It's a simple mistake anyone could make, really:
I/S, Birmingham's a big hole.True. Though once you've clapped eyes on those kilometres of dreary macrocarpa windbreaks you'll never confuse Burnham with any variety of Birmingham. And, pickiness aside, I am glad that I/S is a pacifist. As the Australian poet Les Murray once said, bugger human sacrifice - if you pile up enough dead bodies around something, even a crappy old concept like Britannia might just get taken seriously by the credulous.
-
"I guess the question NZ defence policy is whether the purpose of the NZDF is to intervene when needed if bad stuff happens around here, or to have enough pointy stuff to look good with the Aussies/Yanks/Brits."
"Not sure what that has to do with the jet trainers."
The whinge/justification I have heard most often wrt the airforce fast jets is "to help fulfil our [combat] commitments to our allies [i.e. Australia and the US]". I think that was the point that was being made in the first block of text I have quoted - "to have enough pointy stuff to look good with the Aussies/Yanks/Brits".
It seems to me that if NZ did want to 'fulfil that commitment' (whatever that might mean), it could be far better achieved by, say, a highly trained, well-equipped troop of special forces soldiers The cost would probably be a fraction of that required to maintain a fighter squadron, and they would have a far greater flexibility to deal with a greater range of scenarios, both abroad and domestically. Then if you still want to spend money, spend it on ships/planes/helicopters which can deliver these guys where they need to go, and which can support them when they get there.
But toys of that sort aren't flashy/fast/noisy enough for some people.
Simon: thanks for providing some decent arguments for keeping the jet capability. I've got a bit tired of reading arguments that boil down to 'Helen took my toys away! Whaaaa! Whaaaa! Whaaaa!'
If the airforce really wants a up-to-date modern strike capability, maybe we should buy then some predator drones?
-
Maybe relevant - there were big newspaper headlines down here in the Manawatu, just before election day, that Key had said the airforce base in Auckland would be kept on, as would its personnel of course. Simon Power, local mp, wouldn't comment - people down here have been expecting an influx of personnel to Ohakea over the next few years - an economic boost to the area.
Ohakea also has a very long, brand new runway which seems quite unnecessary for helicopters.
-
It only really covered the combat wing if you read through it. The Mb339 was never considered as a keep option apart from a reference in option 3, which was never costed.
The The Defence Industry Committee of New Zealand has done further work on all aspects of the NZ defence force and its capabilities. I presume that some of their findings and recommendations could be made public if they're not already. Nicky Hager probably has copies :)
-
It only really covered the combat wing if you read through it. The Mb339 was never considered as a keep option apart from a reference in option 3, which was never costed.
Thanks Simon, I'd only ever focused on the combat wing stuff, for overtly partisan reasons I might add, so thanks for this.
-
According to Wikipedia, the RAF only trains pilots on the Hawk (the equivalent of a Macchi) if they are going on to fly fast jets (Tornado/Eurofighter/Harrier). Multi-engine pilots train on King Airs, just as in the RNZAF.
-
Maybe relevant - there were big newspaper headlines down here in the Manawatu, just before election day, that Key had said the airforce base in Auckland would be kept on, as would its personnel of course. Simon Power, local mp, wouldn't comment - people down here have been expecting an influx of personnel to Ohakea over the next few years - an economic boost to the area.
I think the military has balked at the estimated $1 billion shut down cost. According the the wikipedia page on the base, RNZAF Auckland will stay open now.
I spent a big slab of my youth there so at least from that angle I'm sentimentally pleased that the tree I built my tree hut in will still be there. It's a mighty big, WW2 era, base to fill though but it makes far more sense to have the navy helicopters in Auckland, and the c-130s.
-
According to Wikipedia, the RAF only trains pilots on the Hawk (the equivalent of a Macchi) if they are going on to fly fast jets (Tornado/Eurofighter/Harrier). Multi-engine pilots train on King Airs, just as in the RNZAF.
The Hawk is an advanced jet trainer whereas the Mb339 is more of a basic jet trainer., better compared to the T-6II which it competed with in the US. The TA-4K Skyhawk was closer to the Hawk.
-
Regarding whining writers, anyone else see Joanne Black's column in the latest Listener ? She notes that the current US ambassador, a Bush appointee, has resigned and is heading back to the US. Therefore, from her point of view, ex-Labour Party president Mike Williams should resign from the various boards he's on as well, because, like, his gov't also recently lost power.
What a silly, snide, churlish comment. Also she fails to realise that it is established convention for US ambassadors to resign when their party loses, but not a convention for political party appointees in NZ to resign.
Also, I assume she also wrote the "all is sweetness and light now that John Key's been elected PM" editorial as well. It was chocker with twaddle like "The politics of envy have been replaced by the politics of aspiration".
Barf, and, indeed, barf.
-
It was chocker with twaddle like "The politics of envy have been replaced by the politics of aspiration".
This caught my eye too - although in itself needn't necessarily refer to the new government (it could simply be referring to a growing culture of enterprise over many years), it's lifted directly from Key's own words during the campaign:
"So, what do you say when you hear Michael Cullen call this place a trophy home?" I ask.
"Michael Cullen spends too much time on the politics of envy and not enough on the politics of aspiration," he replies. So there.
The authorship of the editorial is almost beside the point. Surely they can't have serendipitously chanced upon exactly the same words? Regardless of the virtues of the new government it just seems kind of icky to me.
-
The authorship of the editorial is almost beside the point. Surely they can't have serendipitously chanced upon exactly the same words?
Sam F.: You might be surprise to find out how much you 'plagiarise' a certain William Shakespeare.
-
I don't quite follow. Unless you mean phrases from Shakespeare's works that have become stock phrases over the centuries. Am I missing something?
-
Although if Sam were sleeping with an editorial writer we might have more reason to suspect the common origin of any talking points (in this century)..
-
Looking at it now I worded my post poorly. I doubt the phrase was actually taken from that article - what I meant was that it was a stock description of John Key's politics used by John Key himself, and thus it was a bit jarring to see such similar wording in the editorial.
-
I don't quite follow. Unless you mean phrases from Shakespeare's works that have become stock phrases over the centuries. Am I missing something?
Don't know about you, but I've been hearing "aspirational" and "politics" squishing up together for a long time.
-
Don't know about you, but I've been hearing "aspirational" and "politics" squishing up together for a long time.
No, it probably is my limited memories of politics showing through. Red face on this end :/
Post your response…
This topic is closed.