1400Hrs – August 8, 2024
Things got out of control! Largest US navy finally arrived zero-point! Israel on red alert!
109th Anniversary of the Battle of Lone Pine at Gallipoli
This week marks the 109th anniversary of the Battle of Lone Pine, one of the most intense engagements fought by Australians during the First World War. This battle, which took place at Gallipoli in Türkiye, stands as a testament to the bravery and resilience of the Anzacs.
The Strategic Assault
The assault at Lone Pine was originally intended as a diversionary tactic to keep Turkish reserves away from the main Allied attack to the north. The primary objective was to break out of the main Anzac perimeter and capture the strategic heights of Chunuk Bair and Hill 971. The intensity of this battle was encapsulated by Australian official war correspondent Charles Bean, who was on Gallipoli. He vividly described the moments before the assault, where excited Diggers ‘chaffed each other dryly’ like spectators at a football match:
“Some belated messenger hurried along the trench to find his platoon, and, in passing, recognised a friend. ‘Au revoir, Bill’, he nodded, ‘meet you over there’. ‘So long, Tom’, was the answer; ‘see you again in half an hour’.”
The Battle Unfolds
At 17:30 on 6 August 1915, the whistles blew, and the Anzacs went over the top towards the Turkish trenches, just a few dozen meters away. From that night and over the next several days, fierce fighting took place across a complex maze of trenches, many of which were roofed over with heavy logs. The Australians had to break through these fortifications to engage the defenders directly.
The Aftermath
When the battle finally concluded, more than 2,000 Anzacs had been killed or wounded, and almost 7,000 Turks had suffered the same fate. The Lone Pine battlefield, now the site of the largest Australian memorial at Gallipoli, is named for the solitary pine tree that stood near the Turkish trenches. While the original tree did not survive the assault, seeds from one of its pinecones were sent back to Australia and used to grow the Lone Pine within the grounds of the Australian War Memorial.
This anniversary serves as a poignant reminder of the sacrifices made during the Battle of Lone Pine and the enduring legacy of those who fought at Gallipoli.
Everyday thousands of veterans and families are exposed to online advertising while they browse the online web and when they scroll on social media.
You may not know it but advertisers on the web and across social media platforms have access to a mix of browsing data and profile information, which they use to reach their target audiences. Some try all types of tricks to get you to trust and engage with them.
They have no problem pretending to be from or acting on behalf of a trusted government agency, such as DVA. To validate their advertising tactics, they might try to mislead you by promoting prize draws or use similar messaging to the agency or organisation they are attempting to imitate.
When it comes to advertising DVA funded programs and services, providers and third-party organisations must comply with strict guidelines. Knowing how to identify when something doesn’t look right or is too good to be true, is the best way to stay protected.
Misleading advertising tactics third-party organisations practice can include:
- Unlawfully using images of Veteran Cards and government logos on webpages, on social media and across other materials.
- Contacting you via un-invited, direct approach methods like cold calling or sending you messages and emails.
- Someone telling you they can provide you with DVA funded allied health services, without needing referral from your GP.
- Sending or offering you unsolicited ‘free’ goods just because you have a Veteran Card.
- Be wary of providers who use language such as ‘DVA pays’, ‘free DVA services’, ‘low cost services using your Veteran Card’, ‘as seen on TV’ or ‘complimentary DVA services’.
- Some providers try to hook you and incorrectly advertise that gym memberships, yoga and mindfulness programs will be paid through your Veteran Card.
DVA is the only source of truth for information about the services and support that can be accessed by veterans and families using a Veteran Card. To learn more about Veteran Card entitlements and about DVA’s funded health services you should visit the DVA website or call 1800 VETERAN (1800 838 372)
If you need help to manage your health and wellbeing, visiting your GP is the best place to start.
Kamala Harris Open to Discussing Israel Embargo Amid Growing Pressure from Pro-Palestinian Activists
In a significant development, Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, has indicated her willingness to engage in discussions with activists regarding an arms embargo on Israel. This comes as the conflict in Gaza continues, and pressure from pro-Palestinian groups escalates, demanding a shift in U.S. policy towards Israel.
Recently, Harris and her vice-presidential pick, Governor Tim Walz, met with members of the Uncommitted National Movement, a prominent pro-Palestinian group. During the meeting, the activists expressed their deep concerns over the use of U.S.-supplied weapons in Gaza, highlighting the humanitarian impact on Palestinian civilians.
Harris, known for her doubtful approach to international issues, expressed sympathy towards the concerns raised by the activists. While stopping at this stage, committing to any specific policy changes, she signalled openness to further dialogue, acknowledging the importance of addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The Uncommitted National Movement has been at the forefront of advocating for a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy regarding Israel. The group is calling for an immediate arms embargo on Israel, coupled with a ceasefire in Gaza to prevent further civilian casualties.
Layla Elabed, a co-founder of the movement, made a direct appeal to Harris, urging her to reconsider the U.S.’s stance on arms sales to Israel. Another co-founder, Abbas Alawieh, emphasized the necessity of a new policy that would prioritize the protection of Palestinian lives and push for a long-term resolution to the conflict.
The Uncommitted National Movement’s influence is increasingly evident, particularly among the Democratic Party’s left-leaning base. The group played a crucial role in mobilizing over 100,000 voters to withhold their support from President Biden in the critical state of Michigan during the last election. Despite this, Biden secured 81% of the vote, indicating the complex dynamics within the party regarding U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Kamala Harris has consistently supported Israel’s right to self-defence, a position she reaffirmed during her meeting with the activists. However, her recent engagement with the Uncommitted National Movement suggests a growing concern for the humanitarian situation in Gaza and a willingness to explore new avenues for addressing the conflict.
Harris emphasized the need to balance Israel’s security with the protection of Palestinian rights, explicitly stating her opposition to any forced displacement of Palestinians. As she navigates the delicate balance between maintaining strong U.S.-Israel relations and addressing the concerns of pro-Palestinian activists, Harris’s approach to this issue could become a defining aspect of her campaign and potential presidency.
Australia’s military announced a new Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) in the South China Sea involving ships from the US, Canada, and the Philippines. This follows a June FONOP with Japan, Canada, and the Philippines. The operation, led by Adm. David Johnston, emphasizes support for the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal Award against China’s territorial claims.
Collin Joh from Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University views this as an evolution from bilateral to quadrilateral maritime cooperation, predicting more such operations. Experts Ian Chong and Koh from Singapore don’t foresee significant reactions from China or ASEAN nations, beyond China’s typical rhetoric and monitoring. Concurrently, China conducted its own patrol around Scarborough Shoal, condemning activities that destabilize the region.
ED: This from my inbox this morning.
Kamala Harris as President: What Australia Should Expect
RedFlag – James McVicar
A Kamala Harris presidency would likely bring continuity in U.S. foreign and security policy, with some nuanced shifts. Unlike Biden, whose long Senate career made him a predictable figure in global affairs, Harris’s foreign policy approach is less defined due to her limited experience in this area.
Harris’s background as a prosecutor and her brief tenure in the Senate before becoming vice president raises questions about how much of her foreign policy stances reflect loyalty to Biden versus her independent views. Australians will be keen to see where the Indo-Pacific ranks in her priorities.
If Harris becomes president, her initial policies might closely mirror Biden’s, especially regarding the U.S.-China relationship. Though she has no direct experience with China or Taiwan, Harris has criticized China’s human rights record and supported Taiwan’s self-defence. She has also denounced China’s actions in the South China Sea as unlawful.
Australia, as a key U.S. ally, will need to ensure that Harris maintains a strong focus on the Indo-Pacific, despite the many global challenges she will face. While Harris is expected to continue Biden’s policies, particularly in defence and security, Australia should be prepared for possible shifts, such as a stronger emphasis on domestic issues or a different approach to Israel and Palestine.
Harris has shown commitment to Southeast Asia, having attended the ASEAN Summit and supported U.S. allies in the region, such as the Philippines. However, her foreign policy towards India might be cautious, given the country’s desire for strategic autonomy and potential concerns about human rights issues.
On climate, Harris may push for more ambitious policies, building on Biden’s agenda but with a stronger focus on environmental justice. If elected, her administration could increase investment in international climate initiatives, which would benefit climate-exposed regions like the Pacific.
A Harris presidency could also see a focus on engaging young voters, who are passionate about issues like climate change and social justice. If they help her secure the presidency, Harris may be more inclined to address their concerns in her policy decisions.
In summary, Australia can expect Harris to continue the Biden administration’s approach to foreign policy with some potential shifts. Close attention will be needed to understand how her administration might prioritize or adjust U.S. focus on the Indo-Pacific and other key global issues.
Australia Braces for Potential Shifts with a Donald Trump Return
A Donald Trump return to the U.S. presidency would bring significant uncertainties for Australia, particularly in foreign policy and security. Trump’s previous term was marked by an unpredictable approach to international relations, which often disrupted longstanding alliances and global stability.
For Australia, a key concern is the potential volatility in the U.S.-China relationship. Trump’s aggressive stance towards China, including the trade war and confrontational rhetoric, created economic ripples globally. A second Trump term could reignite such tensions, which might destabilize the Indo-Pacific region—an area of critical importance to Australia. Unlike Biden’s measured approach, Trump’s erratic policy shifts could make it harder for Australia to navigate its strategic position between the U.S. and China.
Trump’s “America First” policy may also pose challenges for Australia’s defence strategy. During his previous term, Trump questioned the value of alliances like NATO and pushed for greater burden-sharing among allies. This could lead to renewed pressure on Australia to increase its defence spending or contribute more to U.S.-led initiatives, potentially straining the nation’s resources and diplomatic ties in the region.
Climate policy is another area where Australia might face significant changes under Trump. His past withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and rollback of environmental protections contrasted sharply with global efforts to combat climate change. A return to such policies could undermine international climate cooperation, putting Australia in a difficult position as it seeks to balance economic interests with growing environmental concerns.
Furthermore, Trump’s unpredictable leadership style could lead to abrupt changes in U.S. involvement in global conflicts, which might leave Australia needing to adapt quickly to shifting U.S. priorities. This could complicate Australia’s own foreign policy and defence strategies, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, where stability is crucial for the region’s security and economic growth.
Australia might also have to contend with the possibility of Trump weakening multilateral institutions that play a key role in global governance. His scepticism towards organizations like the United Nations and the World Trade Organization could reduce their effectiveness, making it harder for Australia to rely on these bodies to manage international disputes and trade issues.
In summary, a Trump re-election could introduce new challenges for Australia, requiring careful navigation of an unpredictable U.S. foreign policy. The potential shifts in the U.S.-China relationship, defence Union newspaper expectations, climate policy, and global governance could all have significant implications for Australia’s strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.
By Rex Widerstrom
The United States has announced plans for increased military involvement in Australia, emphasizing more frequent rotational deployments across air, land, and maritime domains. These deployments will include bombers, fighter aircraft, and maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft, building on previous rotations at RAAF Bases Amberley, Darwin, and Tindal. This strategy highlights a growing collaboration and presence in northern Australia.
A significant development is the successful “proof of principle prepositioning” of U.S. Army equipment and material at Albury-Wodonga. This success has led both nations to consider the site for long-term use. Additionally, efforts are underway to establish an enduring logistics support area in Queensland, further solidifying the military partnership.
Upgrades to key Australian bases are part of this expanded cooperation. RAAF Darwin and Tindal are currently undergoing enhancements, and other bases, including Curtin, Learmonth, and Scherger, may also see improvements. Australia is also planning to upgrade its base in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, a move supported by the United States.
The statement expressed grave concerns over the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) coercive actions. Officials condemned Beijing’s “dangerous and escalatory behaviour” towards Philippine vessels in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone and criticized “unsafe and unprofessional encounters” with naval vessels and aircraft exercising freedom of navigation and overflight.
The Taiwan Strait was another focal point, with accusations against Beijing for attempting unilateral changes to the status quo. The officials called for dialogue to resolve issues without the threat or use of force, reiterating their commitment to strengthen economic, trade, and people-to-people ties with Taiwan.
NATO is preparing to transport 800,000 soldiers and 200,000 armoured vehicles to the border with Russia in the event of full scale war. The publication Der Spiegel just reported this after gaining access to secret military documents. Russia, North Korea, Iran, and China, have contingency plans just like this one. But moving that many troops would be a massive undertaking unlike anything we’ve seen in recent history. How does NATO plan to achieve that goal? What challenges are there to deploying that many soldiers across the world? And what are some of the strengths and weaknesses of a collective defence alliance?
Australia has upgraded its travel warning for the UK in response to widespread protests and riots, instructing travellers to exercise a high degree of caution.
Protests in the UK have erupted following the murder of three young girls—Bebe King, 6, Elsie Dot Standcombe, 7, and Alice DaSilva Aguiar, 9—at a dance event in England on July 29. The incident also left several other people injured. The suspect, 17-year-old Axel Rudakubana, was born to Muslim migrant parents, intensifying existing tensions surrounding the UK’s migrant program.
Many in the UK are expressing significant frustration over the high number of Muslims being allowed into the country, the crimes committed, and the perceived lack of assimilation. This has brought the issue of immigration and its impacts to the forefront of public discourse.
Australia’s Smart Traveller website now advises travellers to the UK to exercise a “high degree of caution” in areas where protests and riots are ongoing. Additionally, the site notes that the terrorism threat level for Northern Ireland has been reduced from severe to substantial, indicating that an attack is still likely.
Contributing factors to the threat include Islamic extremism, extreme right-wing ideology, and the status of Northern Ireland. Supporters of the protests have accused British leaders of double standards. Heritage Party Leader David Kurten labelled the approach as “two-tier policing.”
“People are on the streets to protest about the rise in violent crime from migrant communities,” Kurten stated on X (formerly Twitter). “This situation is a direct result of decades of mass rapid immigration imposed on ordinary working people in towns and cities across the country by successive governments. Now, this unrest is spreading everywhere—to every town, every city, every village in the UK.”
Kurten encouraged peaceful protest while condemning violence and looting. He claimed that police have been harsh on anti-migration protesters, whereas those protesting other causes have faced less severe responses.
Australia’s updated travel warning comes just days after the warning level for terror attacks on Australian soil was increased to “probable” amid concerns about youth radicalisation and hybrid ideologies.
SLASHGEAR – BY C. GORDONAUG. 6, 2024
It’s rare that you’re ever looking down at the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, unless you’re standing on one or a pilot landing. The rest of us are usually staring up at awe at the carrier’s towering flight deck, wondering how high it is, among other things. The great height isn’t simply there for the sake of being imposing, but helps facilitate seamless take-offs and landings, and protects the ship and its personnel from dangerous waves while in open water.
The vertical distance between the surface of the water and the flight deck is called freeboard, and depending on the carrier itself, and the aircraft carrier load, can be around 65 feet above the water. The height is crucial to the flight deck’s safety and helps the carrier exist above the chaos of any passing storm, so planes and can continue take off and land with relative safety no matter the conditions.
Other carrier flooding safety features, and swim call
Since aircraft carriers are essentially floating airbases that can speedily circumnavigate the globe without refuelling, multiple aspects of their design are intended to offset the swell of the ocean. The flightdeck is rife with drains and gutters to funnel large quantities of water trying to cause trouble on deck away from the surface, and the design of the hull helps to mitigate the power of oncoming waves, with a protruding bulb below the waterline that modulates potential wave drag, ultimately increasing speed and stability.
Of course, safety features aside, one can’t help wondering what it would be like to go swimming off an aircraft carrier’s lofty flight deck. It’s clearly not a vertical distance you’d want to jump, but there are hangar bay elevators in case you do dive into the water. There’s even a tradition for that, named swim call.
Swim call is Navy tradition in which personnel on numerous types of vessels, including submarines, amphibious command ships, and yes, aircraft carriers, jump into the water for a little portside R&R. In the case of carriers, sailors ride the elevators down about 30 feet or further to a much more manageable height to jump, though they’re still advised the use good form on the way down to prevent injury.
It’s been a tradition in the U.S Navy since World War II but appears to date back to the 19th-century British Royal Navy when seemingly filthy sailors were ordered to get into the water to keep clean, known at the time as “All Hands to Bathe.” We suspect, that was probably not as much fun.