It was a difficult decision, both were good. But in the end I was caught by the line: “…so this Saturday we’re going to war, with New Zealand…” haha classic. I thought I’d find something to get offended by, but they’ve both managed to do the job in a friendly manner, even in the act of threatening to overrun us. 100% too easy.
Now chaps, our reverent leader would confront this naked aggression with her wisdom and backed by the top secret socialist hand wringing brigade would stop them dead on out shores. The enemy would see the enlightened state of our citizens and scurry away back in fear to their evil high wages and detestable standard of living.
The Gruen Transfer (the ABC show that asks agencies to do these pitches on things hard to sell), Is a Gem of Aussie TV,
It gets a bunch of advertising types to explain current popular and topical marketing, all in a very tongue in cheek/pi$$ take way.
They’d be able to invade, sure, no problem. But they will find well organised and active passive resistance organisations intact here, which would be a bugger to dislodge. First they would have to take out WINZ, ACC and CYFS, even before beginning a reform of MMP, and of course, the sucky-babba ‘oooh I’m fwightened of investigating things unless its domestic violence’ media.
It would only cost Australia roughly half of their mineral deposits to crush this resistance movement, and then, the incredible prize of New Zealand with its buzzing manufacturing base, ambitious to work population and resiliant economy would be theirs!!
“But they will find well organised and active passive resistance organisations intact here”
Don’t forget the fearsome guerrilla resistance posed by far-right gun fetishist types like whaleoil and Murray. As long as those guys have a ready supply of beef tallow and a deep fry they could last for months up in the Ureweras :-0
If Australia brought their centralised collective bargaining, which covers 60-70% of the workforce (the figure is 20% in NZ) they’ll encounter little resistance from the left.
Ah nome and his beloved australian collective bargaining.
This is what the ACTU says about the situation in Australia….
“Australia has the most restricted collective bargaining rights in the developed world. Our laws have repeatedly been held by the ILO to be in breach of fundamental standards, particularly in respect of:
* restrictions on the right to strike
* the exclusive right of employers to decide whether to negotiate with a union and whether negotiations should be collective or individual,
* the lack of primacy given to collective bargaining, and
* the restrictions on multi-employer bargaining.”
Yeah you lefties love those principles. Very good at cherry picking your data Roger aye?
AFAIK all of those things could be said about every anglo-saxon dominated country in the world. None of them come close to complying with all of the ILO’s core standards.
The empirical evidence suggest that Australia doesn’t have the most constrained legal environment RE collective bargaining – i.e. they have about 60% collective bargaining coverage compared to our 20%.
Fine, bring some facts and reasoning to the debate then…. I’m waiting
Roger Nome:”the whole “benign strategic environment” meme is spot on.”
Oh, like in 1939? When we’d abolished our Air Strike Wing? And in 1940, German Q-ships sailed around NZ sinking our coastal shipping with impunity?
Now, I WONDER, if we read up on SunTzu and Clausewitz, WHY nations TEND to pick a time to go to war when their targets have adopted policies of “benign strategic environments”, disarmament, and ineffective international institutions being substituted for real alliances with teeth in them……..
Roger Nome: “We’re talking a guy who still defends Bush’s war in Iraq. That’s a far-right militarist to most people I would say.”
Christopher Hitchens is not a far right militarist and he argues very convincingly that to have been against Saddam Hussein ALL ALONG, AND to have been against the US supporting Saddam and in favour of the US removing him, represents the only true “LIBERALISM” worthy of the name. Please argue this point.
Roger Nome:”AFAIK all of those things could be said about every anglo-saxon dominated country in the world. None of them come close to complying with all of the ILO’s core standards.”
So the ILO is an organisation devoted to the undermining and overthrow of the world’s anglo-saxon dominated countries, so it’s surprising that they don’t follow the ILO’s agenda? Well I’ll be….., there’s hope for the anglo-saxon countries yet……..
roger nome (3646) –5 Says:
July 10th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
“But they will find well organised and active passive resistance organisations intact here”
‘Don’t forget the fearsome guerrilla resistance posed by far-right gun fetishist types like whaleoil and Murray. As long as those guys have a ready supply of beef tallow and a deep fry they could last for months up in the Ureweras”
Roger Nome, the Far-Right Gun fetishists would most likely be the Australians Fifth column here in NZ and taking over the Beehive before the first plane-load of Aussie SAS even arrived………
But the guys in the Uraweras, TeQaeda, I don’t know about THEM, if they’re Che Guevara wannabes they MIGHT want to form some kind of resistance to a half decent democracy taking us over……..
But seriously, what about a binding referendum on the subject of political union with Australia? It would make it easier for all the NZ-ers who are on the brink of shooting off to Aussie but don’t want to lose the NZ climate……….
Good vid clips.
Defence? well Patrick Starr has got it right.
Who would invade NZ when there is the Treaty of Waitangi?
That is why we need no Defence Force. No Army, Navy, Air Force that is up to world standards.
Nobody wants us, the world does not give a shit about NZ.
Aussies just use us to laugh at.
PC all gone wrong and we show the world the perfect example.
There are some strange people living here.
Cranked up the old Mac and managed to watch them this time. Very impressive. The wife & myself actually prefer the first one (“over by lunchtime” – too true), but the second one is unfortunately even more correct. Let’s hope no-one in any of the countries further north watches it and gets any ideas…
Some interesting dates:
8 May 2001: Clark announces that there is NO air threat to NZ and confirms she is going to disband the air force fighter squadrons.
11 September 2001: Terrorists start hijacking commercial jets and ramming them into buildings. Because of Helen’s peacenick policy, NZ is deprived of any means of intercepting a hijacked aircraft. It is interesting to note that the leader could have still reconsidered her policy here, the squadron was not actually disbanded until 13 December 2001.
I agree with pretty much everything that is said in both videos, though in the interest of sportsmanship, I might have given us 1% Infantry and 0.3% Navy. I would really like to see this screen on NZ primetime tv. We deserve to be mocked over our pathetic contribution toward regional defense. Two questions:
1. Does anyone know what type of missile launcher is shown in the 303 video firing from the ship?
2. If this was played on NZ TV now, would it count as election advertising?
This might happen – if the Fijians don’t get us first.
What we need to do is invade Australia during the running of the Melbourne Cup. Our fleet of armed racing yachts and hang-gliders would quietly take over the Aussie army, air force and naval bases as their military personnel sit glued to the telly.
Declare the Republic of NewZealia and force them to pay us off, Mouse That Roared-style.
Meh. They invade us, we get a decent cricket team, higher benefits, a proper government. We’d be the lowest income state, so we’d get heavy subsidies from the rest of them. We’d get a superannuation system that works, a proper defence force, a more stable currency, and a FTA with the USA. On the plus side for them, they’d get a proper rugby team. Explain to me again why we’d resist? Shit, last I heard, if NZ votes to join the Australian federation, we’re in. They don’t have a right to stop us.
PaulL is correct about the Australian Constitution… All it would take is an act of the New Zealand Parliament (or whatever it would take on your side) to join the Australian Commonwealth… Nothing is needed on the Australian side… Why?… Because in the late 1800’s when talks were being held about a proposed federation of the (now) Australian states New Zealand representatives had a seat at the table – as history had it New Zealand went their own way and formed their own nation… The mechanism for New Zealand to join Australia is still in the Australian Constitution… (Point 6 of the preamble)..
6. “The Commonwealth” shall mean the Commonwealth of Australia as established under this Act.
“The States” shall mean such of the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia, including the northern territory of South Australia, as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth, and such colonies or territories as may be admitted into or established by the Commonwealth as States; and each of such parts of the Commonwealth shall be called “a State”.
Therefore if New Zealand decides to join that’s basically it…
Our Constitution is quite difficult to change as well (requires a majority of votes in a majority of states as well as an overall majority)…
Don’t (personally) ever see it happening though…
p.s. Don’t take the ads too seriously – they are intended as comedy only…