Australia does not follow a “tradition of impulsive involvement in international conflict regardless of the nation’s state of preparedness”.

... My hypothesis is that Australia does not follow a "tradition of impulsive involvement in international conflict regardless of the nation's state of preparedness". Australia had extremely close ties with Britain and felt a duty to the "mother land" which it fulfilled twice following the out break of two major conflicts. It was bound by foreign policy to enter WW1and WW2 and to fight to defend the empire. In our next major conflict, Vietnam, Australia gave support to America due to our eagerness for them to stop the spread of communism. In all involvements Australia's military earnt a fine reputation, and until Vietnam, enjoyed considerable support from home. Australia's military manpower at the time was not strong, but when WW1 began people rushed to enlist and go on an adventure. It has been recorded that Australia prepared for only six weeks for the expected outbreak of WW1, however this is not

want to read more? →