A really fine, well written article.

I always thought Japan made a tactical error siding with the Germans and the Germans made an even bigger error declaring war on Japan - but that is by the by.

It's understandable why Curtin would not have let the 'no invasion' cat out of the bag as the fighting in PNG and Bouganville was brutal. Men fight harder when their backs are against the wall.

It would be interesting to compare Hitler's revised plans for invading England with Japan's plans not to have a crack at Australia. Was the cost too high or was it simply that both nations did not have enough strategic value?

Peter Stanley does well to point out that the celebration of a non-existent battle detracts from the value that rightly should be accorded to Australia's contribution to the outcome of WW2. Rudd appears to have got the day and month right for the commencement of the real battle, but the year wrong. It was 1939, not 1942, and lasted exactly six full years, ending on 2 September 1945 on the deck of the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay.

By mid-1940 Australia stood, with the rest of the British Commonwealth, alone in opposition to an incipient global tyranny of totalitarian powers. Menzies and Churchill were indeed at war, but not with each other. They both knew the absolute necessity of involving the United States in this war against world-wide totalitarian tyranny. I strongly suspect that between them, almost single-handedly, they did orchestrate that involvement.

From September 1940 Germany and Japan were in formal alliance, but Japan was not at war except with China.

What had to be arranged was for Japan to attack the US. Emboldening Japan to just attack the US, leaving British possessions untouched, may not have ensured US involvement in an alliance with the British Commonwealth. Japan had to be sucked into attacking both the US and the British Empire SIMULTANEOUSLY.

To do this, it was necessary for Japan to be persuaded as to British WEAKNESS in SE Asia. I suspect this was done, using Germany as the conduit for the information; information which, when put to the test by Japan, proved to be correct in every detail, and may well have been instrumental in further cementing the German-Japanese alliance, and in due course making it easier for the US to enter the war against Germany once it had been attacked.

In what I suspect was a masterful misinformation operation, Churchill set the trap. Menzies had to place the bait, then leave. He did: The 8th Division and the crew of HMAS Sydney constituted much of that bait.

On 7 December 1941 Japan took the bait. The rest is history.

Apols, error in my post, first para should read Germans made an even bigger error declaring war on USA.

I think you'll find that the US government desperately wanted to enter WW2 but public opinion was strongly against it.

The attack on Pearl Harbour was the result of deliberate provocation resulting from shipping embargos against Japan (because of their invasion of China) that cut them off from their oil supplies.

It's the same strategy that was used in the sinking of the Lusitania in WW1 and the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam plus several other staged incidents throughout history.

Because Japan was allied with Germany, being at war with Japan was the same as being at war with Germany so no formal declaration would have been necessary - just as Australia was at automatically war with Germany because Britain was.

Despite the suspect methods used to involve our troops in conflicts it shouldn't detract from their efforts. Courage and sacrifice don't depend on circumstance.

ANZAC day should also be a day to be aware of how easily one generation sacrifices another on it's behalf.

The Lord Wardenship of the Cinque Ports is Britain's oldest and highest award in recognition of service to the Crown, generally awarded for wartime service at the highest level when the nation is most threatened, and is in the gift of the Sovereign.

In its history, it has only ever been held by three commoners.

Two such held it in succession: Winston Spencer Churchill, and Robert Gordon Menzies. Upon Menzies' death the Wardenship passed to the woman considered by Hitler the most dangerous in Europe during WW2, Her Late Majesty, Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother.

The retention of the award within the royal family after the death of Menzies only emphasises the perceived significance of the service of the the two preceeding commoners. The contribution of Churchill in that context is self-evident. What, however, at that level and in that context, was Menzies' contribution?

I suggest it may have been for maintaining the secrecy of, if not actually helping design, a grand deception that became in large measure responsible for ensuring a successful outcome of WW2 for the entire British Commonwealth, if not the world: the orchestration of the Japanese attack upon the US and the British Empire. Part of the sustenance of that grand deception involved the foreknown necessity for the relinquishment of his position as Prime Minister, and that of his parliamentary coalition, of government, in Australia. No better way to dodge Question Time! And no less questioning a lot than a mob that had just been handed government on a platter without even need to win an election!

The other part of the grand deception had involved the deliberate placement of very well trained, equipped, and led Australian troops right where the Japanese had already been told the British forces were weakest, in order to convey the impression of a desperate bolstering of defences with what were recognised by the Germans and Japanese as crack troops. The 8th Division under General Gordon Bennett.

Everything symbolically corroborated frome the throne.

Of course, it was from the Yanks the secret had to be kept.

You seem to trot out your CV a lot here? Is it because really made up BS?

The only credentials and recommendations that i take notice of (about people like you) are from my fellow Aboriginal people.

Self promoters like you are part of the problem in our communities, not part of the solution.