Australian Defence Discussion

Garpal Gumnut said:

Congratulations to SAS Trooper Mark Donaldson.

What a brave man.

Why isn't the ministry of defence called the Ministry of Attack?

What a silly name "Defence".

gg

Click to expand...

Yes its great to see true bravery recognised and he is the first to receive the new Australian Victoria Cross.

GG only someone who has never served the country in the "Defence Forces" would make that dumb comment.

On a side note one of my old Army buddies phoned me this morning telling me he has terminal cancer in both kidneys and his right lung with 4 to 12 months to live, he is 45 and it's amazing how helpless you feel on the other end of the phone.

New Trouble for an Obama Nominee: Admiral Dennis Blair Aided Perpetrators of 1999 Church Killings in East Timor

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/6/dennis_blair_obamas_nominee_for_director

GumbyLearner said:

New Trouble for an Obama Nominee: Admiral Dennis Blair Aided Perpetrators of 1999 Church Killings in East Timor

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/6/dennis_blair_obamas_nominee_for_director

Click to expand...

I was intimately involved in the preparations for the intervention in East Timor and I find that very hard to believe.

Abbott's VC remarks outrages military

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...-remarks-outrages-military-20090124-7p2i.html

Opposition frontbencher Tony Abbott has sparked outrage by comparing John Howard's US Presidential Medal of Freedom with Trooper Mark Donaldson's Victoria Cross.

Mr Abbott suggests moral courage is possibly a higher virtue than physical courage in comments published in the Weekend Australian on Saturday.

glenn_r said:

GG only someone who has never served the country in the "Defence Forces" would make that dumb comment.

Click to expand...

?? It used to be the Ministry of War. "Defence" is marketing spin & hyperbole.

That aside, I am going to make myself unpopular and say I think our defence forces as they exist should be abolished. I think we need something akin to a Marine Service, a Coast Guard Unit for interdiction of illegal fishermen etc (some of the Navy Assets could be used for that) and a much strengthened AFP for service in areas like Solomon's etc. I would like to see Defence budget cut in half.

Seems to me what we have is an system that is an anachronistic hangover from centuries past.

Trevor_S said:

?? It used to be the Ministry of War. "Defence" is marketing spin & hyperbole.

That aside, I am going to make myself unpopular and say I think our defence forces as they exist should be abolished. I think we need something akin to a Marine Service, a Coast Guard Unit for interdiction of illegal fishermen etc (some of the Navy Assets could be used for that) and a much strengthened AFP for service in areas like Solomon's etc. I would like to see Defence budget cut in half.

Seems to me what we have is an system that is an anachronistic hangover from centuries past.

Click to expand...

And Trevor I reckon you would be the first bloke to go looking for an Infantry section to guard yur house in the unlikely event we were ever invaded. By unlikely event I mean other than land mass we don't have a lot to offer to warrant an invasion except for maybe by Musurian's and if you think the seppo's will come charging in to defend us if we cut down on our armed forces you will be sadly mistaken.

The best defence always has been and always will be a strong offence in saying that I don't mean you have to go look for a fight but let your opponent know that you won't back down. try reading Sun Tzu.

"No better friend ........ No worse enemy"

Time for me to get off my high horse but people like you get to me

UBIQUE

And before you ask yes I have served and still currently do part time

GRES Chocco

Trevor_S said:

?? It used to be the Ministry of War. "Defence" is marketing spin & hyperbole.

That aside, I am going to make myself unpopular and say I think our defence forces as they exist should be abolished. I think we need something akin to a Marine Service, a Coast Guard Unit for interdiction of illegal fishermen etc (some of the Navy Assets could be used for that) and a much strengthened AFP for service in areas like Solomon's etc. I would like to see Defence budget cut in half.

Seems to me what we have is an system that is an anachronistic hangover from centuries past.

Click to expand...

A naive comment from some one who has the luxury to do so from the comforts of his own home.
Even the oldest neutral countries such as Switzerland and Sweden maintain a large standing defence force as they are not so naive to realize you still need to carry a big stick just in case.

Just because Australia is currently under no threat from attack doesn't mean the situation can change in the future. It takes a long time to build up a defence force after it has been run down. You just have to look at WW2 again to see how quickly things can turn to custard. A lot of European countries were caught woefully under prepared even after seeing the warning signs coming out of Germany, their leader/Politicians were asleep at the wheel. Even the UK was one such nation and was staring down the barrel of imminent invasion at one stage.

Being an Island some of our best defence assets are our Submarines, they are an awesome weapon and deterrent because any potential large scale invading force will eventually have to come via sea.

In the words of Plato:

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"

we definitley need a stong military. air force and navy especially. they can prevent a war ever reaching us, which is what we really need.

I just distrust governmetns with large land forces. they often get used against their own people.

if we were involved in major war i am sure that without the US we would be in very deep mud indeed. we migth not lose, but 100,000 casulaties to fend off an indonesian attack is a phyrric victory.

i would no doubt escape to the USA and carry on the fight (share certificates and all in my luggage). lobby the yanks into helping us. protest in the streets. throw rocks at the indonesian embassy in washington. after all somone needs to rebuild and re-populate when its all over.

on a more seious note.... F-35s are quite a weapon.... from what i can deduce the yanks have spent 7 years and billions of dollars making an aircraft that is inferior but quite complemantary to the F-22.

it looks like its even inferior enought to export to allies.

i am not bitter about this. after all i will never get to fly this magnificent beast, but it would be nice to have them.

then again the yank taxpayer should not have to give up the sum of their intellectual knowledge to a country whose PM makes fun of Bush wont criticise china.

F-35s are still quite good from what i have read and seen on youtube.
the assertions that they get beaten by sukhois is pretty silly considering that a classic dogfing will simply not take place. its one air combat system against another. working together with our AWACs, the F-35 will probbaly blow the sukhois out of the sky before they reaslise there is a threat in the theatre.

i dont know much about military matters but i bet any of you $1 dollar that with our AWACs, 100 F-35s and a few destroyers, RAN and RAAF will be able to defend OZ against ANY invasion excpet one mounted by the USA. that includes russia china india UK france etc.

for all you who want to buy russian or chinese equipment ....lol.... just know that is a proven fact that russian stuff is crap. their missiles couldnt hit ayers rock on a clear day, their ships sink in storms and their fighters have night vision capabilities slightly inferior to the new 7 series BMW.

sting said:

except for maybe by Musurian's

Click to expand...

Yeah, they are a cruel enemy those musurians,... they always seem to show up right when you trying to sleep or make a brew, Atleast on holsworthy range they never attack after 10pm or before 8am due to noise restrictions so you can catch some sneaky zzz's on piquet.

Tysonboss1 said:

Yeah, they are a cruel enemy those musurians,... they always seem to show up right when you trying to sleep or make a brew, Atleast on holsworthy range they never attack after 10pm or before 8am due to noise restrictions so you can catch some sneaky zzz's on piquet.

Click to expand...

They must be the RAAF tribe dont work after 1700 or on weekends. The tribes up here in QLD work all hrs. Esp at Wide Bay when ya checking ya crab pots that you have snuck in to go with the prawns that you swopped with the trawlers for a CR1M. I do my best work at Tin Can esp area13.

Finally handover of the 500 room accom blocks at Enoggera in brisbane today. Anything had has to be better than the old ones. It was not so long ago I had some of my troopies marched into the transit lines and one was in bed one night when the ceiling fell down on him.

"Mr Fitzgibbon said that Defence’s contract with Plenary includes ongoing concierge services, facilities operation and maintenance responsibilities as part of a 30-year arrangement."

Concierge services **** soumds like to Hilton maybe next time that I am required to live in I should try and slum it and not stay in the Officers Mess.

END of an ERA

Announcement today states they are bringing frward the retirement of the old faithful Caribou. No more Sideways Airlines. To those of us who have flown in her in some respects will be sadly missed. I still remember my first flight back in 79 straight up after breakfast and as a young 19yr after a night on the piss and a gutful of flavoured milk an invitation from the loadie to take a look over the lowered rear while inflight proved to much. Sitting here writting this brings back the pungent and sickly sweet smell of hot AVTUR.

Now for the amazing part they will not be replaced until 2013. Altho they are not the most comfortable rides around they are exremely good at STOL work something that we still need.

300 billion as part of a 20 year plan...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25417217-5012587,00.html

I'm not sure we need all of the things mentioned. Perhaps Kennas or some of the others who have served could give a more realsitic view.

sam76 said:

300 billion as part of a 30 year plan...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25417217-5012587,00.html

I'm not sure we need all of the things mentioned. Perhaps Kennas or some of the others who have served could give a more realsitic view.

Click to expand...

It is a big bad world out there. All big nations are securing military and navy bases in Asia. Check out the expansion plans of China, India and even Japan (hardly pacific nation if you look at its navy size!!), all in the name of self defense. Actually they want to secure the routes of the resources, especially OIL. Because once the oil supply will not be able to meet the demand, the oil exporting nations would like to use routes which provide safety, and a guarantee of some sort against pirate attacks (which in my opinion will increase, and will be used by different powers for their strategic interest).

I think the next great game has started, and think-tanks of all nations are aware of this. China, India and central Asia, as always, will be the players, but unlike last century, they will be their our colonial masters.

On these grounds I would support a more robust defense spending bill. When the pacific nations (aka Japan) are going crazy in their defense spending it is time to rethink the whole situation.


A pre-cursor of things to come can be seen in this bloody conflict in Sri-Lanka. China is the main supplier of all the arms and also trying to build a base there...On this support the Sri-Lankans are showing a big middle finger to the west, and trying to ignore their lectures. But on a separate point I think it is hypocritical of West to do in Afghanistan what they are lecturing Sri-Lanks to not do! Tamil Tigers are the inventor of Sui-cide attacks.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6207487.ece



And the only nation which has balked on this defense spending spree is, you guessed it, China. BEWARE!

The acquisitions and money is spaced over a very long period, so it might be decieving.

I'm not sure on the % GDP between nations go but we have been spending well down on what was generally considered average. That was 3%. I think the past few years it's been under 2%.

The US spend many many multiples on defence compared to us, as do China. Off the top of my head China spend more than $50b per year and we spend about $15b.

I'm flabbergasted that China could complain about additional spending in the future, they are building more rapidly than any other country in the world. They are nuclear and developing a blue water fleet. Go figure.

Having said that, we do need to defend the moat, however, our next operations (5-15 years) will be abroad. NO ONE has the capability to attack Australia, except the US.

Our best interests in the short to medium term would be to maintain our alliances with the US, NZ, key EU countries, and some important SE Asian nations like Singapore. Throw in alliances with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, and what do we need these 12 subs for (that we can't man) and 100 JSF (that we can't pilot). Cripes, we can't even deploy our current ARH that we are fitting and training with. And WTF are our 60 or so Abrams tanks doing? What a joke! They will NEVER be used.

kennas said:

The acquisitions and money is spaced over a very long period, so it might be decieving.

I'm not sure on the % GDP between nations go but we have been spending well down on what was generally considered average. That was 3%. I think the past few years it's been under 2%.

The US spend many many multiples on defence compared to us, as do China. Off the top of my head China spend more than $50b per year and we spend about $15b.

I'm flabbergasted that China could complain about additional spending in the future, they are building more rapidly than any other country in the world. They are nuclear and developing a blue water fleet. Go figure.

Having said that, we do need to defend the moat, however, our next operations (5-15 years) will be abroad. NO ONE has the capability to attack Australia, except the US.

Our best interests in the short to medium term would be to maintain our alliances with the US, NZ, key EU countries, and some important SE Asian nations like Singapore. Throw in alliances with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, and what do we need these 12 subs for (that we can't man) and 100 JSF (that we can't pilot). Cripes, we can't even deploy our current ARH that we are fitting and training with. And WTF are our 60 or so Abrams tanks doing? What a joke! They will NEVER be used.

Click to expand...

Long range missiles is what we need which we can put fear into beligerants with.

For the non-disclosing countries you ask why? and is that acceptable?

It's Snake Pliskin said:

Long range missiles is what we need which we can put fear into beligerants with.

For the non-disclosing countries you ask why? and is that acceptable?

Click to expand...

Bombers, not missiles. Bombers are re-usuable. The F-15E is a good buy, we should have bought a heap of them instead of this Joint Strike Fighter.

Calanen said:

Bombers, not missiles. Bombers are re-usuable. The F-15E is a good buy, we should have bought a heap of them instead of this Joint Strike Fighter.

Click to expand...

Yes a mixture of bombers and missiles. Australia should rebuild the F111.

A missile is harder to shoot down though.

JSF will be a good multi roll plane IF we buy all the extra bits so it can opperate in a coalition environment. We must buy the add ons! That's why our F18s and F111s have been USELESS for the past 20 + years. No add ons!!! Having said that, the F111's flown to Tindal just before the Timor intervention (invasion) probably had the Indons packing. But from my perspective, it was the US MEU floating about that may have been a good deterrent. Hm,off topic. We need to keep all in perspective, and perspective is that the US and UK will save our @rse into the future no matter what attack. Teams have been set, and we are with the Anglo-Saxons.

ABC News just said it was going to cost 104 billion over the next four years???!!!

Can this be true???