Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Defence Space Command

Even Kev acknowledges if a conflict breaks out over Taiwan and China take on the U.S for control of the Pacific, it leaves Australia in a precarious position.

"The balance of power continues to change in China’s favour, both militarily and economically, so that shifts this dynamic," he told the ABC's 7.30 program on Wednesday night.
Mr Rudd, who has recently completed postdoctoral research on Chinese leader Xi Jinping, believes it will take years for him to force the issue.

"Xi Jinping has his own timetable in his head for returning Taiwan to Chinese national sovereignty, not any time soon, but my guestimate is late 2020s, early 2030s," he said.

If and when that happens, Australia will be caught in an increasingly troubling position as US-China relations deteriorate further.
"We do not have as yet any effective mechanism to manage these impending crises in the US-China relationship," Mr Rudd warned.

Taiwan is arguably the most sensitive and important issue when it comes to China's relationship with the United States. Washington has no formal diplomatic ties with Taipei, but is Taiwan's most important international backer and arms supplier.

'China at this stage wins most of the time'​

The increasingly autocratic Chinese government wants to expel US influence from the Pacific and, if push comes to shove, China could very well win a military conflict in the region, Mr Rudd claimed.

"In most of the war gaming which has been done so far — and these are desktop exercises by and large — if you look at what various US officials have said off the record and partly reported in the American media, the Chinese at this stage win most of the time," he told 7.30.

Additionally, Japan – no stranger to war with China – could become involved in a conflict over Taiwan.

"Japan is indicating it would now see itself potentially involved and there is a logic to that," Mr Rudd explained.

"[A] Chinese pre-emptive strike to try to take out American forces probably in Guam, but also in Okinawa, and that brings Japan in."
 
I think it would be better if the government just increased the Defence budget to allow for things like this instead if making a song and dance about it. It just gives adversaries an idea of what we are up to.

It just shows that Dutton is a blatant exhibitionist with votes his biggest priority.
 
Why?
Well I'm not privy to what is discussed behind the closed doors of our govt. and our allies. Maybe we were asked to?

Deals, contracts, agreements can all be broken, not adhered to, changed, manipulated, interpreted differently etc.
If corruption, greed and power mongering can be stamped out maybe there's a chance but unfortunately, no it does not stop. Probably never will because to me, that is human nature, always was and always will be.
What does any of that have to do with Australia breaking yet another UN Treaty?
I have not yet a reason for Space Command that makes any sense.
 
I have not yet a reason for Space Command that makes any sense.
That doesn't mean Space Command doesn't make sense, only that you have difficulty making sense of it.
My MIL can't make sense of the T.V remote, that doesn't mean the T.V remote doesn't make sense. ?
 
Unless it's a Doctor evil style satellite that shoots a laser capable of destroying entire countries at will, then probably better things to do with the money. Because it sounds like the US syphoning money into their projects.
 
What does any of that have to do with Australia breaking yet another UN Treaty?
I have not yet a reason for Space Command that makes any sense.
Australia breaking yet another UN Treaty, so no other country has ever broken one?

As you probably know better than most and I've lived long enough to know that nothing needs to make sense for something to be justified, rightly or wrongly. This is just the way govts (and humans) roll, West or otherwise.

Anyways, both sides of our govt. are really good at spending money on not so palatable projects. This could be an election loser for ScoMo's mob but hey, what say did I have in the formation of said DSC?

It is what it is. If the negatives outweigh the positives like putting our trading partners' noses out of joint, well hopefully some meaningful dialogue will come of it.
 
Unless it's a Doctor evil style satellite that shoots a laser capable of destroying entire countries at will, then probably better things to do with the money. Because it sounds like the US syphoning money into their projects.
True, but I would rather be feeding money into the U.S, than trying to develop something of our own, or stop the oil leaks in the Collins class subs.
It is like anything in life, you weigh up the risks and make your call.
It will be interesting to see how many of these projects are overturned, when Labor get in and are made privy to all the information surrounding the decisions.
That is when the validity of the decision will be checked, when someone else has to cancel or clear it and wear the responsibility for doing so.
 
Well it is interesting when a publication like macrobusiness, comes out all bolshie about China, it isn't as though they are great fans of the Morrison Government.

 
That doesn't mean Space Command doesn't make sense, only that you have difficulty making sense of it.
Perhaps you can explain it as none of your points on this Coalition vote grabber stack up so far. Is your MIL writing Coalition policy?
 
Well it is interesting when a publication like macrobusiness, comes out all bolshie about China, it isn't as though they are great fans of the Morrison Government.

We need missile defence. Hard against the supersonic stuff.
The only way we could defend against China is some sort of national service scheme and nukes on those subs.
 
Australia breaking yet another UN Treaty, so no other country has ever broken one?
I doubt you conduct your affairs on the basis of the improper acts of others.
As you probably know better than most and I've lived long enough to know that nothing needs to make sense for something to be justified, rightly or wrongly. This is just the way govts (and humans) roll, West or otherwise.
I think the average person would wonder why there is a Space Command with nothing to actually command in space.
But then again I am reliably informed that Scomo got the idea from elsewhere:
 
While everyone is stating the obvious, upping the rate of reproduction would not hurt either. Small numbers defending a massive land mass is not a great combination. People often look down on the single mum on Centrelink type, but they actually are providing a commodity the nation needs.
 
While everyone is stating the obvious, upping the rate of reproduction would not hurt either. Small numbers defending a massive land mass is not a great combination. People often look down on the single mum on Centrelink type, but they actually are providing a commodity the nation needs.
I don't know . Investing in robot swarms might be more efficient than sending a lot of humans to the slaughter. Robots can be programmed to act together to overwhelm the enemy. No fear and no remorse.
 
Last edited:
I don't know . Investing in robot swarms might be more efficient than sending a ,ot if humans to the slaughter. Robots can be programmed to act together to overwhelm the enemy. No fear and no remorse.

Big populations also means you have a good (or at least better) chance to produce enough high IQ folks at the extreme right of the bell curve (3 and 4 standard deviations above the average) to be technologically innovative as a nation.
 
Top