It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australian Military-Defense musings

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 02:59 AM
link   
I would like to hear from people here who think that the current strategy of relying on other countries to come to our aid is flawed.

I presonally believe buying Fighters, Tanks and weapons from overseas is a distraction from the fact that on our own we could only blunt an attack from a foreign power like China for a couple of hours at best. I strongly believe that for us to have some kind of deterrent from foreign invaders taking our resources here we have only one solution....massive missile silo's located in central Australia.

Imagine some unfreindly neihbour eyeing off our northwest Oil, Gas and Iron ore having to deal with a retalitory strike that could reach all their cities. Not that they would be the first option, which would be to Nuke any force on route to our shores.

Australia was at the forefront of rocketry in the 50's with all the testing done at Woomera we were cutting edge. I have talked to people who worked there then and aparently we did alot of the cruise missile flight testing and guidance.

Am i crazy ? would this start an arms race in places like Indonesia ?




posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   
How would China attack Australia? Invasion? lol. They cannot project that much force beyond their 200 nm EZ. You can definetley deal with a handful of ship or (doubtful) aircraft which themselves cannot reach or hit hard enough. Not to mention they cannot sustain such an attack. The only way China could attack (successfully) is via missiles (ICBM's) however that alone will not win a war. I dare say that aside form the ICBM aspect Australia has more capability, now, to project power into China than vise versa. This is all hypothetical of course without factoring in other countries...



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Good post Westpoint.

I think the only real risk of invasion is from a Country like Indonesia who are largely muslim. John Howard bows to them now and always backs down on any quarrel they throw at us.

If we had significant pressuring mechanism's ( ICBM's ) the tables would be turned and places like Papua New Guinea and Iryan Jaya could get independence without Indonesia sending in covert troops to stir up trouble as they have done in the past.

I think you wouldn't even have to threaten to use them, just make it internationally known that Australia now has "around the world missile capability" and test a few up in the North West every now and then.

The reason I think this is relatively important is that the US is extended with multiple war fronts and has largely left southeast Asia theatre out of its sights and Indonesia has 250+ million population and most are Muslim.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I think our postion is a little like Japan. We don't have ICBM's but with a little work we could build them relatively quickly or Lend/Lease from the US. I don't think we need to instigate an nuclear arms race in the region. If a threat emerged..and there is no state threat to Australian soil now, we'd build up capability comensurate to the escalation of that threat. The key is to ensure we understand what/who could/would threaten us and why. The current and real threat is totalitarian, fundamental Islam and its tactic of using terror.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I disagree that the US is paying little attention to South East Asia or the Pacific. I have spend a great deal of time looking at US policy and recent military deployments in the Pacific theater. First the USN is transitioning the bulk of its force into the pacific. During the cold war it was 60-40 between the Atlantic and Pacific. Within a few years it will be the other way around, our sub force will be even more lopsided in the Pacific. Next the basing of an F-22 Squadron in Hawaii and two more in Alaska. The recent deployments of the F-117's to SK and the (planned) deployment of Raptors to Kadena highlights our interest in the region. Also, recently a constant rotation of B-52's, B-1B's and B-2's has been maintained at Anderson AFB Guam. Not to mention the deployment of two (with one more the way) ground based long range X band radars in the Pacific. I'm not even mentioning the constan USAF and ground forces based in the Asian theater (Japan, SK, Singapore etc...)

The truth is that the US has a lot of interest in South East Asia and in the Pacific in general. We know that competition in that region will be increasing so we’re determined not to have another Pearl Harbor happen. The US has strategic assets in Australia as well as several other nations in that region. They cannot be attack without the US getting involved, it just simply is not possible, forget Iraq, that does not even factor into the decision. Saying Australia, Japan or South Korea can be attack without the US getting involved is like saying the UK will get attacked by Russia and the US will not get involved. It is clear to all that those countries are under the US nuclear umbrella, should someone decide to use such weapons they know full well the repercussions.

Australia need not start up anything by acquiring ICBM's, they have the Navy and the AF to deliver long ranged PGM's. If you insist I say purchase a few as well as build up a tanker/transport force and that should suffice for all likely scenarios.

[edit on 15-2-2007 by WestPoint23]



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 12:52 AM
link   


I dare say that aside form the ICBM aspect Australia has more capability, now, to project power into China than vise versa. This is all hypothetical of course without factoring in other countries...


I'm not too sure I understand you there. How can Australia project power into China?Subs? refueled F-111 flights?

I think neither has the ability to do much damage to the other as of now.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
During the cold war it was 60-40 between the Atlantic and Pacific. Within a few years it will be the other way around, our sub force will be even more lopsided in the Pacific.


Surely there will be a sizeable percentage in the Gulf/Indian Ocean as well?



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:52 AM
link   
Australia had a excellent army we might be lacking in numbers but the training in kapooka and duntroon train very strong and exceptionally strong minded soldiers. The only beef i have with this system we have in Australia if our army does fail we can not have a peoples melisha because of our strict firearm laws.

But we have the SAS who are like the knights in shining armor and we have recent military hard were.



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 05:48 AM
link   
AMerica is taking an intrest in east asia. espescially considering that while america plays a huge roll in the defense of austraila, australia suprisngly also plays a large roll in the defense of america. Pine Gap and formerly Nurrungar both play a large roll in the monitering and comunications with american sattelites. Durning the cold war infact, Nurrungar was the main downlod link for the US ealy warning satelites looking for an mass ICBM attack by the USSR. Pine Gap Still plays a large roll in the strategic defense of th US.

I've been to Nurrungar after it was decomissionend and Gee it was big. Not to mention completely self sufficent. It even had it's own power plant.



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   

AUSTRALIA'S close defence alliance with the United States is to be further entrenched with the building of a new US military communications base at Geraldton in Western Australia.

The Age has learned that the US is to build the base, which follows three years of secret negotiations with Canberra.

The base will provide a crucial link for a new network of military satellites that will help America's ability to fight wars in the Middle East and Asia.

It is the first big US military installation to be built in Australia since the controversy surrounding the joint spy base at Pine Gap more than two decades ago.


www.theage.com.au...



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Well, the defense of Australia perhaps can't done purely with guns.
It obviously does manly rely on good politics. It does rely on not pissing Indonesia off too much....which means for some frustrating and sometimes "immoral" decisions by our govt, but it is a fine balancing act.
It also does involve a bit of sucking up to the USA as well.

We are a physically large, but numerically small nation. If someone like China decided to invade, well, theres not much we can do about it alone.

Nukes aren't the answer... you get the classic Arms Race going on. We get 'em, then Indonesia gets them, then the Philippines gets nervous etc etc. Better to keep the Arms in the region mainly for internal and defense purposed. The less guns the better. The more trade, the more economic prosperity the better.

New Zealand took an interesting angle. They decided that buying super expensive fighter jets was really a waste of money. They were never going to fight a classic WW2 style battle. They needed boats for controlling illegal fishing and immigrants, small quickly deployable forces for things like Peace Keeping. A rethink about what useful things their defence forces actually do.



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
dont worry if someone picks on you your mum and dad will come and sort it out. (britain lol)
wel send our military and the real S.A.S over there to give you a hand and im pritty sure any war with australia would be taken as an act of aggresion against the UK if not the U.N.



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Not to rain on your parade or anything but given the current and future state of affairs in the RN it's ability to project and sustain significant power across the globe is highly questionable. Even with a much larger navy, with island territories to use as forward bases and with a conflict zone much closer to the home isles the RN still struggled against Argies. With the home territories, ME and other global commitments to look after such a rapid response is again questionable. Besides a few remaining outpost islands in the Pacific what interest/support structure does the RN have in that part of the world?



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
The UK doesn't really give two hoots about Australia. Singapore was a complete debacle in WW2 and defence of Australia was low on the priority list right when we needed it. The AIF was running around North Aftrica beating up Rommell for the Brits. All the while Japan threatened. When we needed help it was the US that saved our Ass in Pacific not the UK. We did our bit in PNG and but really it was the US Pacific Fleet that stopped the rot. Australians have been eternally grateful ever since. For instance we were side by side in Vietnam "stopping the advance of communism" into our region and the UK was not involved. This is fair enough becasue what interests does the UK have in the Pacific Rim? - Hong Kong is gone so what's left? Australias relationship with the UK is Sport, Culture and Business. There is nothing strategic about it at all. Australia always helps others but the only country to really help us has been Uncle Sam.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Massive missile silos would be a good defensive measure if the missiles are capable of intercepting aircrafts a good distance from the shoreline. An advanced design allowing the missile to target both ship/ground/air targets would be nice.

If you say 1 cruise misisle costs about $1.5 million then for 1 billion a very large stock pile could be built. I still believe a long range jet such as the F-111, B1, etc. would be required unless the missiles were capable of reaching Indonesia and other potential threats (not saying that Indonesia is currenty a threat).

Idealy it would be great if australia had an airforce consisting of JSF, FA-22 and B1 lancers.

Several missile defence batteries with large stock piles of missiles for anti-air, anti-shipping and the ability to track multiple targets quickly and launch at multiple targets similtanously.

Army with Land-warrior type technology, good numbers of AUS-TIGERS, good salaries and benefits.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 12:21 AM
link   
BTW,

In te end Australia probably doesn't need much in the way of military... im just a megalomaniac at heart.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skippy505
The UK doesn't really give two hoots about Australia. Singapore was a complete debacle in WW2 and defence of Australia was low on the priority list right when we needed it. The AIF was running around North Aftrica beating up Rommell for the Brits. All the while Japan threatened. When we needed help it was the US that saved our Ass in Pacific not the UK. We did our bit in PNG and but really it was the US Pacific Fleet that stopped the rot. Australians have been eternally grateful ever since. For instance we were side by side in Vietnam "stopping the advance of communism" into our region and the UK was not involved. This is fair enough becasue what interests does the UK have in the Pacific Rim? - Hong Kong is gone so what's left? Australias relationship with the UK is Sport, Culture and Business. There is nothing strategic about it at all. Australia always helps others but the only country to really help us has been Uncle Sam.


Hey, your welcome friend.


Anyway, I think the first thing Australia needs to do is do away with strict gun control laws so that it can have a people's armed militia as a last line of defense. Hey, it works in the US.

Secondly, I think Australia is more than capable of producing ICBMs and nukes if half the backward countries in the world today are.

I hope the US will be willing to give the JSF, and eventually F-22 fighters to australia as well as other state of the art hardware. Their location in the world is of strategic importance.




posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 01:34 AM
link   
XPhilesfan

I have no doubt we could resurrect the Woomera test range to go full on testing of ICBM's.

Buy some Nuclear technology off the Chinese for nicks and we are all set to protect ourselves properly.

Bring them on Johnny as time goes by there are less and less friendly countries toward us and I think if we are relying on someone else to defend or repell an invasion force we are deluded in the extreme.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by mazzroth]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 01:41 AM
link   
I do agree that Australia is foolish to adopt a defence strategy that basically envolves riding around on the coat tails of other nations.

in the event of an environmental disaster (katrinax50) in the states...... with america on its knees Australia would be standing there in the middle of the asian region with its pants down around its ankles.

And I think that every Australian knows the Howard thinks like most people of his era do and that is that our only hope... if indonesia were to invade would be a strong alliance with the U.S... And he has demonstrated with his cowardice in relation to his years of inaction on the david hicks affair that he would rather "cut loose" one of his citizens then risk offending the U.S.

I think he probably would like to think of us as a quazi satelite provice of the U.S.

I like amerian culture... but I would rather be a bonefide aussie then a second class pseudo american.

As for nukes..... I dont particularly like them or nuclear power for that matter but seeing australia has a large slice of the worlds uranium and that every man and their dog how has nukes.... it wouldn't hurt



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by mazzroth
XPhilesfan

I have no doubt we could resurrect the Woomera test range to go full on testing of ICBM's.

Buy some Nuclear technology off the Chinese for nicks and we are all set to protect ourselves properly.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by mazzroth]


Why the hell would you buy it from the chinese? Im sure the US would sell you a reactor or two even knowing full well australia was using it as a breeder reactor.

Id like to know where all those centrifuges in iran came from..... oh, wait let me guess.....Russia?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join