I wish people wouldn't talk utter sh&$ in their opening posts.
Australia is not considering obtaining nuclear weapons.
Here is the opening part of the article.
A DRAMATIC deterioration in Asian security may push Australia to acquire nuclear weapons, a strategy it abandoned four decades ago, a strategic
Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Dr Rod Lyons says such a decision certainly isn't close, nor is it inevitable.
What it says is nothing new. It is a well known fact that Australia has the capability to build a nuke quickly, if it needed to.
It is also a well known fact that Australia once, in the 60's, considered a nuclear deterrent of it's own, but that was abandoned.
It is also a well known fact that should security and stability in South East Asia and the wider Asia region detereorate, that possibility will be on
the table again. And in all likelyhood, if the security/stability situation detereorated, the development of nuclear weapons by Australia will be done
with complete secrect with assistance from western allies.
In fact it's also a possibility the United States will "loan" Australian some nukes as a last resort. Similar to the NATO nuclear weapon sharing
program during the cold war for use by NATO air forces against the Warsaw Pact.
Nukes aren't being considered right now, and wont be for a long time(unless the unlikely happens in Asia), because to put it simply and probably hurt
some peoples feelings, Australia doesn't need nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction to maintain it's regional supremacy.
And beyond Australias immediate region, it's not like anyone is a threat, yet. China and Australia rely on each other for trade. China needs
Australian resources, Australia needs money.
It's a win win. Why would China or Australia upset that balance?
Indonesia is no threat and never will be. It has too many mouths to feed and can't divert massive amounts of funding to the armed forces.
It operates 13 frigates from the 1950's and 1960's. It has just over a dozen fighter aircraft. Three submarines.
Nearly 1 million soldiers including reserves, with a budget of just under 5 billion dollars.
Australia spends between 20 and 30 billion dollars on around a military of roughly 70,000 personnel. It has some of the most sophisticated military
equipment going around.
If the situation deteriorated in Asia, there's more chance a national draft of sorts would be brought back rather then Australia obtaining nukes.
Nukes are great, sure, but how will they stop enemy soldiers from invading?
We need soldiers, pilots, and crews for ships and submarines. And that is what will happen before nukes.