Indonesia boosts military presence near Australia and ramps up efforts to increase its firepower

daaskapital

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by daaskapital

 

I think there is a reason as to why Japan forfeited their Australian invasion plans.

Oh, there was a BIG reason. It's name was MacArthur and he was one pissed puppy as he led the fight back up the island chains to Japan itself. All done with invaluable help from Australians, of course.

I remember reading that Japan was very well going to invade Australia by landing their forces at two main areas. They had originally planned to land a force in Darwin, but upon realising that it would have been too dificiult to take the city, and gather forces to traverse the Australia continent, had relocated their plan to land a force in between Brisbane and Townsville. Their first objective would be Brisbane, and their second, Sydney. If Australia wouldn't surrender by the time Sydney and Brisbane had been taken, they would have taken Melbourne.

Apparently, it was only two things which stopped the Japanese invasion.

1: Australian forces had defeated the intended Japanese invasion force in New Guinea.

2: Australian and US forces had cut off the supply lines through island hopping.

All of this information was stated by a Japanese national who was at the nerve centre of the Japanese Navy. Upon the release of the aforementioned information, he was taken in and interrogated/tortured by the US in the presence of an Australian officer, before coming out and saying that the information was incorrect.

Mr. Sato indicated that the Japanese Navy was responsible for the implementation of plans to invade and occupy Australia. He indicated that he was always at the nerve centre of the Japanese Navy.

The article indicated that Mr Sato had stated that the Japanese had realised that it would have been too difficult to move a large force south from Darwin and had then decided to attack the Queensland coast midway between Townsville and Brisbane. He indicated that communications were good and the population was sparse in that area of Queensland.

The city of Brisbane was reportedly the first objective of this so-called Invasion Plan of Australia. It was believed that Brisbane could be taken quite readily with a minimum of cost and resistance.

Sydney was the next objective and was to be attacked by land and amphibious forces. They then planned to move on to Melbourne, but by this time, they anticipated that Australia would have surrendered. Mr Sato claimed that moral in Australia was low at that time, and that Australian complaints about Britain deserting Australia was evidence of this fact.

According to Mr. Sato, things changed when orders were issued for the Japanese forces to take Milne Bay and Port Moresby. The Japanese were not willing to risk another operation in Australian while their supply lines were in peril. Again, according to Mr. Sato, the Japanese campaign in New Guinea used up all the forces originally intended for the invasion of Australia. Mr. Sato indicated that the Japanese had initially thought the Australian forces would be a pushover in New Guinea. This they abruptly found not to be the case. Despite this underestimation of the Australians fighting ability, Mr Sato indicated that the Japanese believed that Australia could be persuaded to become neutral. The Japanese propaganda machine turned itself to achieving this goal.

Mr. Sato indicated that Australians would not have been treated very harshly if we had surrendered. He seemed to know a great many leading Australians and he indicated that he was quite certain a good number of Australians would have agreed to co-operate with the Japanese.

The article stated that Mr. Sato had a "pile of information about Australia feet high." He indicated that the information had been obtained by:-

monitoring Australian broadcasts
espionage
intelligence
and at the notorious Ofuna POW Camp

...

Following the publication of this article on 1 January 1946, Mr. J.B. Chifley, the Prime Minister of Australia wrote to General Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers in Japan on 21 January 1946. MacArthur immediately ordered an investigation by his military intelligence group.

Mr. Sato was interrogated by US military intelligence in the presence of Major R. L. Hughes of the Australian Service Mission. They wrote a report dated 2 March 1946 detailing their interrogation of Ken Sato. General Douglas MacArthur, then wrote to Mr. Chifley on 5 March 1946, attaching a copy of the report by the interrogation officer, which contained the results of the interrogation of Mr. Ken Sato and listed the Australians with whom Sato claimed acquaintance.

...

Sato indicated that the newspaper had misquoted him.

Sorry for the extensive quote:

www.ozatwar.com...

------

To address MacArthur, a lot of Australians actually do not/did not like him. During wartime, he was known to have chastised Australian soldiers for the smallest of defeats, only to claim American victory for battles of which the Australians would win...

Thanks for the comment.

edit on 23-1-2014 by daaskapital because: sp

Spot on mate

Australian did not get the recognition they deserved in protecting Australia.

Same thing happened with the Vietnam War..... Australian SAS were reffered to as The Ghost of the Jungle, for their ability to suddenyl appear, successfuly take out the enemy and disappear into the jungle with the Vietnamese wondering WTF just happened. And they were the locals who knew their own area.

Then we go onto Afghanistan, I heard many stories of Australian troops being imbedded with American troops to avoid cases of mistaken friendly fire by the US soldiers upon the Australians....... And the number of times Aussie SAS on hilltops unknowingly to the Americans, ordered in air strikes when americans were being ambushed/over run/under fire saving their bacon......but this is not ackowledged.....would love to see a Hollywood movie depicting Aussies saving the yanks butts in warzones....highly doubt that would happen thou.

reply to post by Melbourne_Militia


We'll agree to disagree at this point and perhaps just accept we read radically different history books and are looking at dramatically different accounts and timelines of the Pacific War as it actually happened from Pearl Harbor to the USS Missouri.

Nothing wrong with disagreement...and I disagree with respect. Australia has absolutely nothing to feel anything less than full pride about......and neither does America. Not for that war, we don't.

I'd say that the Americans were critical in the island hopping campaign, as well as some naval battles (Battle of the Coral Sea comes to mind as an example). That being said, Australia did bear the brunt of the war in New Guinea, Papua, East Timor and other south-east Asian countries, where the threat was most apparent.

I'm not taking anything away from either country. Both fought well in the Pacific theatre.

Pre-Emptive strike on our behalf ? possibly fly a single F18 with a pair of GBU-16's and Bomb the Presidential Palace for some early posturing ? Then Claim Bali and all Eastward as Annexed Australian Lands for good measure.

Some updates about the Australian/Indonesian dispute:

These statements come after the Australian Prime Minister reaffirmed his position to turn all boats around on the Indonesian border.

Indonesia's foreign minister says a heightening of his country's border security is not meant to be an unfriendly act towards Australia, despite admitting the nations are going through a 'difficult patch'.

Marty Natalegawa, in Davos for the World Economic Forum, admitted to Australian reporters on Thursday that there have been concerns recent tensions between the two countries have the potential to get out of hand.

However, he insisted bilateral relations were still in a 'very good state' overall.

Although he wouldn't go into specifics, Mr Natalegawa effectively confirmed media reports out of Jakarta claiming a number of Indonesian Navy warships have been deployed and four Air Force defence radars have been programmed to closely monitor the southern border.

He said Indonesia had upped its border patrol in the wake of recent incursions by Australian navy vessels, but played the move down when asked if it was designed to be provocative towards Australia or put his country on a war footing.

'It's not meant to be an unfriendly act to anyone,' Mr Natalegawa said.

'It's just a country that is keen to ensure our sovereign border is properly protected.'

www.skynews.com.au...

Rumour floating around that a Collins class sub arrived in port at HMAS Larrakeyah over night.....

Couple of my mates in Surveillance Australia have mentioned that the Indo navy are getting pretty active out on the boarders when the RAN are intercepting the boats.

BalderAsir
Rumour floating around that a Collins class sub arrived in port at HMAS Larrakeyah over night.....

Couple of my mates in Surveillance Australia have mentioned that the Indo navy are getting pretty active out on the boarders when the RAN are intercepting the boats.

Thanks for the updates mate!

reply to post by muse7

Now it doesn't look like such a bad idea to have all those american military bases in Australia does it....Australians? :p

The main reason the bases are here is to further US interests and gather intelligence. I would not think there are sufficient numbers to ward off any attacks. What is of bigger interest the increase in rhetoric. Maybe they are positioning for a coming conflict between the USA and China. I remember reading on ATS of a future "fake" war between the 2, to allow the fall of US $ and to nring in a new Chinese reserve currency.

On the Indonesia war of words: I would say that there are too many US and British investments in Aust to allow any form of attack and permanent settlement by Indonesians

reply to post by daaskapital


Nice avatar. ..... I wouldn't be too worried about this. Sounds more like posturing than anything serious. In a couple of months this won't even be remembered.

TiM3LoRd
reply to post by daaskapital

 

Nice avatar. ..... I wouldn't be too worried about this. Sounds more like posturing than anything serious. In a couple of months this won't even be remembered.

Haha, thanks. Nice one yourself.

Didn't know the avatar was already in use though.

I agree. It just seems to be rhetoric. I don't think Indonesia would, or could, follow through on these threats.

Thanks for commenting.

reply to post by daaskapital
Australia does have friends like America that have some very important bases here , more importantly aussies like those sort of odds you only have to read about some of our battles severely outnumbered we still kicked ass

reply to post by hellobruce


Exmouth in WA, Hit that Indonesia, and then watch the US really get there panties in a bunch.

stumason
I am confused by Indonesia getting shirty about the Australian Navy ships in their waters, because under international Law they are allowed access, transit rights etc...

It does seem like they are trying to find a reason to have a scrap...

Refugee boats and money. As with relations between all first-world developed countries and third world developing countries, if one country can send immigrants into the other, they that country finds a new source of income as the workers send money back home (sourced from either benefits, work, or crime). Per individual, this amounts up to $500/month. For 1 million workers, that's worth $6 billion. Multiply that up by 25% of the population who could potentially relocate.

reply to post by hellobruce


en.wikipedia.org... our spy base/where we run our drones from evidently

The facility consists of a large computer complex with 14 radomes protecting antennae[4] and has over 800 employees.[5] A long-term NSA employee at Pine Gap, David Rosenberg, has suggested that the CIA runs the facility.[6]:pp 45-46[7] The location is strategically significant because it controls America's spy satellites as they pass over the one third of the globe which includes China, parts of Russia and Middle East oil fields.[4] Central Australia was chosen because it was too remote for spy ships passing in international waters to intercept the signal.[6]:p xxi The facility has become a key part of the local economy.

so there is that one at least but that seems more of an intelligence base as opposed to a military garrison/out post

breakingdefense.com... so seems where quadrupling our troops stationed in darwin and it seems to have ruffled a few feathers

www.theaustralian.com.au... seems your even sharing the cost of the endeavor

www.anti-bases.org... found this but not sure of its validity as a a source so take that for what its worth.

think were getting ready to share a base near Darwin as well as the future site of pacific command but it seems at least your general (australia) will be running the show www.theguardian.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

U.S./Republic of the Philippines (Mutual Defense Treaty, 1951) U.S./Australia/New Zealand (ANZUS – U.S., 1952) U.S./Republic of Korea (Mutual Defense Treaty, 1954) U.S./Japan (Mutual Defense Treaty, 1960)

also seems if Indonesia wants to get feisty with Australia they would do well to remember our mutual defense pact between united states and Australia
from same link so i think its just posturing on Indonesians part

In addition, PACOM's area of responsibility covers Taiwan whose defense relationship with the United States is governed by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979. Furthermore, while the SEATO organization was disestablished in the late 1970s, SEACDT, the Collective Defense Treaty, still formally binds the U.S., France, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, and the Philippines.

so any attack on Australia will be answered by the usa among other nations (uk france etc)

There's a long history of provocation and paranoia between Indonesia and Australia. I seem to recall that the Canungra Jungle Training base in Queensland was originally set up to stop the Indos if they invaded via Papua New Guinea, which was the prevalent assessment of the time. The thinking was that they would come over the Irian Jaya border and make their way down to Aus that way. At the same time, (1960s), Garuda pilots, who all held military rank, didn't make any Australian friends by continually referring to Australia as "South Irian".

It's an election year in Indonesia. It's possible that Indonesia is feeling a bit hairy chested at the moment, due to a rise in nationalist sentiment, which is always a nice diversion when the economy is hurting, the local Indonesian population doesn't want the refugees either, and there is a good chance for an increase in foreign aid from the Christian devils down south. Plus the local Indonesian military and hangers-on make a nice living from extorting passage money from the refugees.

But I don't like the new level of propaganda the game has taken on. I don't trust the media stories that the Indonesians are releasing. They're aimed at Australians, they have political overtones, with extremely articulate English speaking alleged refugees on camera, describing how heartless and nasty Australian naval personnel are. I've been watching the Indonesian stories for a couple of months now and they all smack of a set piece strategy.

Interesting times.

I'm inclined to believe that all this is a media induced "storm in a teacup". Face Saving for the Indonesians possibly? THe Indonesians have a long detailed history of Sino-phobia.

I am fairly sure that the Indonesians are still with the Anglosphere when it comes to security. They are just modernising their military to reflect their growing economy.

I'm hearing rumours right now that several Indonesian naval ships have entered Australian waters close to Darwin. Can anyone either confirm this or put it to rest?

The reason for this build-up, using the 2009 spy scandal as a catalyst, in my opinion is a smokescreen. I reckon their true intentions not to attack Australia (it would be suicide and un-holdable). I think they have their sights set again on East Timor.

Still, having their naval vestals come within a few miles of Darwin "if true", is pretty worrying.

reply to post by Ironclad2000


What possible reason would Indonesia have to attack Australia? Do you have any basis for this? Indonesia is an ally of the Anglosphere. You are reading too much into this.

reply to post by deessell


I never said they would attack Australia. That would be a big mistake and they probably know this as well as any 5 year old would.

I did say however that all their huff and puff and the reason for the build-up is most likely another play for East Timor.

They are buying a lot of hardware for just a few fishing boats full of illegal immigrants !!

There was a statement made by Natalegawa, that a major military clash between Australia and Indonesia was inevitable in the near future !?!

If a member of the Indonesian government openly says something like this, then I'd say that's a pretty sure sign of their intentions.

Ironclad where'd you hear the rumour? We were out 200nm from Darwin on patrol last night and saw nothing, a few indo patrol boats on their side for the water boarders, but definitely nothing in our waters apart from our navy, a customs vessel and our dash 8.