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.
the emphasis had shifted from purchasing nuclear weapons from abroad, to manufacturing them in Australia. W. C. Wentworth, Liberal parliamentarian and former Chairman of the AAEC, advocated a home-grown weapon 'because the United States could not be trusted to come to our defence'.
Secondly, we accepted that the joint facilities were probably targets, but we accepted the risk of that for what we saw as the benefits of global stability. We did not believe that port visits and exercises posed any such risks. On the one hand, we found ourselves dealing with genuine nuclear risk.
The United States has extended assurances of extended nuclear deterrence to its major allies from the earliest days of the Cold War. At present, the US appears to count some 31 countries - mostly the NATO allies - under its nuclear umbrella. Both Japan and Australia have incorporated explicit statements of reliance on United States extended nuclear deterrence into their formal defence policies. In the Japanese case these public statements reach back at least until the 1970s. In the Australian case, while the assurance has been taken as given more many years, the earliest Australian government official public statement is in the Defence White Paper of 1994. The United States has frequently provided public confirmation of its promise of extended nuclear deterrence to Japan and its European allies. However, there is no known record of comparable public assurance of extended nuclear deterrence to Australia, notwithstanding the assumption that such a promise exists.
This February 2005 NRDC paper pieces together evidence from an array of sources to show that the United States is still deploying 480 nuclear weapons in Europe.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Melbourne_Militia
Look I'm sure Israel do have secret nukes, maybe even India and USA.
BUT. Those countries are already known to have nukes, Australia is known to NOT have nukes.
Like I said, the second mot important reason for having and letting everyone else that you have nukes is for bluffing purposes.
[edit on 15/12/09 by Chadwickus]
A DRAMATIC deterioration in Asian security may push Australia to acquire nuclear weapons, a strategy it abandoned four decades ago, a strategic report argues.
Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Dr Rod Lyons says such a decision certainly isn't close, nor is it inevitable.
Originally posted by Max_TO
Does Australia have rockets to throw a nuke far enough to matter ? Seems to be a much better first step .
Originally posted by proteus33
austalia has had nukes for years but no you they didn't design them or the delivery systems they are us orginated and operated. but there have been nukes there for years.
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by Max_TO
Does Australia have rockets to throw a nuke far enough to matter ? Seems to be a much better first step .
Well considering all the US and British rocket tests were carried out here on joint Australian/ International programs, I think we have access to rocket technology
I know this as the town I live in was where they were all tested, and these programs still occur occasionally
Originally posted by Nventual
The way I see it is that if we get nukes it makes us a target to be nuked ourselves.
How about we just have a large amount of ground-to-air missiles and upgrade our Air Force's inventory.
Originally posted by Nventual
The way I see it is that if we get nukes it makes us a target to be nuked ourselves.
How about we just have a large amount of ground-to-air missiles and upgrade our Air Force's inventory.