Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??
DropBear    6/13/2005 4:53:55 AM
In response to lacrobat's comment wrt "Why not cut the JSFs entirely?" I am interested to know how many of you believe the F-111, F-18 and Hawk127 are a complete waste of time, resources, money, training, funding, manpower etc etc etc... What would you spend the allocated funds on otherwise? You know my views, what are yours...
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Kirkzzy       5/29/2011 2:09:59 AM



The only perceived threat to 2030-2050 is a war between Chinese and America anyway.



not by a long shot.....  there's a bit more than china that needs to be considered....

Indonesia is all I can think of as another potential threat. But that's about it, we have defence ties with Singapore and Malaysia, beyond that I don't think anyone would even think of attacking us... India will later have the capability, but not the motive. They are the only real threats I can think of.... that and we will probably have to respond to regional humanitarian missions (which aren't really threats).. like another East Timor.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       5/29/2011 2:44:08 AM


Indonesia is all I can think of as another potential threat. But that's about it, we have defence ties with Singapore and Malaysia, beyond that I don't think anyone would even think of attacking us... India will later have the capability, but not the motive. They are the only real threats I can think of.... that and we will probably have to respond to regional humanitarian missions (which aren't really threats).. like another East Timor.

well, I guess you realise that I'm not going to go into detail about how the govt and the military determine force constructs against various threats - but its a bit more extensive than whats cited above.
 
there are state actors, non state actors, IMG's (issues motivated groups) which can also be offshore etc,,,,,,
non state actors can require state response etc...
 
Quote    Reply

Kirkzzy       5/29/2011 8:51:52 AM






Indonesia is all I can think of as another potential threat. But that's about it, we have defence ties with Singapore and Malaysia, beyond that I don't think anyone would even think of attacking us... India will later have the capability, but not the motive. They are the only real threats I can think of.... that and we will probably have to respond to regional humanitarian missions (which aren't really threats).. like another East Timor.



well, I guess you realise that I'm not going to go into detail about how the govt and the military determine force constructs against various threats - but its a bit more extensive than whats cited above.

 

there are state actors, non state actors, IMG's (issues motivated groups) which can also be offshore etc,,,,,,

non state actors can require state response etc...


What I am trying to say, is that their are very limited threats in which we would actually have to use the full extent of our ACF. The White Paper IIRC stated the only real things we'd have to deal with would be US-China relations, Islamic extremism and failed states within our region. This is very broad but what I am saying is, if we actually wanted to decrease our defence footprint and have a lesser role in world affairs.... than we probably could without much threat to ourselves. And instead we could just focus on CT. (counter terrorism)

Although don't get me wrong... I would much rather Australia be in the position that it is pllaned to be in around 2030. 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       5/29/2011 4:11:46 PM
military planning is also about risk management.
 
nobody predicted at how quickly ET deteriorated.  the lessons of ET are why we have phatships and an intent to marinise Tigers today.
 
nobody crystal balled the Solomons, or for that matter, when the iron curtain fell everyone saw no sub threat,
 
today we have a situationj were red to blue subs in the pacrim is 8:1 and where the requirement for P3's to do more than ASW is glaringly obvious, its also meant that the west is "relearning" ASW at fleet level
 
the political environment is volatile, you can't bank on anything giving a country a clear run through and deciding to do a Monroe..  Although I'd hardly blame the US if they decided that enough is enough and they're better off doing an imperial china on everyone...
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics