The Defense of Australia.

[Oldbloke]

CZ515.
"Your welcome. Come and take everything Xi.
I'll put the prawns on the BBQ for you sir. I want to be your slave mate. Oh, I remembered the vaseline"

tempFileForShare_20220313-081356_206370061440300.jpg (120.01 KiB) Viewed 2007 times

[mickb]

Thanks Mick

But then question is what do they do land a hundred thousand ppl and try and defend against a couple of American ships.

I read an interesting old article. Basically in Afghanistan it was costing the US Army $400 per Gallon to fuel a front line vehicle. Obama administration calculated they spent 1 billion dollars to deploy 1000 troops.

More reason that we don't need a huge army to defend Australia.

I was in Afghanistan 3 years as a contractor and yep that sounds about right. I think the cost of an apple from where it was grown to some soldiers plate in a DFAC( dining facility) was something like $14. Atrocious waste of money.

Australia is built differently to Afghanistan though, and most countries. eg people seem to think the outback makes us strong, picturing chnese landing in WA and stumbling for 6 weeks across the simpson desert to attack coober pedy etc.. The fact is we have no strength in the interior( like battling to moscow, taking berlin, taking kabul type grinds).

Everything important to us is easily stacked , centralised targets on the coast. All our goodies are right next to enemy territory aka the waterline. Its a hell of a situation to defend.

[Larry]

Yes if the want to take over Sydney, canberra and Melbourne the are not going to land on the norther cape and try to make it via the surface. You dont land in Darwin and take a road trip.

[Oldbloke]

A small nuke for each major city, all in a singe ICBM. Let the foxes, dogs, rats & flies clean up the bodies. Then use our bull dosers and fuel to clean up the rubble.

Job done. Get the remainder on the BBQ for the new bosses. BYO Vaseline.

[cz515]

Far out OB, How about you give us a reason or proof that China is planning to attack us. And what will you do to defend. Instead of taking pot shots.

And having a bunch of nukes is not an option... only because the people and parliament of Australia will not allow it. But even if they did you have two problems firstly is taken most countries 20/30 years to build one, and secondly about same to build a rocket to deliver it.

But more importantly if you lob a nuke at China pre-emptively what do you think they will do? Fire everything they got at us. And I dunno about you I rather be Xi slave then dead and my children and their children mutated by radiation poisoning. Do you know even after 80 years children in Nagasaki and Hiroshima have defects resulting from the nuke thrown on them. And a far higher incidence of cancer even if they haven't lived there, just cuz their parents etc were there and their cells got mutated

And before you say in the 1980s they were just going to give us some nukes, it didn't happen then so forget about it, it's the same as I saying, last month i was going to buy the ticket that won 120 million dollar powerball.... just I didn't buy it.

[Oldbloke]

Far out OB, How about you give us a reason or proof that China is planning to attack us. And what will you do to defend. Instead of taking pot shots.

And having a bunch of nukes is not an option... only because the people and parliament of Australia will not allow it. But even if they did you have two problems firstly is taken most countries 20/30 years to build one, and secondly about same to build a rocket to deliver it.

But more importantly if you lob a nuke at China pre-emptively what do you think they will do? Fire everything they got at us. And I dunno about you I rather be Xi slave then dead and my children and their children mutated by radiation poisoning. Do you know even after 80 years children in Nagasaki and Hiroshima have defects resulting from the nuke thrown on them. And a far higher incidence of cancer even if they haven't lived there, just cuz their parents etc were there and their cells got mutated

And before you say in the 1980s they were just going to give us some nukes, it didn't happen then so forget about it, it's the same as I saying, last month i was going to buy the ticket that won 120 million dollar powerball.... just I didn't buy it.

1. This thread is about defence that means we don't use them first.

2. Nobody can see into the future. But
Proper Planning and Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance. A good boy scout is always prepared.

3. Nothing is set in concrete. Ever thought the government might change its policy regarding nukes. So, don't assume too much.

4. Ever thought the offer might have been to purchase,, idiot.

5. Xi doesn't care about his own people now. Do you think he will care if a few die from cancer in 50 years.

6. You keep assuming we don't have the equipment, knowledge or skills to build a few nukes. You never know do you?

[cz515]

Why don't you go away. OH&S officer did you avant do any real work. Or just talk to everyone in a demeaning manner

[Oldbloke]

Manager sport

[straightshooter]

A bit of mutual trolling going on here.
While I am mystified as to exactly what CZ is trying to say with his avatar in relation to Australia, Oldbloke your avatar is 'The Duke' with all that implies. The reality is that Australia is more like the deputy he had in many of his western movies. Aged or infirm or semi-useless.
A lot has to change.
No point in talking loudly but only carrying a very small stick.
That's not going to change by buying some overpriced trinkets that may be all consumed on day 1 or day 2.
Look at Australia's geography, population distribution, true industrial capacity and how deeply WE have swallowed the woke ideology.
Anybody with at least a few functioning cerebral neurons should be ventilating these concerns rather than trying to win debating points over trivia.
The warning signs are flashing right now.

[on_one_wheel]

We don't need to build neuclear weapons.
We simply need to allow the US to park some of theirs here.
Something I think the US would love to do.

[mickb]

Smaller countries survive, be it Australia, Denmark or Austria- through alliances, period. We have enough of an army to look like we are pulling our weight, we sign up for any international skirmishes the big boys require of us, and in return we get their protection, or rather they defend their interests in our mining and agricultural resources. Increasing spend to defend a continent like ours from a large opponent is pure fantasy. it would be like owning a cattle property and putting up a brick wall around it to keep theives oout

[bladeracer]

Smaller countries survive, be it Australia, Denmark or Austria- through alliances, period. We have enough of an army to look like we are pulling our weight, we sign up for any international skirmishes the big boys require of us, and in return we get their protection, or rather they defend their interests in our mining and agricultural resources. Increasing spend to defend a continent like ours from a large opponent is pure fantasy. it would be like owning a cattle property and putting up a brick wall around it to keep theives oout

Being reliant on the protection of somebody else is akin to calling the Police when some druggie has a gun to your head.
Didn't work for Poland or other European countries in '39, won't work for us.

We keep foxes out of our rabbit cages using electric mesh fencing.
We keep our cattle in their paddocks with a single electric fence wire.
It's far more cost-effective than building a steel or timber fence, or patrolling the fencelines 24/7.
No reason we couldn't do the same with our country.
Electronic defences are the way to go. We only need assets on standby 24/7 if we don't have effective long-range warning systems or intelligence sources. Put electronic surveillance measures up so we have effective warning of impending attack.

But, an enemy doesn't need a big opening to infiltrate many, many thousands of assets into the heart of the country, and our military has no hope of doing anything to prevent it. Even thirty years ago, putting 1000 troops into an area required supply columns hundreds of kilometers long, with air and sea ports and masses of supporting infrastructure to keep the attack rolling. Modern military's now plan for putting troops into an area with no outside support, or very little immediate support (Russia obviously didn't get that memo). They take and consolidate an area and build the infrastructure to allow future resupply. Look at any of the recent wars, small protected enclaves of troops, self-contained and able to defend themselves for long periods (decades). Any enemy coming here would do the same thing, just on a much larger scale. Supply has always been the killer of offensives, so modern planners try to avoid the issue entirely by inserting a _lot_ of supply with the initial forces.

[womble]

We drive this up to the port of Darwin and leave it at the gate with the keys still in it.

[Bill]

Smaller countries survive, be it Australia, Denmark or Austria- through alliances, period. We have enough of an army to look like we are pulling our weight, we sign up for any international skirmishes the big boys require of us, and in return we get their protection, or rather they defend their interests in our mining and agricultural resources. Increasing spend to defend a continent like ours from a large opponent is pure fantasy. it would be like owning a cattle property and putting up a brick wall around it to keep theives oout

well put the day America abandons Australia is probably the the end of the world anyway

[Pudlux]

Smaller countries survive, be it Australia, Denmark or Austria- through alliances, period. We have enough of an army to look like we are pulling our weight, we sign up for any international skirmishes the big boys require of us, and in return we get their protection, or rather they defend their interests in our mining and agricultural resources. Increasing spend to defend a continent like ours from a large opponent is pure fantasy. it would be like owning a cattle property and putting up a brick wall around it to keep theives oout

Being reliant on the protection of somebody else is akin to calling the Police when some druggie has a gun to your head.
Didn't work for Poland or other European countries in '39, won't work for us.


Blade
I think you'll find that the Jindalee over the Horizon Surveillance System may do some of the work you are looking at (have a look at wikipedia). That and a gazillion satellites. The other thing to consider is that the US does not have to disclose what capabilities they possess here. They wouldn't put near on a Marine Division in AS without a reasonable 'OH s**t' plan.

We keep foxes out of our rabbit cages using electric mesh fencing.
We keep our cattle in their paddocks with a single electric fence wire.
It's far more cost-effective than building a steel or timber fence, or patrolling the fencelines 24/7.
No reason we couldn't do the same with our country.
Electronic defences are the way to go. We only need assets on standby 24/7 if we don't have effective long-range warning systems or intelligence sources. Put electronic surveillance measures up so we have effective warning of impending attack.

But, an enemy doesn't need a big opening to infiltrate many, many thousands of assets into the heart of the country, and our military has no hope of doing anything to prevent it. Even thirty years ago, putting 1000 troops into an area required supply columns hundreds of kilometers long, with air and sea ports and masses of supporting infrastructure to keep the attack rolling. Modern military's now plan for putting troops into an area with no outside support, or very little immediate support (Russia obviously didn't get that memo). They take and consolidate an area and build the infrastructure to allow future resupply. Look at any of the recent wars, small protected enclaves of troops, self-contained and able to defend themselves for long periods (decades). Any enemy coming here would do the same thing, just on a much larger scale. Supply has always been the killer of offensives, so modern planners try to avoid the issue entirely by inserting a _lot_ of supply with the initial forces.

[Pudlux]

Sorry, l cooked that up.

Blade
I think you'll find that the Jindalee over the Horizon Surveillance System may do some of the work you are looking at (have a look at wikipedia). That and a gazillion satellites. The other thing to consider is that the US does not have to disclose what capabilities they possess here. They wouldn't put near on a Marine Division in AS without a reasonable 'OH s**t' plan.

[Fionn]

What now Haniball ?
Well i suppose we just take our elephants go the f*ck home.
That tight mountain pass over there seems like the quickest route.

*elephants taken out by javelins *

Glad to see someone knows something about the Second Punic War.

The Fabian strategy is really the only strategy that Australia can deploy, except for relying on the hope that friends bail us out. Sadly Australia has the "little man" syndrome so its not a strategy that we have put much planning into.

Even though the Cunctator's was removed from command his strategy was prove correct and he got one of the best "I told you so" moments of the 3rd century BC.

[Blackened]

Locked. Too many pointless arguments.