Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Australia to spend $270b building larger military

Discussion in 'Free Fire Zone' started by CAC, Jun 30, 2020.

  1. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
  2. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,313
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    I'm sure this will be seen positively in London and Washington, not sure about domestically in OZ.
     
  3. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Im happy with it...it's difficult to argue against given China's current mood...money to go also to US defence industries. The long range ordnance is a rarity for Australia...
     
  4. O.M.A.

    O.M.A. Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    Illinois
    China is clearly a bad actor and incrementally increasing aggression, with a lot of attention being paid to Australia nowadays. It seems a sensible response.
     
  5. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,487
    Likes Received:
    734
    Canada has some f18's for sale.
    china ...
    after the beat down on china/ india border, maybe some martial arts training is neccessary.
    did anyone see the border beatdown? at least they didnt start shooting.

    Australia needs to protect itself
    and Canada, because we love each other.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2020
  6. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    .....what or where would be a hotspot for Australia--most likely reason for a war?
     
  7. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    China is expanding its country...the South China Sea...would be a likely spot. But this is also about preventing conflict...can you imagine the embarrassment if little backward Australia sinks a major Chinese warship? Bullies only pick on those they think can’t hurt them...
     
    belasar likes this.
  8. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..the US spent a lot more --and had many conflicts ...
     
  9. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    What conflicts are you referring to?
     
  10. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    Korea, Nam, PG1 and 2, War on Terrorists,etc
    ..the HUGE military of the US did not stop the North Vietnamese from fighting the US/etc
    ..did not stop the US from being attacked on 9-11--in the US..more deaths than Pearl Harbor
    caps for emphasis only
     
  11. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..there has always been conflicts and wars...Britain had the ''biggest military/navy'''..that didn't stop countries/tribes/groups from attacking and fighting them --and Britain lost sometimes
     
  12. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    8,567
    Likes Received:
    1,817
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    The US also got itself into most of those wars...outside of 9/11, where was the US directly attacked? Australia also does not stick it's nose in other peoples business like the US does.

    India is becoming a major player, China all ready is, Indonesia is a potential threat, and, in my opinion, the Philippines is also becoming a potential threat to Australia. But, first and foremost are the Chinese aircraft carriers.
     
    CAC likes this.
  13. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Australia is not Super power...the psychology is different...most of those conflicts have been initiated by the US...once hostilities start of course it’s on for young and old. Australia won’t initiate hostilities, but WILL defend itself. If we don’t want to be pushed around and threatened, we need to have a credible reaction to what China can do...it’s actually a way of calming the waters...but if China has gone rogue (which is looking increasingly likely) then all bets are off...
     
  14. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,313
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    A force in being, large enough to make a enemy question victory, does tend to deter a rational player from acting, but then again not everyone in the region (I'm looking at you Kim) always act rationally.
     
    CAC likes this.
  15. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Yes, let’s not forget the lesson Argentina gave the UK during the Falklands...
     
  16. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    For as long as I’ve been alive, Australia’s defence plan hasn’t been rooted in victory...instead, more realistically, the plan has been to make victory so costly that it’s barely worth it*...as far as I can see, that is still our plan.

    * if the enemy is weakened sufficiently, other players may step in to take advantage of it...
     
  17. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    hahahhah

    1. we had every right to go into PG1 and 2 and Korea.....
    a. hitler invaded a tiny country and started a war
    saddam invaded a tiny country and started TWO wars
    b. hitler gassed his own people
    saddam gassed his own people
    c. hitler violated the cease fire terms/etc
    saddam violated the cease fire terms

    --however --you still did not address the major point---having a huge military does not stop conflicts
    Germany invaded Russia
    France and the UK had a huge military--but still fought in WW2

    the US had atomic bombs, naval and air superiority, and China entered the Korean War

    here's a key = most wars are not total--the conflicts start whether the other side had a huge military or not
     
  18. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    1. you argue against Takao--Britain had no reason to go into the Falklands
    2. Britain had a great military--but they still went to war!
     
  19. belasar

    belasar Court Jester Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,313
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    But when those wars happen a larger military ensures you survive the initial onslaught and the eventual victory less costly.
     
  20. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,123
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    Argentine naval forces in the Falklands War - Wikipedia

    ....the Brits lost the Atlantic Conveyor--losing their choppers/etc--and they still beat the Argentines...the Argentines were losers compared to the Brits--and they still invaded the Falklands = military power does not stop conflicts
     

Share This Page