WAR Australia "War": "We've got to be worried about 2020 and the next 12 to 24 months or so."

China Connection

TB Fanatic
Um, this has just gone mad on T.V that we might be in a conflict with China soon. So as you would know we are linked with you in the U.S. We are spending huge amounts of money on U.S. made military equipment.

Below is just on example of what is happening here...................


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Australia to spend $270b building larger military to prepare for 'poorer, more dangerous' world and rise of China
By political reporter Jade Macmillan and defence correspondent Andrew Greene
Posted Yesterday, updated 3hhours ago
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume.
WATCH
Duration: 40 seconds40s

12412062-16x9-xlarge.jpg

The PM says Australia must expand its Indo-Pacific presence
Share

Scott Morrison has unveiled a more aggressive defence strategy aimed at countering the rise of China, while warning that Australia faces regional challenges on a scale not seen since World War II.
Key points:
  • Scott Morrison has committed $270 billion to defence spending over the next 10 years
  • The ADF will get long-range anti-shipping missiles as it refocuses on possible conflict with China in the Indo-Pacific
  • The PM says the region is the "epicentre" of rising strategic competition
The strategy increases the focus on the Indo-Pacific region, with the Prime Minister warning that Australia needs to prepare for a post-COVID-19 world that is "poorer, more dangerous and more disorderly".
Australia will build a larger military that is focused on its immediate backyard, including new long-range anti-ship missiles, signalling a major shift in the nation's defence strategy.
"We have not seen the conflation of global economic and strategic uncertainty now being experienced here in Australia in our region since the existential threat we faced when the global and regional order collapsed in the 1930s and 1940s," the Prime Minister warned.
Mr Morrison also announced a commitment to spend $270 billion over the next decade on defence capabilities, including more potent strike weapons, cyber capabilities and a high-tech underwater surveillance system.
Over the four years, the Australian Defence Force (ADF) is expected to grow by 800 people, comprising 650 extra personnel for the Navy, 100 for the Air Force, and 50 for the Army.
According to Defence's 2019-20 Budget Statement, the ADF was estimated to grow to 60,090 by this year, with 16,272 full-time public service staff.
Its budget was expected to grow to 2 per cent of Australia's gross domestic product by 2020-21, "equating to approximately $200 billion in Australia's defence capability over 10 years", making the new announcement an increase of $70 billion to the department.
In a speech at the Australian Defence Force Academy Mr Morrison argued the Indo-Pacific is the "epicentre" of rising strategic competition and "the risk of miscalculation — and even conflict — is heightening".
"The Indo-Pacific is where we live — and we want an open, sovereign Indo-Pacific, free from coercion and hegemony," a copy of the speech says.
Mr Morrison argued increasing Australia's defence capability was vital to shoring up the nation's position in the region.
"The strategic competition between China and the United States means that there's a lot of tension in the cord and a lot of risk of miscalculation," Mr Morrison told Channel Seven.
"And so we have to be prepared and ready to frame the world in which we live as best as we can, and be prepared to respond and play our role to protect Australia, defend Australia."
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume.
WATCH
Duration: 4 minutes 55 seconds4m 55s

12412254-16x9-xlarge.jpg

Defence Correspondent Andrew Greene interviews ASPI executive director Peter Jennings
In releasing the 2020 Defence Strategy Update and the accompanying Force Structure Plan, the Government confirmed Australia would purchase the AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) from the United States Navy, at a cost of $800 million.
The missile has a range of more than 370 kilometres and would be a significant upgrade from the 124 km range of Australia's AGM-84 air-launched Harpoon anti-ship missile, introduced in the early 1980s.
Up to $9.3 billion will also be spent on research and development into high-speed, long-range weapons, including hypersonic weapons.
"The ADF now needs stronger deterrence capabilities," Mr Morrison told an audience of defence leaders.
"Capabilities that can hold potential adversaries' forces and critical infrastructure at risk from a distance, thereby deterring an attack on Australia and helping to prevent war."
A massive underwater surveillance system using high-tech sensors and costing between $5 billion and $7 billion is one of the biggest new purchases which could eventually also include unmanned submarines.
Mr Morrison has also promised to boost the ADF's ability to deal with what he described as the "grey zone" — activity against Australia's interests which falls below the threshold of traditional armed conflict.
A docked frigate with a seagull flying past

The Australian Navy is expected to grow by 650 personnel over the next decade.(Supplied: Department Of Defence/Kylie Jagiello)'We're not talking about Canada'
Labor's defence spokesman, Richard Marles, welcomed the shift in strategy.
"COVID-19 is changing the world around us, the world in which we live," he said.
"Labor supports strong defence resilience for Australia in the face of this, that is going to be much more important … in the future than it has been in the past."
Peter Jennings from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) said the world had changed dramatically since the last Defence White Paper was released, particularly in the era of COVID-19.
"What this policy document does is it starts to increase the hitting power of the Defence Force in the short term, rather than being focused on building submarines that will be ready in the late 2030s and into the 2040s," Mr Jennings told ABC RN.
"We've got to be worried about 2020 and the next 12 to 24 months or so."
Mr Jennings said there was "only one country with both the capacity and the desire to dominate the Indo-Pacific region in a way that works against Australia's interest".
"We're not talking about Canada," he said.
"When they talk about the bad behaviour that's happening in the region, the annexation of territory, coercion, the influencing of domestic politics, the use of cyber attacks – it's really only one country which is doing that at industrial levels, and that's the People's Republic of China."
The Government will spend $15 billion on cyber and information warfare capabilities over the next 10 years, $1.3 billion of which will be used to boost the cyber security activities of the Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Cyber Security Centre.
Including a network of satellites for an independent communications network, $7 billion will also go towards improving Defence's capabilities in space.
Mr Morrison said the 10-year funding commitment went beyond the Government's pledge to boost Defence spending to 2 per cent of GDP.



 

China Connection

TB Fanatic
'Cold war' with China lays bare US view of Australia
The US continues to show its tendency to take Australia for granted, and to demand positions and stances on China that its junior ally simply cannot afford to deliver.

James Curran
Jun 22, 2020 – 10.02am
Save
Share
Even before the onset of coronavirus, it had become something of a truism to talk of US-China relations plunging into a new era of heightened geopolitical competition.

The element of danger in all this comes not from the risk of it sparking a major military conflict — which remains unlikely. It comes with the reinforcement on both sides of existing stereotypes.

3718a87e73ea0f053a2975629a8cb67e331dbe54

Leaders in Washington and Beijing are unlikely to drop their underlying assumptions about each other anytime soon. AP

If US minds are made up that China already poses an economic and military threat, then the coming of the pandemic, which has taken so many US lives and ushered in levels of unemployment approaching those seen in the Great Depression, is already intensifying the antagonism towards China in the US policy community and wider public.

Indeed, there is emerging a new consensus in Washington that the era of engagement with China, which held from the time of President Richard Nixon’s visit in 1972, is now at an end.

Of all the statements that have intensified US-China competition of late, the speech by Deputy National Security Adviser Matt Pottinger, delivered at a symposium last month on US–China relations, is perhaps the most remarkable. It shows the lingering temptation in the US policy community to understand China through the prism of American exceptionalism.

In remarks given in Mandarin, Pottinger appealed to the spirit of the May Fourth Movement, a student demonstration in Beijing in 1919 sparked by outrage over the treatment of China at the Paris Peace Conference, especially the decision to grant to imperial Japan Chinese territory that had been previously occupied by Germany. This, said Pottinger, "galvanised a long running struggle for the soul of modern China".
Not only did Pottinger elevate those "Chinese heroes" whose "democratic ideals" went on to play a key role in the signing of the Declaration of Human Rights, he identified a series of "heirs" to the May Fourth Movement: "civic minded citizens who commit small acts of bravery". These included Li Wenliang, the doctor in Wuhan who blew the whistle on the virus and was persecuted by Chinese authorities as a result.
72f38abac5e0a6f340aa0deb0fe01eabf5958fe9

Matt Pottinger's remarks have already been widely interpreted as endorsing a grassroots-led regime change in China. AP
It also included a group of Catholic priests who "have refused to subordinate God to the Communist Party, and the millions of Hong Kong citizens who peacefully demonstrated the rule of law last year".
Put simply, Pottinger’s speech is not so much harking back to the "loss of China" in the wake of the Communist triumph in 1949, but rather a "lost China", a China that had been trending towards the achievement of a "Chinese enlightenment" before being thwarted by the rise of Mao’s Communists.
Pottinger’s remarks have already been widely interpreted as endorsing a grassroots-led regime change in China, but during the same symposium he broke with the more aggressive postures taken by other White House officials, stressing that the United States was not considering punitive measures against China over its handling of the pandemic.
It is difficult to foresee what might ultimately come from all this. The pandemic was bound to be interpreted through the prism of geopolitical competition.
Scrambling for a slogan to give it purchase in the language of international relations, some analysts have rushed to label it a new type of Cold War, acknowledging that while it is no replica of US-Soviet rivalry, the clash in political values and strategic ambitions are eroding mutual trust.
The likelihood is that the pandemic will for some time yet stand as a benchmark of both countries’ style of governance and their ability to respond to the welfare of their peoples. Such a benchmark will continue to be assessed in the same zero-sum terms that have characterised so much of the debate surrounding US-China strategic rivalry.
Leaders in Washington and Beijing are unlikely to drop their underlying assumptions about each other anytime soon. So even if there is an opportunity for incremental recovery in US-China relations after the November elections — theoretically neither Trump nor Biden will have the need to seek votes through China-bashing — there must be serious doubts about whether both sides will seek to seize such an opportunity.
Australians often struggle to understand the central point about what China’s challenge means for the United States: namely the threat it represents to powerful and deep American ideas of its own purpose and primacy.
Snug beneath the warming blankets of "mateship", Australians too often fail to recognise the profound differences between the two societies, not least in their respective experiences of nationalism. If, therefore, the US continues to edge closer towards full-throated containment of China, Canberra will need to recognise just where that kind of policy prescription ends.
Decoupling. Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.
RELATED
US and China on the brink of a new type of cold war
But some Americans misunderstand Australia too, a point most visibly manifest in the remarkable question apparently being asked by US congressional hawks of late: "Who lost Australia?". Even more remarkable is that some Australian officials have so little self-confidence that they are concerned by these reports.
Yet Australia is not "lost" and, moreover, does not want to be lost. The very posing of the question symbolises not a crisis in the US-Australia alliance, but rather a profound lack of awareness in Washington as to Australia’s particular circumstances when it comes to dealing with the rise of China.
In short, it shows once more the tendency in the US to take its junior ally for granted, and to demand positions and stances on China that Australia simply cannot afford to deliver.
James Curran is Professor of Modern History at The University of Sydney. He is also non-resident senior fellow at Sydney University’s United States Studies Centre. This article is part of a series from East Asia Forum (www.eastasiaforum.org) in the Crawford School of Public Policy in the ANU’s College of Asia and the Pacific.


 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Considering the frequency of the reports of cyber attacks against Australia and blunt theats from Beijing, it's no wonder I keep coming across articles discussing Australia getting a long range strike capacity that includes nuclear weapons.
 

MountainBiker

Veteran Member
It sounds like we are in for really difficult times just around the corner.

I already had the feeling and have been working hard in the garden.

Australia would not last 5 minutes at war with China. on its own.
Australia, New Zealand and the rest of that region will eventually have no choice but to be subservient to China because they would quickly overwhelm you if you don't deflect to them when the time comes. If the Dems do a clean sweep this autumn in the US, I think we'll see China's ascendancy accelerate. Mind you China has vast problems internally and may be a house of cards, but there is no price too high that they wouldn't pay in order to achieve their world dominancy goals.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Surely the Brits would be there in a flash, to save the day?

About the only thing that would signal that would be publicized deterrence patrols by RN boomers in the Pacific and maybe add a couple of seconded Aussies to the crew while they were at it.
 

Ku Commando

Inactive
Ain't nobody gonna invade Australia & survive.....

......sea snakes, salt water crocs,.......any manner of poisonous animal or plant would not allow it !!!!!!

Don't be fooled, even the koala has a nasty streak.......it just stays stoned all the time eating eucalyptus
 

Meadowlark

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Australia, New Zealand and the rest of that region will eventually have no choice but to be subservient to China because they would quickly overwhelm you if you don't deflect to them when the time comes. If the Dems do a clean sweep this autumn in the US, I think we'll see China's ascendancy accelerate. Mind you China has vast problems internally and may be a house of cards, but there is no price too high that they wouldn't pay in order to achieve their world dominancy goals.
Both nations are rich in resources that China covets. That is dangerous for both Australia and New Zealand.
 

pauldingbabe

The Great Cat
Ain't nobody gonna invade Australia & survive.....

......sea snakes, salt water crocs,.......any manner of poisonous animal or plant would not allow it !!!!!!

Don't be fooled, even the koala has a nasty streak.......it just stays stoned all the time eating eucalyptus

I would NOT recommend messing around with a Koala. Mean little buggers with very long sharp claws. Like, rip your face off claws.

No thank you.
 

Blacknarwhal

Let's Go Brandon!
You know, for a pariah nation, China is still oddly dangerous. I guess maybe the entire planet doesn't hate China after all?
 

IronMan 2

Senior Member
And Indonesia is closer than China. Don't forget them ....

Indonesia is a third world craphole. Their military has a minuscule amount of modern equipment and the rest is last decade's holdouts. Their army is huge but mostly a militia, and they lack any sort of reach to invade.

I was on the exercise when the Indons brought their all-singing, all-dancing Sukhoi fighters out to play the first time, about 8 years ago in Darwin. Our 30 year old F/A18's wiped the floor with them. Indonesia is never a great threat to Australia.
 

Troke

On TB every waking moment
Seems I remember some years ago reading that the Pres of Indonesia had a map on his wall showing the North half of Australia as Indonesian. When asked, he said the Aussies weren't using it and the Indo's needed more land for their population.

International politics is one damned thing after another.
 
Seems I remember some years ago reading that the Pres of Indonesia had a map on his wall showing the North half of Australia as Indonesian. When asked, he said the Aussies weren't using it and the Indo's needed more land for their population.

International politics is one damned thing after another.
ever been there? it is DRIER THAN Dry
 

Jeff B.

Don’t let the Piss Ants get you down…
Oddly enough, the cooperation between the Aussies and Japanese has been on the upswing.

If something spooks Japan, you can expect them to have their own nuke in 6 months or less... the only thing that's kept them in line has been their own determination. The Chinese have been pushing that regularly for some time now. I think the re-armament of Australia and Japan is a good thing for the offsets to China that they represent.

Jeff B.
 

Coulter

Veteran Member
Lets be honest, if there is war it will eventually go nuclear.
It will have to because I can't imagine that a democrat would actually fight.

And since they are destroying this country - I can't imagine any conservative would enlist to fight for what America has turned into - seriously.
 

Illini Warrior

Illini Warrior
Australia was supposed to get Canada's F-5 fighters when they got delivery of their upgrades - last I heard it was still hung up >>> that would go a ways toward a better defense ....
 

Bubble Head

Has No Life - Lives on TB
There is no 32nd Division to send down under to help with the day this time around. You will be eating Bully Beef by yourself's mate.
For those that don't know what Bully Beef is or was it was a sorta canned spam mutton that made our troops sick on top of the malaria and yellow fever.
 

ArisenCarcass

Veteran Member
Almost all wild koalas have Chlamydia.
There were a bunch of people that got the bacterial infection from koalas not too long ago (mostly handling, but the males would also sometimes spooge on people passing below).

Salties (which are found in practically all Ausie waters) are no joke.....

Mark Felton Productions- Japanese Army vs. Killer Crocodiles 1945 (4:13)
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuqslS_yV2U



Even so, I could see China taking Australia long before invading the US.
 

kochevnik

Senior Member
Only thing that would EVER stop the Chinese from taking NZ and Aussieland is nukes - spending 270B on useless ****ing toys is ... useless.

A dozen nukes and the means to deliver them and they would be as safe as anyone.

I know the US will eventually end up sacrificing Taiwan and HK without doing much - if the US is in a huge depression and we get some woke Dem woman as Prez, I doubt they would life a finger for Australia either.

Would definitely end global warming in hurry tho - the studies I saw said a regional nuke war could drop temps 40 degrees on average for about 10 years.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Only thing that would EVER stop the Chinese from taking NZ and Aussieland is nukes - spending 270B on useless ****ing toys is ... useless.

A dozen nukes and the means to deliver them and they would be as safe as anyone.

I know the US will eventually end up sacrificing Taiwan and HK without doing much - if the US is in a huge depression and we get some woke Dem woman as Prez, I doubt they would life a finger for Australia either.

Would definitely end global warming in hurry tho - the studies I saw said a regional nuke war could drop temps 40 degrees on average for about 10 years.

With the background noise, which I have posted on, of the US "studying" deploying a new version of the Pershing IRBM in the region, probably the best and most cost effective option for Australia would be a "2 key" deal with the US.

SSBNs may be much more survivable but their very nature of being out of sight out of mind doesn't have the same impression of something you can see actually pointed at you.

ETA:

maxresdefault.jpg


 
Last edited:

Illini Warrior

Illini Warrior
it would be awhile for Australia & New Zeeland once China would role >>> they are working on aircraft carriers to project forward air power but would still conquer their way south just like the US did in WW2 - establish forward bases and secure supply lines ...

the US definitely would get involved with both South Korea and Japan on the Chinese butcher block - initially, China would wage a majority land invasion campaign with limited marine invasions ...
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
it would be awhile for Australia & New Zeeland once China would role >>> they are working on aircraft carriers to project forward air power but would still conquer their way south just like the US did in WW2 - establish forward bases and secure supply lines ...

the US definitely would get involved with both South Korea and Japan on the Chinese butcher block - initially, China would wage a majority land invasion campaign with limited marine invasions ...

Assuming everything stayed "conventional"......
 

Pat Hogen

Contributing Member
China will have to deal with INDIA very soon in a very serious way.

We are all going to have to deal with India very soon.

What has not been said here is that the Australian Gov has been TOLD to upgrade its weaponry and the majority of the upgrades will be US armament - it's like Australia is a piggy bank for the US.

ABC News:
Strategic competition between China and the US is intensifying, and their naval vessels are eyeing each other warily in hotspots like the South China Sea.

The looming threat is a "military miscalculation" leading to a sudden, irreversible escalation of hostilities which blooms into a shooting war.

Australia is embracing a doctrine of deterrence.

There are limits to this strategy. Australia's military is small, and does not have any nuclear weapons.

The defence strategy puts it baldly: "Only the nuclear and conventional capabilities of the United States can offer effective deterrence against the possibility of nuclear threats against Australia."

But the shifts in power and unpredictability of the Trump administration have convinced the Federal Government that Australia must be able to do more by itself.

Joint Strike Fighters, missile shield systems and unmanned robotic vehicles that float, sink or fly will come direct, software coded and usually pre-built, from the United States.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
We are all going to have to deal with India very soon.

What has not been said here is that the Australian Gov has been TOLD to upgrade its weaponry and the majority of the upgrades will be US armament - it's like Australia is a piggy bank for the US.

ABC News:
Strategic competition between China and the US is intensifying, and their naval vessels are eyeing each other warily in hotspots like the South China Sea.

The looming threat is a "military miscalculation" leading to a sudden, irreversible escalation of hostilities which blooms into a shooting war.

Australia is embracing a doctrine of deterrence.

There are limits to this strategy. Australia's military is small, and does not have any nuclear weapons.

The defence strategy puts it baldly: "Only the nuclear and conventional capabilities of the United States can offer effective deterrence against the possibility of nuclear threats against Australia."

But the shifts in power and unpredictability of the Trump administration have convinced the Federal Government that Australia must be able to do more by itself.

Joint Strike Fighters, missile shield systems and unmanned robotic vehicles that float, sink or fly will come direct, software coded and usually pre-built, from the United States.

Look at the WoW threads and see the articles discussing this issue I've been posting for a while....HC
 

Meadowlark

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Lots of other nations have aircraft carriers, but they lack global reach because those other nations lack to global logistical reach. We have supplies prepositioned all around the globe. No other nation can match that. We learned to do that during the war in the pacific and have never forgotten that lesson.
 
Top