PDA

View Full Version : Congrats to the DownUnder



Marlin
May 7th, 2009, 02:03
Australia to Buy 100 US Jet Fighters

May 02, 2009
Associated Press <!-- Uncomment this when the Jive comments functionality is available -->

<!-- quick fix for IE6&7 render bug where duplicate word being added. hasLayout-related-->
CANBERRA, Australia - Australia plans to buy 100 state-of-the-art U.S. jet fighters and double the size of its modest submarine fleet in a bid to keep pace with an Asian military buildup.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, announcing the plan on board the HMAS Stuart in Sydney Harbour on Saturday, said Australia's military must be prepared for any situation.

"It's important for our own capability requirements ... for the Australian Defense Force to be prepared to meet a range of contingencies arising from military and naval buildups across our region," Rudd said. "That is prudent, long-term defense planning, and we believe we've got the balance absolutely right."

The major defense update also says that global warming and shortages of fuel, food and water will likely be emerging threats to world peace as countries seek to guarantee supplies of crucial resources.
The plan says world powers will jockey for naval supremacy in the Indian Ocean as it gains importance as a seaway for oil shipped from the Middle East to Asia.

It does not single out any single country as posing a military threat to Australia, which is a close military ally of the United States.
The plan focuses on building Australian naval and air force strength to take any fight over Australia's security far offshore.

To do this, Australia's current fleet of six Collins-class submarines will be replaced by 12 longer-range Australian-manufactured submarines. The government, which bans atomic energy in Australia, has ruled out nuclear propulsion. The navy's 12 frigates will also be replaced by the same number of larger warships.

Australia will remain without an aircraft carrier.
The government plans to buy 100 U.S.-manufactured Lockheed F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighters to phase out the current Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornets over the next decade.

But the opposition Liberal party argued that the report doesn't explain how the new equipment will be funded.

"Nobody reading this white paper could have any confidence that the government has the capacity, the commitment, or even knows how it is going to pay for this dramatic expansion in our military hardware," opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull told reporters in Sydney.
Rudd recently warned that Australia needed to reshape its military in response to an "explosion" in defense spending in Asia.

Saturday's plan said the global economic downturn would slow the recent arms buildup in some Asian countries, though China will likely continue its military modernization, it said.

"But the pace, scope and structure of China's military modernization have the potential to give its neighbors cause for concern if not carefully explained," the paper says. "China has begun to do this in recent years, but needs to do more."

The government is committed to increasing defense spending, which is 22 billion Australian dollars ($16 billion) in the current fiscal year, by 3 percent each year despite the current recession.

Australia is the largest contributor to the U.S.-led coalition force in Afghanistan outside NATO. Rudd announced this week that the Australian military commitment there would be boosted from 1,100 to 1,550.


<!-- -->
© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Snuffy
May 7th, 2009, 03:09
Good Job Mates! :ernae:

cheezyflier
May 7th, 2009, 07:13
i don't see non-nuclear powered subs being all that effective against today's technolgy. seems like the greenies have strangled any chance for real naval strength. and no aircraft carriers? WTH?

Wozza
May 7th, 2009, 07:17
LOL you guys fell for that did ya :)
unless ya gunna give em to us on credit .....whats that line from Top Gun........Your butts writing cheque's your body cant cash lol
Wozza

wombat666
May 7th, 2009, 09:29
i don't see non-nuclear powered subs being all that effective against today's technolgy. seems like the greenies have strangled any chance for real naval strength. and no aircraft carriers? WTH?

The RAN 'Collins Class' subs (very stealthy and non-nuclear) have 'sunk' half the US Navy on exercises.
As for carriers ......... too expensive and unwieldly for our region and budget.
More Subs and FPBs make sense.
One shapes one's military forces to suit the area of perceived conflict, not on patrolling the face of the Earth.
In our case, it's the Pacific Rim and Indian Ocean.
:173go1:

PeteHam
May 7th, 2009, 11:30
Hey you guys wanna buy some really cheap Skyhawks?

NZ has some ........... :monkies:

:icon_lol:

Pete.

cheezyflier
May 7th, 2009, 12:18
The RAN 'Collins Class' subs (very stealthy and non-nuclear) have 'sunk' half the US Navy on exercises.
As for carriers ......... too expensive and unwieldly for our region and budget.

:173go1:

ok, but what about the fighter jets? how do you deal with their short range?
wouldn't that rule out any chance of a pre-emptive strike, or even retaliatory ones? you'd be limited to defense only, unless you were planning on refueling entire squadrons en route. or is there something i'm not seeing?

Toastmaker
May 7th, 2009, 12:38
It's most logical for Australia to enhance it's defensive forces. Their doctrine is not global force projection (which necessitates carriers).

Remember, we're the ones who have to stick our nose in everybodys left ear from time to time. . .

wombat666
May 8th, 2009, 07:03
ok, but what about the fighter jets? how do you deal with their short range?
wouldn't that rule out any chance of a pre-emptive strike, or even retaliatory ones? you'd be limited to defense only, unless you were planning on refueling entire squadrons en route. or is there something i'm not seeing?

'Pre-Emptive Strike' is not an acceptable method of warfare within the ADF.
The most probable threats are just a few hundred klicks North, so the JSF would be able to handle anything from that region.

Longer range aggressors would need to get past the Navy and the Submariners.
Given the state of play between India and Pakistan it's unlikely anything will come out of that area for quite some time, while China is not regarded as a military threat to Australia, they are more into buying the country than bombing it.

:kilroy:

crashaz
May 8th, 2009, 15:03
Wow things really are backwards Down Under?!

Toilets flush counterclockwise and Liberals are in the minority. :icon_lol:

tigisfat
May 8th, 2009, 22:23
Wow things really are backwards Down Under?!

Toilets flush counterclockwise and Liberals are in the minority. :icon_lol:

I think I could handle that.

Let's not forget how superior their vehicles are:

http://www.fpv.com.au/index.aspx:gameon: