Bedfellows with China, Russia, India and Iran đ¤Ś
2 Likes
Shots fired.
Unfortunately, at our size and population, weâre always going to have to tie ourselves to someone. The UK wouldnât be much use in a material sense, but if the excrement ever hits the wind propulsion device for real, weâll need the US .
Problem is, theyâll also drag us into stuff weâd be better off staying out of.
Weâre actually so far from self sufficient militarily that itâs a joke in many ways. But with probably the worldâs most unfavourable coast line / population ratio, weâre always going to be choosing from less than ideal options.
1 Like
I donât understand how a Chinese invasion or even attack on Australia is supposed to work, either suddenly or by stealth.
Other than Fiji âvoluntarilyâ giving up its sovereignty.
Edit: You know what? Even then.
All they probably need to do is stop taking out coal and or iron the ore
1 Like
This was a thought experiment not so long ago, but itâs turned into practice.
We supplied pretty much half of their requirements in that area, and they were some pretty, pretty big requirements.
The idea of the rest of the world immediately scaling up production to cover the loss seemed unlikely and so it has proved.
I donât want to be nationalistic about this, but as for how thatâs working out for themâŚthe answer is not well.
I know what youâre saying, but does it need to be sudden, or stealth? Does it even need to be China?
(Simply, In terms of who weâd be looking to for help in an active battlefield situation, itâs really the US in the foreseeable geopolitical future. I canât see a situation where they arenât our major military treaty partner. Itâs a two edged sword, but to my eye probably unavoidable.)
Yes, I canât see France or the UK making their rear/supply unsustainable. It has to be the US.
If not China then perhaps Indonesia if they ever became financial. Big if.
If any country invaded Australia they would do it on a Friday night before a long weekend here. Iâd be game over before our PM could send a secret txt message asking for help to the US on a Tuesday!
And the Septics probably wouldnât particularly care except for protecting their spy bases here.
2 Likes
I meanâŚthey went to war over Korea and Vietnam.
I think theyâd be suitably miffed by the thought of losing a continent.
10:00am on a a Friday of a long weekend. Our defence personnel are queuing up at the gates by 9am to get out of there 
I think itâs fair to assume a new sun will be created and its light will arrive a few centuries before a new sub will be manufactured.
2 Likes
Defending the approaches to Australia is relatively easy. Our defensive strategies have always relied on early warning and distance to position our small but potent forces.
The diesel subs were perfect for this strategy. Just park them strategically where an invasion fleet would need to sail.
We would be more than capable of preventing a Chinese invasion, largely because China doesnât have the air and naval equipment with range to extend all the way to Australia.
We are clearly shifting to an aggressive containment rather than defensive posture. This is an attempt to build a NATO like group of nations in the Asia Pacific to balance out the power China is starting to throw around.
4 Likes
Logistically I donât think China would have that ability to invade. Their defence force, whilst large, just donât have the fleet nor air power to invade a country the distance we are away from them. Their ships canât stay out to sea long enough to complete a mission so ambitious and their air power is limited in range and needs constant maintenance requiring air bases close enough to our coast.
Their fleet would be wiped out in the water by the US in little time.
How do I know his? I watched a youtube video once, so Iâm quite the expert now.
Edit: Also and what @Benny40 said
2 Likes
It would be easier for them to strike a deal with the invader. They would know well in advance what was planned. âYou can keep the bits you want if we get these bits including all our bases and the Hangar.â
Ummm.
Iâll read ahead but I assume this has been addressed.
1 Like
Nothing is that simple when it comes to international defence procurement. With various bits and pieces subject to all sorts of arms trafficking laws, and with other bits and pieces subject to commercial sensitivities etc. Aus obviously will want to be a âsmart customerâ, and have an ability to do lots of things, such as manufacture the required spares, service the things etc. On the other hand I doubt weâre going into the business of servicing nuclear power plants.
A contract will be written that will be bespoke and with the intent of providing the ability for Aus to do what needs to be done locally. But it will be complicated and difficult to manage and some bits will not be to our liking.
None of these deals is the same as any other. Time will tell whether the contract writers have done a good job in getting Aus access to everything that is needed. And that âtimeâ probably wonât be until there is some issue that hasnât been seen in other parts of the world and which needs fixing in Aus first. And that could be in 2050.
Iâm not sure either party would be comfortable with that.
OK.
I know this is a Neil Mitchell interview, and I apologise for that.
But this is well well well worth a listen. Train wreck doesnât even begin to describe it.
Edit: and now he has a presser at 12pm. So I guess the interview has killed him
2 Likes
1 Like