China’s Military Is Worried about Australia’s Rise! How Powerful Australian Military Today 

Bullshit ... you been in shady conflicts , what USA says you jump and say how high !!!

i laughed when i saw this

@@ITSaPendragon Lol why would you swap out a Landing Helicopter Dock ship for a air warfare destroyer? Its getting added to the Navy not replacing anything.

@@26Rudders no shit sherlock

I saw there was no mention of the construction of the AUKUS planned nuclear submarines either

​@@26RuddersFrigate, not destroyer.

Nah bro the kangaroos bro💀

Ain’t that the truth ❤️🇦🇺

Yeah we tiny and they're massive

​@@JordanOpitztrue

More likely there own government 😢

Not currently. They are however worried about us getting nuclear submarines which would make us one of only three countries that could block their access to the Indian Ocean from the South China Sea.

if the liberal party gets voted next election in 2025 australia will go nuclear which would make them more dangerous

If America and England are to busy with their own defence we are screwed ❤️🇦🇺

Are you delusional? We don't HAVE a military.

If only that wads true half our kit is broken and inoperable like our subs thatvare always in dry dock. Our vehicles which end up being no good for operational use in some cases.

@@andyt654 "in some cases". at least we dont have to replace our fuel with water. our military is ranked so highly because it is small and highly trained. an aussie infantryman is one of the best in the world compared to their peers in other nations.

Why is china on the biggest military build of any country on the planet...there is your answer

China been doing it since early 2000. Why can't Australia.

Australia is taking necessary steps to ensure its National security remains strong ! China is expanding its Military presence in the Pacific Ocean and in the South China Sea, Australia even though has a relatively small population it has a very powerful military. Australia 🇦🇺 will not be bullied by China.

Australia is a vassal of the US government and has to procure military hardware from the use to “protect” itself. 😮 China is not threatening anyone. The threat is being perpetuated by the US and the MIC. It’s about the $$$. US is running the biggest protection racquet in the world…

China know exactly why

The guy didn't do a single proof read.

If what I understand to be happening is correct, Australian military doctrine is now changing to the point that the vast majority of our infantry is being brought to be equivalent to USA and British marines, we are also setting up rapid air response battalions. Basically the Australian military has decided that a small army that is basically all marines or airborne unites is the way to go.

I’m sure a couple of Chinese soilders don’t wanna be there, so some would most likely surrender.

there doing a big recruitment thing im doing my application now and am on the last step they want to expand by 10000 personnel in a set time limit

​@@Lurlene.👍

if aus and chin go to war then us and britin will step in to help aus

these days its not just a numbers game. considering the war could start and end without a single person leaving either country, its all about allies and resources

2 million > 80 thousand

Australians will remeber this

Right back, at you India!!

Hunter class will make a very good ASW ship. But Australia needs more destroyers 3 not enough

@@Nathan-ry3yu Australia is considering 3 more hobart class destroyers which I hope they get, and they were proposed an offer for them to get a corvette fleet.

​​​@@jazzi8539I hurd BAE offered Australia 3 surper destroyers of 110 cell VLS. Probably based on the UK new type 85 destroyer design. I guess Australia will have to wait until the RAN review comes through to see what has been proposed by the American general who's doing the review. Corvettes would be good to be used as OPV instead of thiughs Awafra class that hasn't got much to offer for any other roles. I still think Australia needs atleast one aircraft carrier. Something similar to south Korea new designed CVX that also has a 16 cell VLS

@@Nathan-ry3yu Yeah I agree. Though I reckon they should transform one of their LHDs to make it capable of carrying F-35’s

@@jazzi8539The 2 LHDs Australia has was originally desined by spain for the Harrier jump jet. But the aircraft was being phased out by the time the carrier went into production. Australia had them decked out to be LHDs it has 2 hospitals and has been decked out internally to carry army amphibious assault vehicles and some landing crafts. The lowered deck been fixed for helicopters and suplies and the upper deck hasn't been heat shielded to suport F35s. So to turn it into a proper jump jet carrier work will need to be done on the upper deck to heat shield it. It will have to take of the helicopters and be eqwiped with atleast a squadron of 12 F35. Other internal departments will need to redesigned to store bombs missile spare parts and extra fuel. So you be basically taken the lhd capability away to turn it into a jump jet carrier. it will cost more and the upper deck will have to widen also. Australia better of keeping the LHDs as it is, as the army needs it to have amphibious assault capability for anywhere in the pacific. But build an entirely different ship for jump jet carrier. Something like the south Korean CVX carrier they planning to build would be suitable for Australia as in size and carry as may as 16 to 24 jump jets of the F35B. I think would be more ideal. As for my annalise for RAN based on Australia geographical area coverage size Australia GDP and population. Australia should have atleast 30 combating ships but it has only 11, 16 if you add the 6 subs at most the rest is Marchant navy vessels or none combating opv If it was my choice I'd have 6 new Navanti F110 class with 120 cell VLS as AWDs. And have 9 hunter class frigates up armord from 32 cell to 72 cell VLS as ASW for blue water operations. Have 12 Navanti corvettes with CEFAR-2 radar 16 cell VLS and 16 anti ship missiles tubes. With ASW capability for OPV. It turn the Awafra class into mine hunters. Have 8 nuclear powerd submarines. And purchase 1 CVX carrier from south Korea. And I would call for national service to maintain the crew needed. BAE ship builders has already offered 96 cell VLS for hunter class but doing so they have to take away some ASW capabilities such as towe away sonar and few other. I don't think it needs 96 cells but if they can give it 72 or even 48 cells vls that would be a good armament for a ASW ship. It would give the ship some decent long distances strike capability rather than be suck with just ESSM. It give it some SM2 and SM6 options. But what I stated it remains a fairytale. I doubt Australia government has any intrest of giving a decent fleet for RAN. Not this century anyway. Our ADF has decreased in size it hasn't gained anywhere. That's not just in terms for Army and RAN but for the RAAF too. We used to have 100 F/ A18s and 100 F111s 200 aircraft. We have 59 F35A and only 24 super hornets and growlers. Not even 100 planes. We have no aircraft carrier since 1980s and we have no long range bomber since they retired the F111s. We have less IVF capabilities for the Army. I'd really like to know this government strategy is to protect Australia in a world that has many countries increasing its military size and capabilities. Yet our polies is just sitting on it. If Australia was pulled into a major war today it be Gallipoli 2.0 and Australia will become Warsaw 2.0 in less than a few days

The aussies & Canadians 800 odd in fight stopped a chinees division 15thousand from taking soul both units awarded presidential citations, not to shabby bet they haven't forgotten that license 😉a

@@peterpayne9869 Correct, not too shabby. The Australian force was the second largest in the Korean War, from a country of 8.0M, it was a significant effort.

It will be good eqwiped with top class gear. Only problem it's too little. Australia still missing several platforms it really needs to be able to defend. 1. is a aircraft carrier. 2. long range bombers. If you look at south Korea desined cvx carrier it will be eqwiped with a number of platform aircraft including drones and even a 16 cell Mk41 VLS to protect the ship. Why can't Australia build something like that? Australia could also build a MQ28 ghost bat drone into a long range bomber varent rather than build AI short range fighters that have no range outside Australian borders without mid air refuelling support

@@Nathan-ry3yu Why would Australia need an aircraft carrier? That is a power projection platform not a defensive one. Couple that with the fact that the carrier would require a sizeable portion of the surface and sub fleet to protect it, and if you are talking rotation probably most of it. Couple that with the fact that Australia would have no carrier when it goes into maintenance and refit and during that time skills in both sailors and airmen would degrade. I haven't seen anything about a VLS on the CVX but I might have missed that, though it seems weird to me. Even discounting that the size of the ROKN is about the same as the entire ADF and has a far larger surface fleet than Australia by multiples, not to mention double the population and an economy 1/3 or so bigger to support an armed forces that size.

​@@Nathan-ry3yucarriers and long range bombers are power projection offensive assets, not for defence. They are also costly and need lots of logistics and infrastructure in place to maintain and operate. Even smaller carriers operated by UK and France has thousands of crew onboard and thousands more support personnel, Australia only has population of about 25 million.

​​​​@@penitent2401I can tell your not from Australia. As you talking a load of crap to say Australia don't have the population to oporate an aircraft carrier. I think you need to follow up in the 1960s to 1980s Australia once had 2 aircraft carriers. With the old Melbourne been decommissioned in the 1980s. We had a lot smaller population back then. 1979 the year I was born Australian population was only just on 14 million people. We have 27 million today. The whole point I'm saying is Australia needs an offensive capability. We have to be able to take the fight to enamy not be just a defensive player. The war in the pacific during ww2 was won by aircraft not by destroyers and frigates or troops on the ground. Without adding aircraft it will be difficult to face of with an enemy without carriers. Especially out at sea. The whole point is to be able to project out as far as possible. So enamy can't take the fight to you. If you know about how ww2 was won in the pacific you will see aircraft carriers are important. You can't defeat an enamy if you can't take the fight to the enamy. The whole point is to be able to project out far as possible so the enemy can't take the fight to you. That's the whole point why Australia needs offensive capability. And having a aircraft carrier is needed

@@Nathan-ry3yu those old carriers were just flight deck slapped on a hull. Modern carriers are much more technical needing tons more supporting logistics and much larger size for all the stuff it needs to be able to do to justify being a carrier. The last carrier Australia has spend 4 months out of every year docked up for constant refits and repair and the modern ones needs even more, so you would need at least 2-3 of them. We've had consideration for getting new carriers several times and each time it failed due to costs and lack of manpower required. Carriers also needs escort fleet, Australia don't have an abundance of surface vessels as it is. As for offensive capabilities, that's what our submarines fleet (although current ones are dangerously close to outdated) and the US. We've reached age of long range missiles and drones that can be fielded on much smaller and cost effective vessels.

conscription is a terrible idea, the defence force has no use for people who are put there by force and dont want to be there, its not a finishing school for wayward youth, and my opinion is backed up by eleven years of service in the Australian army, how many did you do?

@@GUNHOWITZERcouldn’t agree more, It would be a complete disaster 👍👍❤️🇦🇺

Imagine how crap our army would be then,,, all the bludgers

@@GUNHOWITZER our defence force only has about 80,000 where as China has 2 million and Russia over a million. We also had our guns stripped from us. What will we do if we’re invaded?

@@tomhocking5606why would they bother invading? Far more strategic to hit us from offshore and form blockades that stop us from doing anything rather than boots on the ground and going through the nightmare that is urban warfare.

i sort agree how ever i would like a model like Israel. i would like our youth to be better prepared .

By then it would be too late. It takes months just for basic training. We tried this in WW2 and ended up putting troops in the field with not enough training. We need to bring in a plan for this now, and develop forward areas in PNG and the Islands NOW! Otherwise we are going to be caught out again.

Australia fighting against an adversary in the jungles, as we did will in WW2, now, is largely obsolete. Conscripts … If there were call-ups, they would better find themselves in front of computer screens. A Chinese Solomons adversary

Conscription is for the defence of Australia, which is why in WWII conscripts could stay on the Papua New Guinea side of the border if they chose to.

Well before WW1 Australia had a defence policy where young men of a certain age had to be members of a rifle club and actively had to attend. This created the diggers of WW1 which helped them become good shots. I think something like this would be great but the weapons stay onsite in armouries after you have a shoot. No guns in the community. Have the Army or police be in charge of these armouries and rifle ranges. Maybe site these ranges next to or near existing Army Reserve units who takes over responsibility of these ranges? www.awm.gov.au/articles/encyclopedia/conscription/universal_service

Same with things in this comment, HMAS Canberra and Adelaide were never intended to host fixed wing aircraft. They were acquired in the aftermath of the Timor INTERFET operation when it was brought to light that Australia's lift capacity to transport troops offshore was woefully inadequate as they can transport over 1000 troops and equipment. With the exception of the F-111's the fighter force whilst smaller in terms of what we had with the Mirages etc the power projection is greater with the air to air refuelling we have now as well as the command and control the E7 Wedgetails provide.

The real asset behind the Canberras aren't the aircraft but the tanks and armoured vehicles it can land on the islands to our north. But yes, it would be nice. Hopefully their replacements can have fixed wing aircraft.

@@dan7564 The LHD's were not bought for the purpose of fixed wing operations you are right. If Australia were to ever want to go down that route though I doubt it they would probably need something like the America Class or a little smaller in size so that the amphibious carrying capability isn't degraded. Even then having half a dozen F-25B's onboard, I am not sure what you would do with them that you couldn't with another platform.

Yeah, they don’t want to have a repeat of the last time they went to war against Australia.

Billy Hughes?

Australia will. Long range missiles. Nuclear submarines, SNN AUKUS, AI drones and Scramjets and QM.

we can do business with the Chinese without getting into bed with them

​​@@alexlanning712but we feeding the enamy though. What Australia sells to China they make military eqwipment out of it to threaten us and the region. Australia should cut all minerals trade and make it ourselves

Rubbish. The empire is dead and has been for more than half a century. Don't be so juvenile; we can do business with the Chinese and still maintain cultural ties with the UK and other Commonwealth countries. The UK is a sinking ship; I wouldn't be tying mine to theirs. None of these countries and governments are perfect; don't look at the world through simplistic glasses.

@@alexlanning712 no i would rather if AUS starved them of coal

Bill Hughes pressed, yet failed?

Correct and THAT was WW1 NOT 2@@petersinclair3997

@@HenriHattarYou are correct. WW1.

Bullshit, the military expansion is bipartisan. They know something, they're not telling us and I think we're in a position where time is a factor.

No Australia is low on recruits

@@kingseb2252 please explain further.

@@jessewhite2226 Australia isn't getting enough recruits and we have a shortage of people interested that's why there are so many defence ads and stuff and conscription can work look at finland

@@kingseb2252 I have many friends and colleagues in the ADF, and yes at times they do that priority roles to fill. But there is high interest in joining the ADF. That's why there are many jobs closed, and priority roles are often filled quickly.

The 59 M1A1 are suppose the be upgraded to M1A2's in addition to the 75 new M1A2's. or has the Canberra brains trust canceled it to piss more money away into the wind..?? The increase of MBT's was suppose to offset the downgrading of APC's..

@@user-xm3fo5vu1s my understanding is the 59 original M1A1's will go back to the US in trade...so the new force will only be the 75 M1A2 SepV3's. Australia never keeps the 'old models' when they bring new equipment into service typically.

@@thomasconc They were suppose to be upgraded with the delivery of additional M1A2's which are upgraded variants from the USA reserve stockpile.. If they are no longer in addition to the 75 than they will be 59 of the 75 meaning 59 that do not need the depleted uranium armour removed like the rest of our M1A2's are having done to them.. I am pretty sure we bought something like 140 or 160 abrams from the US reserves for our 75 M1A2's sepV3 and spares.. I was just curious if it was another gutted project from albo and his mates from the useless canberra brains trust..

@@user-xm3fo5vu1s that is not my understanding based on an article I read that defined the procurement. Ie. around 75 gun hulls delivered as upgraded SepV3's and around 25-28 other variants - assuming M88 recovery types - to add up to just over 100 procured. Then the old non-upgraded hulls returned to the US.

@@thomasconc The old MBT's we use to lease from the yanks, they were apart of the original procurement, although this has gone through multiple governments and multiple defence reviews which leads to procurement changes.. How old is the article have you got name of who posted it, i'm interested in checking it out myself.. Wikipedia is not really a good source although i recently seen on there that the M1A1 are still listed as being upgraded to M1A2's as the newer delivery of the M1A2, it's been that way for a while on a few sources including defence connect and others.. I have not seen anywhere saying we are returning any MBT's back to USA, it seems to be the same as our 59 M1A1 are still being upgraded to M1A2's at the same time as we take delivery of the additional 75 M1A2's.. Under Labor with them gutting our Army i wouldn't be surprised if they reduce numbers or gut the procurement like they have elsewhere.. I lost interest in it all after the last DSR when Canberra decided to gut our Army again, i am curious to see the article you seen and what date it was posted etc if it's recent or older..

No they were not, in WW1 YES..in WW2 NO!

NO! Thwy did NOT have conscription in WW1, indeed the Australian forces in WW1 were withdrawn from the fighting sometime in 1918 due t o numbers not being able to be replaced, conscription was what the Government wanted but tge deal was defeated and it never happened! @@highcountrydelatite

​​​​​@@HenriHattarww2 wasn't conscription for ADF it was after Korea war they brought it in. And demolished it after the Vietnam War. National service in Australia was between 1965 to 1972. My dad was conscripted into the Vietnam war. He was 18 years old 1965 when he had to register My grandfather lied about his age he was 17 when he joined ADF in 1939. He stayed in the army and was a captain during the Korean war. Australia had 1 million men and women serving during ww2. With a population just over 7 million with everyone of them being volunteers. The reason why Australia abolished national service is because the pension they had to pay out from being sued by men and women who was forced into the vutnam war. It wasn't because Australia couldn't afford it.

That is what I said the ADF were volunteers in both wars the constipation referefam was defeated twice.Vietnam we had conscription but not for long.

Nathan, please brush your brians and have a read of THE TRUTH, which is out there if you care to look AND it's easy to find, let's start with your LAST dumb remark first, about conscription for the Vietnam war, the lottery was held for people turning 20...NOT 18 in a particular year and conscription was ONLY stopped due to a change in Government, when the labour Government , under Gough Whitlam came to power, one of their platforms was to end conscription. Now let's travel back in time a bit to WW2 and look at THAT dumb remark too. For as early as 1939 Australia had a LIMITED form of conscription, this developed further and in January of 1943 it was full blown conscription with the inductees being sent any where to fight! This is ALSO available for any half literate being to find out very easy if they want to !A little bit MORE for you Nathan, conscription did NOT happen during the Lorean war, you are RIGHT there, however, it was only SEMI intrioduced after that as a 3 month , basically part time/weekend stint BEGORE it becoming a 2 year continuous conscript period FOR the Vietnam War. Where DO YO(U get your load of garbage from Nathan? IO hope the brain brushing illuminates something up there.

Australia not going to fight China. They just both having an argument with eachother caused by America international interference It will blow over in time. China Australia and USA need eachother. The three countries will never fight eachother the 3 of them are dependant on eachother. Australia the minerals. China the manufacturing. The US the largest buyers. Australia main military build up is because of Indonesia both countries hate eachother. Indonesia has been a threat to Australia since the 60s. So Australia makes sure they are militarily more advanced. Australia not going to use it against China. Like I said Australia needs China. Also some of Australia military eqwipment has become dated or is about to be dated. So they only replacing equipment with new and new capabilities. Every country does that to what they can afford. Australia buys the best their money can buy.

I'm Australian I shoot kangaroos for a living ...Its very tender meat and healthy ..Try harder bot.

It is commonly eaten by Australians in Australia…

I'm Aussie myself and I never eaten kangaroo meat and never will

​@@ziptink1710Not as many Aussies eat it. Maybe some but not all. You won't get me to eat it.

@@Nathan-ry3yu as am I. You've never eaten it. Many people have. Its commonly eaten; not weird.

They did very good to hold of enemies in the past including won battles that larger countries couldn't pull off. They had an even smaller population back then. So the Aussies are not to be underestimated. They can punch far above their own wight

​@Nathan-ry3yu especially if us Kiwis are there to help. ANZACs all the way!

Yeah thats what others said in WW1, WW2, Korea , Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. As years go the popuation increases, we get richer and develop more capability to defend ourselves. We have no interest in aggression but threaten either Australia or our ANZAC mates in NZ and see how you go.

@user-bi8wp6wy3l Those of us, who have a firm grip of the 'family', would fight with us. The woke forkers, are fodder!

That's what Rommel said.

It was specially edited for you.

Bot

tailor made for you ?