Correct but we won’t see it anytime soon. They have forgotten what the military is for; it’s been repurposed to show how fabulous we are not fight wars.
@lewynomg4943 Don't forget we've got at least 3 generations who are absolutely petrified of guns and anything that goes bang. Australia is in a bit of a defence pickle at the minute
@ZELJKO472 Not everyone is like this, go to the country and you will find competent patriots who know how to service and use firearms. It's just they don't want to serve a woke bureaucracy and woke brass.
The Australian Diplomatic Corps needs to be armed with 'competence'. The 'Defence' Force should be provided with every tool needed to 'defend' AU's border. Not to be the next 'proxy'.
@MrWhitmen1981 from any threat. The ADF isn't fit for purpose. And it's something that needs to be fixed. And the most likely threat would be China. Concider the size of China military. Australia has to beef up and able to match them in technology and stike power to be able to defend
@@drinkyourtea The ones you let into Australia are very small numbers. The ones you want to worry about is the ones you bred in the country through hate and racism.
@@drinkyourtea the few islamists you let in are not the problem as you can watch them. The big problem is the ones that you breed with your racism and hate in the country. Disenfranchised teenagers that fall through the cracks will be your biggest threat.
@grantsapain look at the population difference champ for both US vs AUD. We punch well above our weight. Our SAS are always some of the first requested to Assist in conflicts. We have quality
Australia comunity was once armed up thats why the Japanese were reluctant to attack Australia but we all know now that this country is nueted and we would be lucky to survive any attack it's a joke
In WW2 most of Australia's fighting aged men were up in Europe and our equipment levels were poor. The Japs didn't attack us mostly due to the sheer size of land they would have to control - and that USA would not want us to become a Japanese base for their Pacific ambitions.
@jackduane5555 Really we can't even get enough recruits in our defence forces and our comunist goverment is now talking about recruiting people from overseas
It's not about "preferring war". If Australia isn't defended, wait until you see the regime that will be taking the Australian Government's place. What you said is just juvenile. It reminds me of something that a 1st year uni student might say. Don't kid yourself that China will simply manage Australia like China's richest provinces. It will turn Australia - and Australians - into slaves that are being flogged every day.
Our defence force are just glorified SES workers , I know a lot who have left our defence as the whole time they were in the defence ,, years and years of cyclone clean ups and natural disasters ,, no training ..
@@highcountrydelatite lol u saying I’m lying , I don’t no anyone who left cause of it ,,, pull ya head in , I’m not denigrating anyone ,,, I have vet’s and old service man in my family
I Agree with Roger , if your referring to the Hand in/ Buy Back,, in the 90s,, thing many Didn’t Participate in that. So many Americans in Particular, think, everyone gave up there Weapons, Completely False 🤷🏼♂️
What are armed people going to do? It's a bunch of individuals with guns. The military is organised, highly trained and is under a command structure. Individuals with firearm cannot replicate that. Do you people ever think?
A) Every school leaver needs to do minimum 2 years ADF service. B) We need to stop financial aid to countries that dont really like us (lile Indonesia). C) Australians need at least a Castle Doctrine/ Stand Your Ground style of self-defense, maybe with the possibility of CCW/ OCW and Pepper Spray. D) Sadly; our country is too arse backwards for any of that to happen
@adamedward3677 Australians don’t have the right of self defence, you are not allowed by law to carry ANY object that could be used as a weapon of self defence by law. You are a dumb and pussified nation under authoritarian rule. Your government is worse than any enemy you face.
Australia has very underarmed and dated defence equipment. It couldn't hold any country anymore than a few days. The ADF is seeking to fix the situation so it can be fit for purpose. But they get twits like you with dumb comments..
When you look at the assets our neighbours in the Pacific area have available as far as weapons are concerned Australia is still sorely lacking. The Coalition tried to turn the ADF into a disaster response and immigration focused force and almost forgot about the rise of near peer adversaries in the region. The lack of armed drones as well as the lack of properly armed and equipped small naval vessels are an example of the wrong mindset for the current political climate. Spending extra money on defence is great as long as it's spent on the right equipment and assets such as long range land based air defence systems as an example. The weapons Loadout of one Flight IIA Arleigh Burke class destroyer constitutes more firepower than virtually the whole of the ADF has available as an example. Australia will never have a very large amount of personal in the ADF so having the best and most lethal world class equipment is obviously a big priority. 😎🇦🇺
How stupid are the governments in Australia. They are going out and buying all of this great equipment for the Army, Navy, and Airforce. But they forget one major defining point, you have to have personnel to operate them. The Defence Force Personnel are the least paid members of the Australian workforce, yet they hold the same qualification like all the trades. The only trade the is not in the Australian workforce is the Arms Corps. A basic soldier in the defence force is paid dollars just above the dole.
Look at the SIZE of Australia , do you really think we can defend ourselves? Don’t pay billions for an expensive dream. I’d rather see us neutral, withdraw from all the expensive organisations which don’t benefit us one iota, transfer our “defence” forces to air, Sea, Land rescue.
Paul Keating was right, these Virginia Class subs are already outdated. They use the old, noisy nuclear mechanical propulsion system, which will have increasingly worse survivability as time progresses. Even the US recognizes this deficiency and have recently announced the upgrade of a newer Virginia Class with an experimental caterpillar propulsion system. The notion of spending endless billions on extending the life of an end-of-life Virginia Class in 10 years time represents some sort of strategic deterrence to China is absurd. Then, there's this nonsense about Tomahawk cruise missiles. Yes, the Tomahawk has been one of the US's more reliable missiles (contrary to the propaganda, missile systems is not one of the US's strengths). The weapons don't fly fast, nor that low, they are lacking in manoeuvring capability, and don't disperse decoys or flares. Quite simply, against advanced air defence systems they have low probability of successfully penetrating an enemies defences. It has been shown that in Ukraine, Russian air defences are very effective. This has been admitted by the British intelligence. The success of Russian air defence missiles runs at over 90% interception rates against the Storm Shadow missiles. These are a more advanced, stealthier system than the Tomahawk. If Australia wastes money on buying 200 Tomahawks, with 90% being unsuccessful in reaching their targets, that means only 20 missiles get through. To believe this represents some sort of strategic deterrence to China is also moronic. Then, with the HIMARS, are we going to have a rocket manufacturing capability here? Without that these are nothing more than commissions for the the toe-touchers who leave the senior command and take up positions in the Australian branches of US armament corporations. The Ukrainian War has shown just how abysmal US weapons stocks are. So, to have all these US weapons and totally rely on the US for ammo is just stupid and suicidal. Then there's the F-35. This aircraft is a World Wide serviceability rate of just over 50%. A core reason is the lack of availability of parts. So, if there's no parts now, there's definitely not going to be any parts if the shit hits the fan. Then, whilst Israel is allowed to have full access to the F-35 software codes and the right to incorporate their own weapons, Australia is not. This is disgusting and insulting to the Australian people. Israel has been caught stealing US technology and illegally selling such on more than one occasion. Australia is the only country that the US has provided nuclear bombers to (the F-111). We upheld the terms of our agreement impeccably. So, Israel is trusted with full sovereignty with the F-35 and we get told no. That this situation has been accepted obliterates the integrity of our senior command, Defence in general, and the government (bi-partisan). So, we are spending all this money but are just not getting genuine defence. Such has to stop.
And experimental caterpillar system on the Virginia Class? Please don't tell me you got that from the Naval News website? Did you happen to see the date that particular article was published? 🤣1st of April 2024. 🤣
@@AndrewinAus I see that you are right. Thanks for pointing that out. However, such only strengthens the point that I was making. The Virginia Class does use the old nuclear mechanical system, which is noisier and provides low survivability. The US is moving towards the nuclear electrical system, which the French already have operational in their Suffren Class. This is particularly pertinent with regards to operations in our primary area of operation to the north, which consists largely of shallow water. This will be a sensor saturated area. These closed waters bring all the auxiliary vessels into play, such as pleasure craft and small commercial vessels. We have seen the massive expansion of drones and these can easily be operated of small vessels. Good thermal sensors, passive dipping sonars, lidars, synthetic aperture radars, etc, can be utilised by these assets. We can expect a mass of such assets in use should there be any conflict to our north. Thus, older, noisier subs will have no survivability at all.
@@AndrewinAus Aircraft carriers are used mainly to help with invasions of the enemy taking out targets protecting our soldiers and taking power of the air
@@jecos1966 Who are we invading? With a carrier of that size it will carry what 8 -12 fixed wing maybe 6 rotary wing aircraft. That's not going to be sufficient to launch more than 2 jets at a time perhaps if you're lucky have two more on quick alert. And again it would take the rest of the fleet to protect and service it. Besides who are we invading with a single available combined arms brigade, plus special forces to provide limited disruption activity in opposing territory. Where is the lift capacity to move that amount of men and equipment? Then you have to be able to protect and supply those troops as well?
A couple of capabilities we are missing is a medium to long range land based mobile air defence system with the recent attacks on Israel showing why such systems are a necessity. And for all our large naval assets to be able to fire the full array of US missiles such as the SM-3 and Tomahawk. I am happy to have defence equipment designed and built in Australia as long as what is built is world class or better. 😎🇦🇺
We need to stop being an American colony and stand alone. We are grateful to have friends, but just in case we have everything, we need to develop in-house military research, development, and manufacturing to at least defend. So let's do that.
Where are you going to get the recruits? Where are the +1 million Lee Enfield 303 rifles, 17,000 highly accurate light machinegun Brens, +100,000 SLRs and trillions of rounds of ammunition that at one time was kept in storage in the event of another 1942 Emergency? Coalition forces use to get nasty little surprises from snipering by Afghan hillbillies with the 'old muskets'. Irony is disarming a population and then telling them they are defenders of the country. As the family goes so does the nation and also the armed forces.
@@Kay-ph1kb I am not Xi either and I dont respect him either. If Albanese betrays his own countrymen on the global stage, is why weekness is seen then you will betray anyone else as well. Well done Charmain Xi for putting this woke wannabe woke and Palestinian appeasing leader in his place
We don't need a good speaker - and the general made that point adequately. We need a clear vision and the executive capability to achieve that vision. I don't believe Marles understands what the vision is.
I'm going to say it. The move to an amphibious capability is a waste of money. There are many, more serious defence deficiencies to fix first. Especially since the Army is already so seriously under-equipped, under-manned and continuously under the threat of cuts. Since we are already committed to heaps of new aircraft and fancy new ships and then subs, there will be no money left to bring the Army back to where it should have always been. What threat will be defeated by adding a few fast ferries and landing boats? All they provide is a waterborne taxi service. Always remember that it is always the Army that fights the hardest battles and is the only of the three services that can actually win a war. Yet, ever since the end of the Vietman war (when the ALP returned to power), it is the service that has been progressively stripped of capability, so that it could not operate continuously for more than a few weeks. Planes and boats cannot seize and hold ground or other objectives, they cannot occupy an enemies' capital or topple its government they cannon destroy an enemies' armed forces so that victory becomes inevitable. That can only be done by boots on the ground, lots of them, which we don't have any more. The other two services do an excellent job of supporting the main game, but by themselves they will never force or carry a decisive result in war. The 'overwhelming' air raid by Iran to Israel is a perfect example. For all its cost and sparks, it achieved nothing. Defence Ministers' strategy launch is all smoke and mirrors. It ignores the central problems that are so well known outside the political corridors of the ALP's 'focus groups', that is - recruitment failed because soldiers are way overdue for a decent payrise and that so much outsourcing has already occurred in defence that it has destroyed large parts of the Army's ability to manage itself. It did not mention the woeful deficiency in tanks, artillery, armed aviation. It did not mention the half-strength battalions that we have been putting up with for way too long. One might conclude that the ALP does not actually want to have an effective Army, for reasons they have not yet confided in us.
What is the strategic outcome, are we seizing ground offshore or are we trying to prevent an adversary from creating and then expanding on a lodgement to invade the country. No country on Earth can invade us, but they can strangle us by cutting off our ability to trade. Through that lens the navy and air force are the focus. Sure if we want to take and maintain territory you can't do that from the air or ocean, you need boots on the ground to do that but is that our strategic objective. Or is it to stop others from doing that to us. If so then the army being mobile in the littoral zones to project force like the navy and air force can help achieve that goal. Porcupine (or in our case Echidna) strategy. We've never had a defence force (at least since I have been on this Earth for nearly 50 years) capable of doing that to any great effect. ADF numbers overall from memory 2002 to now have grown about 6000 so the problem is not just one side of politics but both. Both sides have fiddled with Army has been rejigged so many times its absurd trying to be a Jack of all Trades but Master of None. Perhaps we need to choose a trade, like modelling Army after some manner of 'marines' force and stick with it.
ADF needs to stick with humanitarian stuff - no political party has had the balls to equip it for high-end complex warfare. This current catch-up strategy will leave an ADF with a broad set of capabilities but with no significant depth.
The ADF is tiny and can not defend Australia in the absence of a major ally, in a peer to peer conflict and where the full gamut of asymmetric warfare is employed. As a partial solution we need a layered and mobile missile defence system deployed in different ways air, sea and ground. As it currently stands we have small components of this, but no significant capacity to resupply large numbers of missile based munitions in a timely fashion. Our major population areas do not have the equivalent of the Israeli multi layer defence system e.g. Iron Dome - Davids Sling - Arrow II and Arrow III (yes I know the strategy is offshore defence and containment via -Japan - Taiwan - Phillipines - Indonesia etc). The only effective way, on ground, that Australia can defend its own land mass from direct assault is an armed citizenry, this could double as a broad scale defence of critical infrastructure although this is highly vulnerable to drone/missile strike. It could be argued that low-grade information and economic operations are currently being undertaken by bad actors. Neither the ADF or Government appear competent in outlining a broad realistic strategy that recognises our major threats - if you can't do that, you can't build the systems, structures and logistics chains required for effective defence. There are three switches the major peer threat would flick in the first instance (1) information (2) economic and (3) infrastructure - all three of these can be achieved without a bullet being fired.
You're correct, particular the last point. My understanding is that our doctrine is to hold adversaries at risk from significant distance as our geography is our strongest defensive feature. Using force multipliers, and agile equipment and weaponry to harass and eliminate supply lines and enemy logistics in order to defeat or at least delay the enemy until the cavalry arrives. We are good at this, but our numbers of boats, missiles and troops are woeful. Our country is far too vast for an iron dome type of missile defence, and we will never be an armed nation. They have explicitly told us this. Our government hates us. I will join a partisan group if God forbid it ever comes to us.
@@JohnLoogleman Yes thats the doctrine and a critical component of that is containment via the defensive line, Japan - Taiwan - Phillipines, PNG and Indonesia. Unfortunately due to the soft diplomacy of the likely protagonist the containment line has been, in effect, breached at many points. I strongly suspect Taiwan will be taken out one way or another within the next few years. We have in effect, through our air force and navy elements of a mobile defensive missile shield able to defend against a wide range of missile types, however this is so dependent on location and number of missiles that if concentrated it could be effective, for a very short time, but if dispersed would likely be completely ineffective. We're certainly in no position to manufacture and resupply the requisite number of missiles for adequate long term defence. In effect, we're in a one shot in the locker situation. For city based defence we do manufacturer equipment that will certainly deal with drones and the jamming gear to go with it, we don't need an Iron dome but Archer equivalents would be very effective against ballistic threats which are the likely major danger in most but not all cases. My view, is the Australian government and the ADF has disengaged from the general public in regard to defence, its not sexy politically and most people don't take a great deal of notice of the terrible geopolitical situation that currently exists and is slowly further destablising. A disengaged population is a problem because you need a population fully engaged in defence for many reasons, expertise, labour and endless numbers of defence related roles.
@@mikerussell3298 Do you consider the US an enemy, it would be unusual for an enemy to provide access to state of the art missiles, nuclear technology and where do you think our fifth generation aircraft F35s come from? The three threats to global stability and peace are dictatorships, all have expansionist or regionally destructive policies in place and all have appalling human rights records. These are (1) PRC (2) RUS and (3) IRN - I haven't included NK as they are an arm of the PLA.
@@VK6AB- Russia is a Federal Democracy, China is a Socialist Democracy, both have strong leaders NOT Dictators, that's a US construct. As for our "friends" the US they have a Fedreal republic where the President has supreme Executive power. The major difference is that US is a warmongering Nation that has been in conflict for the majority of its existence and it has a millitary/ Industrial economy the absolutely depends of the sale and use or arms and warfare.
We have way to many chiefs and not enough of men and women who don’t sit in ivory towers. We need more boots on the ground we need to be armed to the teeth and we need to be buying the gear off America. We need to stop trying to make our own ships. The Hobart class is a prime example went way over budget when we could have picked up arliegh burks that were on offer. Tried tested and true piece of warfare.
We are sick of political reteric and their games ,Australians want common sense action all the time .All the game playing career politicians get out before you get us all killed or enslaved .
Getting involved in great power competition and take side to help them maintain their international hegemony is not a clever choice. The tax-payers' money can be better used for improving Australia's infrastructure and living standard of the low-income Australians
Stop spending money on 'wokery' and other such nonsense. Reduce waste in the public service, where less wokery will be a start. And redirect the money to Defence. Our servicemen and women should be respected and well treated.
Ze Chinese, havnt you heard? Anytime now😂😂😂 they got tired of waiting for the Russians so switched it up. Wonder who it will be next?🤔 running out of bad guys to blame
Make some gun safe changes, and let the law abiding, and hard working people have the right to bear arms, and defend their country. No adverse army will ever risk invading an armed nation.
couple of questions to ask... the obesity epidemic will make conscription interesting, additionally, the mental health epidemic will also make things interesting... a decision based on medical exemptions may be made very quickly, depending on the urgency... political and business son's daughter's and other relations exemptions will be interesting as well... there will be no fortunate son's without extreme justification... and post whatever war, scrutiny around such 'safe' postings will also be observed...
Israel has to do what they think is the right response.... Do not expect America's support as its hegemony is over...It is EUROPE my Bible says who will respond fearfully and dreadfully (Daniel 11:40)
What to invest in depends on what you’re trying to achieve. If we want to invade a Chinese military base in the Solomon’s we’re going to need more ships and naval air. If we want to stop the Chinese militia fishing boats, we’re going to need a lot of mogami type ships. We have one of the most advanced airforces in the world, but small. In both of these examples our airforce is relatively useless…..food for thought.
It appears from all events that have unfolded lately that the billions being spent on Subs is a waste of money!The future is definately DRONES! Money well spent there for Australia!
Neysid knife attack. Just a mirrored version ov Port Headland. With moore indevidual's in shopping ctr. Interesting they don't say Underworld Mafia Boss's daughter executed. Istead they say Businessman.
Playing soldier has always been good for the economy, however it has become a thing of the past. When capitalism fails, the correction is usually based on war. However there must be other ways. Does anyone seriously believe Australians would fire an H-bomb onto Beijing ? Tibbets was supposed to have had a nervous breakdown after bombing Hiroshima - he didn't, but the magnitude of the thing is horrendous. Bomber pilots after WW2 lived with realy bad consciences. And the other thing is 'what goes around comes around'.
Well, be prepared for our children having to fit the bill in their taxes and reduction in healthcare. Perhaps try to get in now and buy stocks in military contracts.
Australia have to develop missile can travel 3000 kilometres to defend our country from external threats however, we must not spend our taxpayers dollars to boats and move around the world and work like world police man .
so who is the enemy within 3,000Km ? realise China has no intention to "invade" other nations, it trades and BRICS is becoming the biggest trading system ever seen.