Defence Upgrades

[moistie]

Originally posted by 1jasonoz
Its actually funny Moistie, im an ex serviceman, ive got a far idea from some of the posts ive read on here over time that are a few other ex-servicemen. Ive seen them post stuff which only those of us who have servied would know, i.e. how crappy some of the stuff is, some of the rubbish that goes on behind the scenes, and the response from people who have never served is that you are a Lefty looney communist because you don't verbatim follow the government line.

Its interesting to hear that. Thats why I like this forum, because it gives an opportunity to hear something other than what were told through our (commercial) media. It never ceases to amaze me how many people swallow the government line and never think for themselves.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by moistie
It never ceases to amaze me how many people swallow the government line and never think for themselves.

Of course you shouldn't do that. But at the same time it's amazing how many people assume everything is a conspiracy and everything involving Western Establishment is bad. Of course, nothing involving the people on the other side is bad though.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by moistie
No, but its not the only statement he's put forward. If you don't agree with what he's saying and can prove it, then do so. I like these sorts of arguments because it gives me a chance to learn about a topic I'm not fully conversent in.

The problems with his statements is they are so rampantly anti-US (such as the example I gave), even in topic which don't really need such a focus, and he often rants without much coherence, so that his posts are rather tedious. Like you, I enjoy debate on a range of topics, and like to hear well-argued opinions from another viewpoint, however that was not one.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by 1jasonoz
the response from people who have never served is that you are a Lefty looney communist because you don't verbatim follow the government line.

It has nothing to do with whether you follow the Govt line or not - it's related to the form and content of the arguments. I know a stack of current and ex-military people who like nothing better than to comment on the behind-the-scenes messes (amongst other things). It's interesting to listen to. However, their behavour is not one synonymous with the furious keyboard thrashings of some.

 

[moistie]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Of course you shouldn't do that. But at the same time it's amazing how many people assume everything is a conspiracy and everything involving Western Establishment is bad. Of course, nothing involving the people on the other side is bad though.

The thing is, the U.S. govenment has done so many evil things in its own interest to other soverign nations and blatantly lied about it to cover their tracks, only for it to become public at a later time. Thats why there are so many conspiracy theorists about, because for the amount of money the U.S. C.I.A. have they have the capacity to do an amazing array of things. Sure some conspiracy theories are far fetched, but with what the U.S. government has done over the years, I'd put nothing past them.

As for the Western establishment being bad, I think the point is that they're supposedly the upholders of democracy and paint themselves as the saviours of the planet from the forces of evil (eg. Communism, Fundamentalism). Yet their actions are shown time and again to be hypocritical. For me, its more that they try to claim the high moral ground in every situation they're involved with and the simple inability to admit they were wrong on something that frustrates me. I don't (but I know others might) paint the opposition side as being blameless, as I always say 'it takes two to tango'.

 

[dan warna]

when the various groups were saying there are no WMDS and its all about oil, the pro war groups were sying it was conspiracy theory rubbish, and it will be all right when we get their and the shiiites and sunnis will welcome us.

turns out the conspiracy theorists were right!

no WMDs, the sunnis and the shiites want the US out and are killing them at every opportunity.

the US has thousand in illegal concentration camps.

did the US protect the electricity supply? no. did the US protect the water supply? no. DId the US protect the civilians? no....

the US protect the oil resources...

DER go figure, you live in la la land in ignorance and blind faith in the new nazi regime of bush and rummy and the more US body bags sent bag the more the people will get the message of OUT OF IRAQ MURDERING US THEIVING SCUM.

 

[1jasonoz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
It has nothing to do with whether you follow the Govt line or not - it's related to the form and content of the arguments. I know a stack of current and ex-military people who like nothing better than to comment on the behind-the-scenes messes (amongst other things). It's interesting to listen to. However, their behavour is not one synonymous with the furious keyboard thrashings of some.

So you have never served yourself then? You rely on 2nd hand talk, rumours and statements and when faced with the following FACTS;

why do think we paid hundreds of millions to buy torpedoes that don't fit our subs?

why do think we handed over 500m for a fighter we might not even buy?

why do think we buy so much crap from the US that doesn't work, like flak jackets that don't stop bullets, helmets that had to be upgraded, the ASLAV 25 which the contracting managers recommended we DON"T buy and whose armour can't stop 7.62 rounds etc etc.

What was your response to these facts;

Your fingers must be hurting from all that furious tapping on the keyboard... ooh, the anger of the righteously indignant left...

Good response, but please tell me what you think and know of the ballistic capabilites of the flak jackets issued to our service personal. What about the problems with the ASLAV 25, what do you think should be done to fix the problems, and please name the problems you know off. What do you think of the CIWWS system on the FFG'S, do you think they should have gone with the non US system in the Goalkeeper, or that they are correct in blindly buying an inferior system due to it being US made. Or what do you think of the US Link Communication/Combat system which we ned to purchase from the US if we want to be operable with US task forces in the future? What about the fact that we are reducing the patrol boat fleet down to 12 which isnt enough to properly carry out servalliance of the coastline? What about the fact that these patrol boats arent going to have helicopter landing facilities, which is/was a requirement of the defence white paper due to the Seahawks and other defence helicopters limited range? They aren't being built with helio deck facilities due to the government choosing an inferior cheaper design to save money.

Please tell me, tell us your worldly knowledge of all these failings/problems in our Defence forces. Once you have finished answering them, i will start giving you the real hard stuff.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by moistie
The thing is, the U.S. govenment has done so many evil things in its own interest to other soverign nations and blatantly lied about it to cover their tracks, only for it to become public at a later time. Thats why there are so many conspiracy theorists about, because for the amount of money the U.S. C.I.A. have they have the capacity to do an amazing array of things. Sure some conspiracy theories are far fetched, but with what the U.S. government has done over the years, I'd put nothing past them.

As for the Western establishment being bad, I think the point is that they're supposedly the upholders of democracy and paint themselves as the saviours of the planet from the forces of evil (eg. Communism, Fundamentalism). Yet their actions are shown time and again to be hypocritical. For me, its more that they try to claim the high moral ground in every situation they're involved with and the simple inability to admit they were wrong on something that frustrates me. I don't (but I know others might) paint the opposition side as being blameless, as I always say 'it takes two to tango'.

I can't really faulty most of what you said, and it is not in disagreement with what I have said. However, the key point I make is that not every case is one of a conspiracy. There are plenty of things that have happened that haven't resulted in shocking outcomes, but people focus on the worst cases. People (like William Blum) tend to take a mix of the truth falsehoods and make eggregious omissions and the hold these things up to be fact. I simply would prefer more even-handed comments.


Of course, comments like the following don't help any argument:

I think they'll have to give a lot of kickbacks to US corporations to ensure that Bush gets elected

DER go figure, you live in la la land in ignorance and blind faith in the new nazi regime of bush and rummy and the more US body bags sent bag the more the people will get the message of OUT OF IRAQ MURDERING US THEIVING SCUM.

we buy it to brownnose the US, which you seem to like to do.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by 1jasonoz
Please tell me, tell us your worldly knowledge of all these failings/problems in our Defence forces. Once you have finished answering them, i will start giving you the real hard stuff.

I was simply responding to his usual diatribe about us giving kickbacks to the US to get Bush re-elected (yeah right!!) and us brown-nosing to the US, which is his conclusion to everything. Perhaps if he presented his arguments and conclusions more sensibly, they would be given more merit.

 

[dan warna]

briefly our flak jackets used in e.timor purchased very recently could not be guaranteed of stopping certain rounds of ammunition from certain automatic rifle types (7.62 i believe, they were ok for 5.56s but who besides us use 5.56s sigh).

fortunately we cut a deal to lease US vest and suits for the duration of the exercise, i believe that we rectified the situation and wrote of the first set which is used for training of choco's

the brit goalkeeper I haven't seem specs to campare with the phalax, however we didn't purchase the depleted uranium ammunition, we used a technical solution to give the same effect as the heavier round used the US warships. phalanx is now 25 y/o while goalkeeper was being deployed only 5 years ago, also the brit rapier 2000 is a superior field SAM than most avail now, we still use the older rapier,

I am aware of the comms/combat systems, but don't know the tech specs, I do know however our field combat comms do not work with US or UK field combat comms (we were hoping to sell our tech about 15 years ago...at least labour tried)

geez the superseasprites look ordinary and 5 years too late and over priced ...

 

[1jasonoz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I was simply responding to his usual diatribe about us giving kickbacks to the US to get Bush re-elected (yeah right!!) and us brown-nosing to the US, which is his conclusion to everything. Perhaps if he presented his arguments and conclusions more sensibly, they would be given more merit.

Obviously it was to hard for you to say whether or not you have served in the military? It was also to hard for you to respond to my questions aswell.

Here's a few more;

What do you think of the MSBS, which a senate select committee has stated discriminates against service personal. What so you think of the recomendation that the government is causing service personal to lose thousands of dollars due to the government refusing to meet their obligations as an employer?

What do you think of the government having in place a widows pension scheme that is little more than the old age pension.

What do you think of the government fighting every compensation claim by ex-Voyager crewman.

What do you think of the government refusing to place people on a asbestos register, after it has come out that ships that people have worked/lived on where riddled with the stuff.

Please tell me and the rest of the ex-service personal what your learnered knowledge is on these matters.

Thats if you can stop yourself from typing the response thta im a lefty becaus ei dare to question the government.

 

[moistie]

Now that we're getting onto the topic of government military acquisitions, I'd be interested to hear from those with a military background or knowledge on the topic as to what is the current process for purchasing for our countries defence force.

A friend of mine in the army believes it would be best to follow the Singaporian model of arms and vehicle purchasing. That is to actually buy only a couple of each necessary vehicle, give it to the armed forces for field testing, let them decide which is the better vehicle and tell of any faults/shortcomings in the design so they can be fixed prior to an order going out.

That seems to make sense to me.

 

[dan warna]

I think thats the theory in some instances, however you tell a politician 'x', they'll say you said 'y' then you replay the tape, they then say you meant 'z', then they'll answer another question altogether.

still waiting to find the WMDS, babies overboard, never ever GST, from the libs to name a few, and the no tolls on the freeway just lately from the labs.

Also, hate to say it buts it is true, there are some fumb duck and some corrupt officers, and a some really really stupid soldiers out there.

it seems the smart ones, or the ones with a shred of decency stay away from canberra and south melbourne, or laverton or pitt st where the clowns seem to congregate.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by 1jasonoz
Obviously it was to hard for you to say whether or not you have served in the military? /

No I have never served - I never held myself out to be an expert on weapons systems. I was simply making some comments earlier on the topic at hand and then commenting on a certain diatribe, which I had seen too many times before. You are just going over the top now with your range of questions barely related to the original topic of the thread.

 

[1jasonoz]

.

Now that we're getting onto the topic of government military acquisitions, I'd be interested to hear from those with a military background or knowledge on the topic as to what is the current process for purchasing for our countries defence force.

This is one of the reasons we have a sh-tfight getting gear;

My father served in the Army for 9 years, serving in the Malaya conflict, then in the Air force for 20 years. At the end of his time he ended up going to Avalon airfield west of Werribee. Well he ended up working his way through the positions and ended up being the head of the entire QA(Quality Assurance) for the ADF aircraft. He had to deal with the F-18'S, Seahawks etc. He was running the checks on the first 2 Seahawks in the country, and they failed dismally. These where built in the US, shipped to Australia to be the Lead helicopters for the rest of the choppers. Well my dad said they werent up to Aust Standards so refused to clear them to the Navy. My dad got an abusive phone call from some Commodre at the fleet air base at Albatross ordering him to sign over the aircraft. Well my old man responed with a i'm not in the ADF and i'ii clear them when i'm ready.

The ADF is run by people who think it is there own little fiedom, they are the masters and know best.

 

[TheBloods]

I worked on a major submission to the ADF for outsourcing logistics about 4-5 years ago. One of the most disorganised clueless organisation I have had anything to do with. I don't doubt for a moment the incompetence you have suggested is inherent in the ADF (and I have not done so in this thread), or for that matter most defence forces. Like I say, I know a lot of service personnel who say the same things.

 

[1jasonoz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
No I have never served - I never held myself out to be an expert on weapons systems. I was simply making some comments earlier on the topic at hand and then commenting on a certain diatribe, which I had seen too many times before. You are just going over the top now with your range of questions barely related to the original topic of the thread.

They if aren't an expert and haven't served why did you respond when a person put these facts on the table;

why do think we paid hundreds of millions to buy torpedoes that don't fit our subs?
why do think we handed over 500m for a fighter we might not even buy?
why do think we buy so much crap from the US that doesn't work, like flak jackets that don't stop bullets, helmets that had to be upgraded, the ASLAV 25 which the contracting managers recommended we DON"T buy and whose armour can't stop 7.62 rounds etc etc.

Your response was;

Your fingers must be hurting from all that furious tapping on the keyboard... ooh, the anger of the righteously indignant left...

Dan posted facts about the government buying inferior equipment, and you responed with what that rubbish.

Here's one for you, do you know that Eurpean Helio manufacturers make their aircraft with an exceptable human lose rate of ZERO. That is they design their aircraft in such a way that any lose of life is eliminated or minimised. Do you know that the US build their aircraft with a lose rate that says they accept an X % lose of life per x number of hours flown? Do you know which ones we bought?

One guess.

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by 1jasonoz
Dan posted facts about the government buying inferior equipment, and you responed with what that rubbish.

You obviously haven't read anything I've written - the responses I made were to his other comments...

 

[dan warna]

I am anti US imperialism, I am against ANY imperialism.

I detest the fact that the US invaded Iraq.

I also am not a fan of US bases on Australia.

Doesn't mean Im a lefty or a commie or a hippy or a socialist, I am GLAD the soviet Union is no more, however i feel great sympathy for those that are suffering under the current economic and social conditions.

I prob used to harsh language, but the only way to get the US out, is by killing their soldiers and generating enough public opinion to pull out, unfortunately passive resistance is only a fraction of the story of the Indian fight for freedom, but the most publicised.

I don't believe america is evil, but the actions of the oil companies, the military and the government is on par with the annexations that the germans conducted in the lead up to the war, and the testing of their weapons in the spanish civil war, just as they improved on their effectiveness in afghanistan, they are strengthening their power in iraq.

note pearle asked that the US take back the panama canal... that would be another interesting development if that particular loony gets his way.

I believe in defence and war as the last resort... was it the last resort in this situation?

no, where are the wmds?

there is no evidence, even the US couldn't fake like they did at tonkin, and their justification for shelling iran, etc.

 

[pazza]

$13.5 billion to upgrade things like aircraft and the like would seem about right, but, are there alternative areas of government spending that could use and extra $13.5 billion in their running and administration?

 

[dan warna]

13.5B is about 10% of the fed budget and about 2% of GDP.

this is about average for an OECD country...

I would say a lot gets *****ed up against the wall on useless project by hq people without much thought for the actual diggers.

its only when we get found out like e.timor that the govt goes in and spends money.

the jack up increase was caused by early years of 'savings'

money can always be better spent somewhere else.

I could make some politically insensitive suggestions on where the govt could stop their middle class welfare/wealthy welfare, but I think that would start a whole new row

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by dan warna
I am against ANY imperialism.

I detest the fact that the US invaded Iraq.

What about the Gulf War in 90/91 - did you favour the US-led coalition then or were you in support of Iraq?

 

[jim boy]

I'm amazed how this thread has turned into an argument of the fomer make up of the Indian Army.

Now back to topic.

To me it seems that purchases do focus on the big showy items. While I agree with Mead and Weaver's response that we need to be ready for a worst-case scenario, I am still not sure that the purchases address this.

Firstly if Indonesia did attempt invade, they would probably fail even if the Aussie defence force did nothing. Having manpower is one thing, but they lack the infrastructure to move large scale people and they just wouldn't cope in the desert, their navy is hardly anything and their airforce is small and old. A couple of destroyers, a dozen planes and some infantry would see them off. And anyway, pretty much all of their entire armed forces is wound up in quelling civil unrest, they simply can't just let that go.

In the other scenario of Indonesia breaking up, which is a real possibility considering that Indonesia is effectively a bunch of different ethic groups dominated by java and it's military, then political considerations come into force into who we back. Groups such as the GAM (Aceh) or Free Papua movement (OPM) are only lightly armed and certainly not capable of undertaking any largescale military manouvres outside of their localities. However, with the exception of east Timor, Australia has been willing to let Jakarta pursue whatever means it sees fit in dealing in these trouble-spots.

Outside of Indonesia, their really is not even a remotely credible local threat, unless something dire happens at the rugby on Saturday.

So I think it's a mistake going for the big ticket items. To me the sensible approach would be to have a smaller airforce (say 50 strike planes), a modern fast naval fleet and a well equipped and trained modernised army that can deal with the daily realities and credible threats that exist in our region. Money needs to be invested in building bridges rather than creating fear and distrust.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
Outside of Indonesia, their really is not even a remotely credible local threat, unless something dire happens at the rugby on Saturday.

Funny you should mention that. I reckon if we're down by more than ten points at half time, we call the game off, and then throw a spectacular collectively national hissy fit- machine gun the kiwi players and launch F111 airstrikes on Wellington, making the poor sods wish they hadn't sold off their last fighter plane to buy more sheep.

 

[Weaver]

Originally posted by Jim Boy

Outside of Indonesia, their really is not even a remotely credible local threat, unless something dire happens at the rugby on Saturday.

Considering that many of the purchases are a 10 year program, and that the life of many of these weapons is 30 years we really need to be looking into the future.

Who knows exactly how Indonesia might look in 30 years. The Phillipines has a problem in Mindanao with a seperatist group. How stable is the regime in Cambodia, or Myanmar?

And as for New Zealand ... well I have long harboured ambitions to invade and conquer NZ. I think all Australian military spending should be focussed on building an Aussie empire, starting with New Bondi.