The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Armed neutrality for Australia reconsidered > Comments

Armed neutrality for Australia reconsidered : Comments

By Peter Stanley, published 8/6/2012

If Anzus has kept Australia safe from overt foreign aggression it has not kept us out of war.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. All
Arjay, people like you and I can write a billion comments and nothing will change. Those who run the world control the minds of the peasants and they will do exactly what they are told.

That is how it is and will always be. Humans will disappear soon and the Earth will try to recover from the damage they have caused and will cause!

Humans intelligent? Not in a million years!
Posted by David G, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 8:55:45 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Davis G,

Humans "are" intelligent - the shame of it is that very few are also "wise".
Posted by Poirot, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 9:07:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen: I guess I'm a little more confident in our ability to do technology home grown. Before we canned it we were world leaders in rocketry and electronics. It's much cheaper to test ones own missiles than blow off a profitable US company's expensive toys.
Yes, it's more expensive initially than paying US engineers and US soldiers, but strategically we need to get away from the psychopathic US war machine.
You are right though, we still need an emergency response force and the military is the perfect candidate.
Posted by ozandyh, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 9:25:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"...but strategically we need to get away from the psychopathic US war machine," says Hasbeen.

Never were truer words spoken!
Posted by David G, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 9:30:20 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David G.Not all humans are pathologically insane.We just have a few inbred elites who have far too much power.In the modern era,we can trace this back to the instigation of the US Federal Reserve. Psychopaths premote their own kind and Romney will be little different from Obama.

A good analogy is this reality of humans jerking off with a noose around their neck in order the reach a new sexual high.Note that people with anexoria will starve themselves to death to fit a perverted perfect image.

Our oligarchs will push it to the limit and I cannot see Russia or China backing down.We have little choice but to keep trying to create awareness and hope for the best.
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 12 June 2012 11:22:15 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“I have to emphasise again that a realistic defence policy cannot simply be about the defence of the territory of Australia against invasion.”

Well actually, it can. Australia is very fortunate to be potentially capable of self-sufficiency, both in agricultural goods (food) and resources. And we certainly don't have to protect our export routes; any disruption to our exports can only increase global sympathies; particularly from those countries requiring our exports.
Much of our imports are in manufactured, even 'luxury' goods; at least, they could be seen as such in a war situation.
If we're invaded, we probably won't be too worried about getting the latest plasma TV.

“The goal of defence policy is to never have to fight a war.”
Precisely.
Unfortunately, a defence based on offensive weapons can only be effective if your offensive weapons are better than their offensive weapons.
The word is “escalation”, and we have been watching it for our entire lives; to the point where the major powers can destroy the entire planet, and pretty much wipe out all life on Earth.
Shore based defence systems which threaten no one require no escalation; merely diplomacy and treaties.
True “defensive” systems can actually make it feasible to reduce armaments through treaty. This is most unlikely in a situation requiring superior offensive weaponry.
Another historically tested non aggessive defence system is good old scorched earth. Some of our most valuable and (presumably) coveted assets are remote from the vast majority of our population. This makes it feasible to mine such assets with a relatively small, relatively 'dirty' bomb, thereby making the assets undesirable foreign takeovers.
Apart from short supply lines and virtually unlimited room to stockpile, the other major advantage to shore based defences is the ability to bunker. Unlike ships, bunkers can be made to withstand even nuclear attack.
And bunkers never really wear out.
Unlike warships like the 'Wisconsin' and 'Missouri'. My apologies for quoting 'Yorketown' (sic); memory's slipping.
Australia is in a position to actually be able to defend itself. What we cannot hope to do is compete in an offensive weapons race.
Posted by Grim, Thursday, 14 June 2012 8:29:27 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy