At http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-03/indonesian-president-wants-more-military-power/4666748 , ABC correspondent George Roberts reports this morning:

"About 16,000 Indonesian troops are preparing for joint military exercises in East Java.
Meeting with military commanders, Mr Yudhoyono told them that Indonesia's military should be bigger and more modern than countries like Australia, Singapore, and Malaysia.
Indonesia's military boasts 470,000 active troops, while the Australian Defence Force has just over 80,000 full-time personnel and reservists..
It has also embarked on a military upgrade program, building warships and drones, as well buying fighter jets, helicopters and rockets."

Australia to manage peace? What a quaint thought!

Australia has only one thought in its tiny mind: Follow the imperial U.S. in whatever it does!

Australian politicians, the most backward in the world, are American sycophants. They have never got over WW2 or the fall of the British Empire.

They have already given parts of our country to the warmongering Yanks.

The rest will surely follow.

For the sake of my children and grandchildren, I think we should be spending much more on defence, and spending it more efficiently than as reported at present. We can have much bigger service numbers, including part timers, without having a warmongering attitude. Despite the things about the US that I don't like I believe it is vital to maintain close defence links with them, and keep them thinking they need our support, including use of some of our bases and land.

David Morrison says "I think we should be spending much more on defence, and spending it more efficiently"

But we have Indonesia as our loving neighbour, I do recall that the Republic crushed the United States of Indonesia in 1949/1950; fought with Malaysia, sent several invasion forces to New Guinea in the 1950s and 1960s, invaded East Timor, has purportedly crossed PNGs borders with a thousand or so troops whenever it feels like it. But we can trust Indonesia they adore us- I have complete faith in Paul Keatings wisdom in the 1980s that Indonesia is Asia's economic tiger whose back Australia should be riding.

And we can all take comfort that DFAT no longer questions if we should be supporting Indonesian claims in Australia, because Keating created a new department inside DFAT the Australia-Indonesia Institute whose sole task is to promote Jakarta's whims to the Australia government.

Yet David then says "Despite the things about the US that I don't like I believe it is vital to maintain close defence links with them, and keep them thinking they need our support"
- Geeze the US has never cut and run? Hello North Korea, hello Vietnam, we really appreciate how the Yanks ignored Ho's pleading throughout WW-ii for help to decolonize Vietnam from French claims, how the US in 1946 sent military advisers to help the French in Vietnam and never got out until after Ho was forced to get help from China and the Soviets.

The only thing dumber that Australia's 1947-1972 quest for the A-bomb has been its subsequent program of appeasement to the whims of every corrupt self-serving foreign interest ever since..

I agree with the author we should be managing peace, not war, however that's not so easy when we seem to be making enemies everywhere because of our alliance with the US. As with our earlier dependence on Britain this alliance might prove an illusion in the long term.

We should follow Israel's example and increase investment in local hi-tech defence R&D and manufacture, we seem to import nearly all our advanced military hardware, of course many items are far beyond Australia's capacity to produce, but surely there must be scope for reducing our dependence on foreign technology.

After years of reading economic history, I'm also sceptical in regard to China's inevitable rise, when I returned to Business School in the early 90s "Japan as #1" was the fashion.

I can't remember any of the economic forecasting geniuses even mentioning China as a "contender", the country wasn't even on the horizon.

BRICS is a slick acronym, but sooner or later it will be forgotten, my money's on the US, unless of course, Niall Ferguson's prediction of sudden and catastrophic imperial decline for the country proves accurate.

The truth is we need Indonesia more than they need us.

It seems we have two main options.

1. Maintain out close alliance with the US, allowing us to keep military spending low, focusing on high tech "niche" capabilities.

2. Pursue a more independent path, meaning increased military spending to enable independent deployment of army, navy and air force.

In defense spending many people get distracted by the shiny high tech toys, however they forget that all defense spending should be driven by required capability, which in turn is driven by our defense doctrine. If Australia was to become independent in defense of our interests we will need to capability to defend against worst case scenarios. While the need for ICBM and nukes is debatable, and the potential for mainland invasion unlikely, the next scenario would be an alliance between China, Indonesia et al to enforce economic (shipping, trade) isolation upon us militarily. I think by far the most important expenditure should be on promoting strong relations with Indonesia. If we can maintain Indonesia as a close ally then the need to deploy our military outside our boarders becomes minimal. Neither Indonesia or Australia will ever have the capabilities to invade each other. We do have the potential to become very strong allies.

On the decline of the US - At one point you would agree that the USSR collapsed catastrophically, right? Well they still have the land, resources and manpower to enable them to be a potent force just 20 years after this collapse. I don't believe we are talking about the same sort of empires that we saw with the British/Romans et al. The USA will always be a superpower, what could change is that they may not be the sole superpower in the world.

David G,the deception continues.Both Malcolm Fraser and Pauling Keating have warned our Govts about the folly of trying to contain China.Invading Afghanistan was all about resources and energy as well as strategic positioning close to China.

China creates 80% of new money for growth from Govt banks.The West is enslaved by the private debt money creation system and so China's growth will continue even with ghost cities,corruption and serious inefficiencies.

I've read that China will be the number one economy within 5 yrs.

The Council On Foreign Relations and the Builderberg Group are re-thinking their Global Strategies.Their objectives are the same ie New World Order of a Global Government.Even Bob Brown backed this Global Governance concept,denied it later then resigned.

The elites in the West like the totalitarian Chinese model,but they want to own and control China and Russia.

Had Romney won the election,he would have done Israel's bidding and we'd be at war with Syria and Iran.I think they are taking a more cautious approach to their imperialistic endeavours.

Read John Perkins Book 'The Confessions of an Economic Hitman'.He reaveals how Western powers infiltrate and corrupt Govts,put them in enormous debt from which they cannot escape and take their energy/resources for a song.

The general public is ignorant and keep believing the BS eminating from mainstream media.

Managing the peace means maintaining traditional alliances, which have not just served us well in the past, but saved our bacon, literally.
And yes, defence alliances come with mutual responsibility Outcomes! It also means developing new common interest alliances, with much more populous countries, like India and Indonesia.
Mainly because they're both developing democracies, with common cause interests and forward defence posture needs.
The past and the present are two different places.
We were once at war with Turkey, now they are part of the NATO alliance.
Japan was our WW1 ally, and our WW11 enemy.
Now they are once again our ally!
It would make much more sense to maintain some form of defence cooperation with Indonesia, than to enter into a mindless and costly regional arms race with them.
We do need to focus on self reliance, given in any real war, that's what carries you well beyond just the first few days.
One doesn't see future war as conventional war, but rather as a conflict between remote controlled technology, stealth, intell gathering and missile launching platforms.
The so-called front line any any future hot war, could conceivably be the safest place.
I agree with most of the article, except how much of our GNP we need to commit to defence.
Which should be around 3%, with a further 2% minimum, committed to R+D.
To have and maintain alliances, you also need to be a reliable ally!
Our defence strategy, must lean further and further toward total self reliance.
I've often heard it said, we don't build Jumbo jets here, because that'ed be too expensive!
I guess that's because we have higher professional wages than the US, which does build them? No?
Well, perhaps our energy cost are higher? Maybe?
But only because we have locked away our most promising potential reserves of conventional energy, possibly large enough to rival or eclipse the entire and currently, increasingly volatile Middle East?
Lest we forget, we would be completely defenceless without substantial oil/energy reserves!
Rhrosty.

An ANT doesn't have to choose between humans or big animals.

Either way in the end the ant WILL get stepped on. Having GROWLERs will only delay the inevitable UNLESS that little ant goes to nuclear science school and builds itself some plutonium breeder reactors and makes a BOMB.

That will keep it safe from hegemonious gerfingerpokers I can tell You!

As it stands, you may as well put a bullseye on your back and wait for the US shooters party to descend from the sky.

Why Howard got a medal for removing the right to guns from everyone but criminals and Labor party lobbyists is beyond me!

Dibb and Cooke present salient assessment and suggest we "re-tool" our relationships with neighbours; Indonesia, PNG, and the Pacific islands. I agree but HOW do we re-tool?

I suggest returning to UN principles which abandoned in September 1962 at the suggestion of U Thant who slipped in a motion for the UN to colonize 5% of the Australian continent, a colony called West New Guinea. This was the final progress towards secrecy of questionable UN decisions; the creation of Israel before there was consensus with the locals was a tragic public mistake the UN endorsed in 1949, but the failure of the United States of Indonesia in 1950 as it was crushed by Sukarno and his Republic military was a tragic mistake which newspapers rarely noted. So in 1962 the UN concealed the UN trusteeship of West Papua from the newspapers and public.

I have no doubt that Indonesia and the trusteeship of West Papua were orchestrated by businessmen with colonial business interests, lead by the Ford Foundation and Robert Lovett. But only because the UN was being mis-used.

It is against Australia's interests to be silent about issues that harm our region, Sukarno was a Axis leader who should have been arrested and his militia disbanded in 1946, the UN colonisation of West Papua was MEANT to protect West Papua's human rights under article 76 of the UN Charter but Australia allowed the colonization under article 85 of the Charter to be kept secret from the public and newspapers.

Australia has blinded itself to the truth. The Pacific islands were not starving nor failed societies when Europeans came here. The mess in PNG and other Pacific islands is our legacy, created by foreign cultures dictating the structure of government and laws (environment design to support our remaining mining or other interests) which these nations were allowed to have. Over thousands of years Melanesian cultures had developed consensus making skills, which we should not have displaced with our primitive adversarial legal & government forms.

The United Nations is a good idea and we should make honest use of it.

Actually KAEP, we can build nuclear bombs here now to day! And here we are not talking about the A Bomb or Fission bombs, but rather fusion bombs, and something the size of a grapefruit. [Albeit, we also possess the technology to build the former!]
We also have the missile technology to deliver dozens, should that ever become our only remaining pre annihilation option.
Scram jets developed here and capable of mark ten or more, could deliver them to London or even further, in under an hour.
The only problem with a fusion reaction, it continues until all the locally available hydrogen is exhausted!
And should we want to, we could turn our little blue green planet, into a small yellow sun for a few hours!
There would be no bunker deep enough, no mountain high enough and no ocean deep enough to be safe.
If ever enough of these were deployed, an unstoppable fusion could be started.
I don't see it ever happening, except if another stark raving mad dictator developed them and had an itchy twitchy trigger finger, and no imagination beyond destroying a perceived more powerful enemy.
Be very careful what you wish for!
Rhrosty.

KAEP,The fight for freedom will happen in the USA.Recent survey shows 29% of US citizens believe there will have to be a public uprising to stop the loss of freedoms enacted by Bush and Obama's signing orders.

So the imperialists in the USA/Europe will have to concentrate on disarming the US population before they can continue to expand their empire.

In the meanwhile Russia and China are arming themelsves to the teeth with lots of new weapons and gold, to shield themselves from the currency wars.

160,000 tonnes of gold is in private hands on this planet,while the central banks have less than 25% of this.They continue to print money and inflate the derivative market and starve our real economies of cash.When the second bubble bursts,precious metals will more than double in value.

Rhosty,

Australia does not have weapon grade fissile material. No one would sell it to us I guarantee that!

Thus you are incorrect.

Arjay,

Why is gold falling in price? where is its bottom likely to be? And did you know that computer trades can detect a gold purchase as low as $20k and place calls to jockey that investment into a losing position?

You are correct about precious metals, but how do you outsmart a nanosecond probing computer programmed by a Havard Grad with a 200 IQ?

Kaep," Why has the price of gold fallen?" Yes it has even with increasing demand. http://maxkeiser.com/ Max Keiser and others have put this down to the use of derivatives which are really bets.You can put a small amount of money down and bet on the price of a share rising or falling eg futures.Collaterised debt obligations and credit default swaps are some others.

Max tells us that for every oz of gold there are 80 pieces of paper laying claim to its existance.This is how they manipulate the price of precious metals.Presently they are acting in concert to force prices down so they can buy the real stuff.You have to be able to take possession of your gold.

I think silver is the dark horse that will beat gold.Gold is 60 times more expensive than silver,but silver is only 10 times more abundant than gold.

Eventually this derivative game will collapse.Our banks here have a derivative exposure of $20 trillion which is 16 times our GDP or six times their assets which are really our mortgages.Their assets are mortgages which are based on over inflated house prices that have not been paid off.

For the first time this year the Commonwealth Bank has refused to reveal its exposure to derivatives.

Arjay,

Got it!

Nuf said

Rhrosty, just when I think you know what you are talking about you mention "fusion" bombs and scram jets capable of reaching London! It's a bit like your fascination with ceramic fuel cells. (Just in case you haven't heard, the company which makes them has left the country.) The other two items I suspect are still ideas waiting to happen. As far as I know no one, but no one, has achieved nuclear fusion. The scram jet has been around forever, and no one has used it, in a long range bomber. We wouldn't need to anyway, aircraft from Darwin can reach most of the important bits to our North.

KAEP: Actually, you are the one who is wrong, again! We own 40% of the world's uranium, and the invented here, pulsed laser light enrichment process, that much more effectively and inexpensively, produces fissionable material!
And it is portable enough to be deployed and set up, almost anywhere, in this wide brown land.
Should our intell tell us we'd become a preferred prime target of a nuclear armed nation, for whatever reason?
We could produce enough fissionable material, in just a few hours, for several bombs.
We already have the technology and the expertise to make them right here! I mean, we've exploded several of them right here!
However, we have decided not to become a nuclear armed nation, for several cogent reasons, one of which remains, mutually assured destruction!
The other, a heartfelt desire, for nuclear disarmament!
I mean, it'd be hard to argue that position, while building our own nuclear arsenal!
Moreover, we already have the means to deliver them by stealth and in smart bombs, that keeps ground zero, to military targets as much as is still possible!
Not that one sees, or wishes for, this virtually guaranteed, mutual destruction outcome!
On another related topic, we have finally learned to make Collins class submarines, therefore it behoves us to build more of them here?
Except, the newer model ought to be nuclear powered, with the much safer helium cooled pebble reactors.
This would ensure they could run for twenty years or more without ever needing to refuel; and, run far more silently and submerged, for many months at a time, should that ever prove necessary or desirable?
As Roosevelt once remarked, walk softly, but carry a big stick!
Rhrosty.

Jon R: Scram jets, which NASA are also trialling, are a fairly recent local innovation!
We are not talking about ram jets, which have been around as you say, a very long time!
Possibly as long as your very dated, actual knowledge of such things?
Ceramic cells? You say the company that makes them has already left the country!
This would be news to the Melbourne based company, recently in the news, deferring that decision for any number of reasons, one of which could be the 20% annual wages inflation in China!? Another, renewed local interest in localised NG>ceramic cell based power provision?
As far as you know, nobody has made a fusion bomb?
Well, given your accuracy on ceramic cells, one would suggest, your other self proclaimed expertise, who knows how to make fusion bombs, is even less reliable!
Knowing how to make one, and the science, is very different from actually making one or more, which could be a fool's errand; given, in testing these devices, one could start an unstoppable thermonuclear reaction!
Rhrosty.

KAEP.Please note.Gold in 1950 was $35 per oz with average yearly wages of $1500.Ratio of wages to gold was 43:1. Today gold is $1450 per oz with average wages of $67,000 pa.Ratio of wages to gold is 46:1 Not much difference.

The economic crisis today in terms of inflationary money with derivatives is far worse than the Great Depression.World GDP is $70 trillion and the derivative market is $700 trillion.

This is why everyone who understands the madness is buying gold.

Its quite obvious that the yanks believe they are the intergalactic police & consequently need to be in the middle of any stoush whether or not it constitutes a risk to their country. For some unfathomable reason, the clowns we elect to run our country are incapable of telling the yanks to rack off hairy legs. If the red-headed witch and the RAbbott had any decency, they would don military uniform and personally lead the troops into battle. The kiwis manage to keep their noses out of yankee conflicts without being overrun by ferals. As far as I'm aware, unlike yankeeland & Australia, kiwiland isn't even on the jihadists radar. Maybe the fact that the sheep chasers have the nous to mind their own business could be a factor.