“Australia was ill-prepared for war in 1941. In 2025, we’re making the same grave mistake”. (historian Geoffrey Blainey).

“Australia stands at a crossroads. The world is more unpredictable and dangerous than at any time in recent memory”, writes Marc Ablong of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute after spending a year investigating Australia's preparedness for crises. And, Australia remains dangerously unprepared.

It seems Australia is not prepared for very much at all: not just defence. We have no national risk assessment, when we should be looking at everything from natural disasters, cyber attacks, economic coercion, and the prospect of war. There is a “strategic failure” putting every Australian at risk. Government and the bureaucracy are complacent. There is no way that the country could switch quickly from peace to war. On that note, our deindustrialisation comes to mind: particularly the loss of a motor industry, which could have switched from cars to military vehicles and weapons in an emergency. Our enemies wouldn't let us import such things.

The author states the bleeding obvious (obvious to all but Australian politicians) that is prudent and essential to prepare. He suggests that Finland is the country to emulate; a country that involves the entire population with what will happen if they are ever involved in a war. If you are familiar with Finnish history, you will know why.

Australians are uninformed, unless they take the trouble to inform themselves because, to date, our governments are either deliberately keeping us in the dark, or they too are shockingly uninformed and as ignorant of history as most Australians now are.

Australians need a comprehensive national assessment, publicly available, and readily upgraded, and a clear governance framework for preparedness. Adequate funding is needed. Some of the bribes to vote for our lacklustre politicians and the free stuff Australians like could be diverted to their security.

Currently, any steps Australian governments have taken are “neither visible or sufficient”.

http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/learn-from-finland-australia-doesnt-assess-its-risks-isnt-ready-for-them/

The enemy is within and can’t be defeated by military means: Save your money.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

I fully agree with you, ttbn. I’m afraid we’re in for a rude awakening.

The world is becoming more and more dangerous, and our “protectors” are becoming less and less reliable.

If we want peace, we must prepare for war.

We must do it seriously. We must do it urgently. And we must do it based on the worst possible scenario : that we are all alone.

That is the reality today. We have no protectors we can rely on 100%.
We have no nuclear submarines, and the 6 diesel-electric submarines we have will soon be obsolete.

We are David, a shepherd with no armour, who faces Goliath armed only with a sling, our courage, faith, determination and intelligence.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyAy13C0vAQ&ab_channel=C.JohnO%27BrienSPINAFEX

.

BJ

I'm glad you get it. But I'm merely reporting on what the ASPI says. They are the people who spend their days investigating such things.

I hope that people out there who don't say much also get it; but I'm afraid that Australians are pretty naive when it comes to the state of the world now. Too young, or too uninterested in history to know that the world is looking like it did 80 years ago.

Both sides of politics have let us down badly when it comes to defence.

ttbn,

Eighty years ago there were no atomic weapons. (Trinity was detonated on July 16th 1945.) Are you of the opinion that the United States would abandon Australia if China paid a big enough bribe to Trump?

If you want peace, you must be peaceful. I agree with defence, what I don't agree with is a policy of aggressive militarism, nuclear submarines fall under that latter category. Where has aggressive militarism led the world, the answer is simple... war, not one but many.

There is no evidence that the build up of arms has made the world safer, or less prone to war, history shows, the countries with the most weapons have engaged in the most wars.

The reality for the whole planet is we are all at the mercy of the warmongers. AND regardless if we spend no dollars or $100 Billion the reality wont change.

Hi Paul,

"If you want peace, you must be peaceful."

Poland, Czechoslovakia and Ukraine come to mind. My observation is that peace is maintained when a solidarity is maintained against bully nations. Trump seems to be treating international security as a protection racket, which is a worry.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

Australia had been occupied for about 65,000 years by Aboriginal tribes before the British took it over it as a penal colony. 113 years later, the 6 separate colonies that had been established came together and federated as a nation in the form of a constitutional monarchy.

That is history. What comes next is pure conjecture :

Allow me, in my congenitally optimistic fashion, to suggest that our most important trading partner, the People’s Republic of China, may decide to take advantage of our protectors’ reticence to honour their pledges and absorb us by the sheer force of its persuasion.

This may seem extravagant, but it is consistent with the military strategy outlined by the Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu in his treatise entitled “The Art of War” (5th century BC) :

« Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company than to destroy them. »

In view of the way things are shaping up at present, future generations of Australians may well be Chinese.

Zhù hao yùn ! (good luck!)

Here is “The Art of War” :

http://ia903407.us.archive.org/35/items/TheArtOfWarBySunTzu/ArtOfWar.pdf

.

Hi Fester,

I'm not aware of any situation that has seen war prevented and "peace is maintained when a solidarity is maintained against bully nations". No nation going to war believes they are not justified and not right in their actions. The god fearing ones, even claim "God is on their side", you can't be wrong if god is on your side.

Hi Banjo,

Not since the Han Dynasty around 220 BC has China been successful in annexing vast territories from other nations. The forces of Emperor Wu Han were successful in expanding China's borders into northern Korea and northern Vietnam. They had a go at invading Japan in 1281 AD, but unfortunately for the Chinese, the Devine Wind ("kamikaze") came to Japans rescue, actually it was a typhoon, and destroyed the Chinese invasion fleet. Tibet is another john dory, the Chinese claim they haven't invaded a sovereign country, but view Tibet as an inseparable part of the People's Republic of China, citing historical control dating back to the Yuan dynasty (about 1300 AD). However it certainly looks like an invasion to me.

Lets hope the Chinese don't discover a long lost dynasty from about 67,000 BC that had Australia as part of China. Then we would become another Tibet.

Fester

You've gone a bit weird on us. “... if China paid a big enough bribe to Trump”! The US is at war with China NOW. A cold war, yes; but a war nonetheless. I have to say I find your comment bizarre. I don't think the US will “abandon” Australia. Not just because of ally and buddy-buddy reasons, but because Australia is a strategic asset for US troops and aircraft if armed conflict does occur. Marines are already here, and we are getting ready for US nuclear submarines rotation on the West and East coasts. There is much more in our connection to the US than lump-in-the-throat emotionalism.

I'm not sure what your comment on the lack of nuclear weapons before 1945 means.

The ASPI reports on our lack of defence seem to be hitting the mark because Albanese this morning is whingeing about it. I'll get around to seeing what the most useless PM ever has to say later.

BP

Given that Australia is now a definite Left wing country - a Marxist government has been returned with 94 seats in Parliament, with Liberals only managing 20 something, and the Nationals what they already had - I don't find your hypothesis at all exaggerated.

Given Albanese's appalling pawing of and sucking up to the Communists dictator and thug, Xi Jinping; not to mention his supine attitude to all the bullying and menacing from Communist China, Australia could very well end up closer to China and the US. There is also the mass importation of the Third World which is going to eventually make us part of that world. Xi Jinping must be salivating.

If that happened , we would certainly lose the US alliance, and their next batch of troops in the north wouldn't be friendly, but they would still use us as a strategic launching pad against China.

Albanese is hinting at closing down ASPI, a once bipartisan think tank to provide alternative, independent advice: to create debate.

ASPI should ‘look at itself’, he whined. He probably doesn't like the way it tells the truth about Communist China and his pal Xi, apart from the criticism of the government's lack of defence arrangements. All this government and the one before it have done is hollow out the defence budget to pay for ‘someday’ in the future submarines. A decade of very poor policy over at least a decade, worsening under Albanese.

ASPI's agenda for 2025 is to focus on the NEED to:

. defend Australia
. navigate our place in a new world (dis)order
. reform our security architecture and policies
. secure our critical infrastructure
. protect and use our natural resources.

A non-partisan think tank, ASPI was created by the government in 2001 to provide the government with fresh ideas. Albanese has decided that he doesn't like its ideas on defence.

Periodic investigations are carried out, and advice given. In 2025 concerns and events affecting Australia have been/are:

. The Russia-China partnership
. China and the “ratcheting up” of of military intimidation
. China's increased aggression against the Philippines and Taiwan
. The possibility of a terror attack
. October 7 2023
. Artificial Intelligence
. Donald Trump's re-election (added tension re US-led international order)

ttbn,

Weird is the Trump Putin bromance. The hawks in the US are incensed by it, but note that Vlad and Xi are allies.

Eighty years ago there weren't nukes. There has never been a war between nuclear armed nations. Ukraine thought its sovereignty would be protected when it gave up its nuclear arsenal. Betrayed by Obama, Biden and Trump.

Hi Fester...
http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-and-security-assurances-glance

1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

"To solidify security commitments to Ukraine, the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances on December 5, 1994. A political agreement in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Accords, the memorandum included security assurances against the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territory or political independence. The countries promised to respect the sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine. Parallel memorandums were signed for Belarus and Kazakhstan as well. In response, Ukraine officially acceded to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state on December 5, 1994. That move met the final condition for ratification of START, and on the same day, the five START states-parties exchanged instruments of ratification, bringing the treaty into force."
http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_1994_1399.pdf

What stands out to you here?
'included security assurances against the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territory or political independence'

* Specifically - 'political independence'

What happened in 2014, and was Ukraine still politically independent?

MUST WATCH: Nov 2013 (pre-Maidan!): Ukraine Deputy has proof of USA staging civil war in Ukraine
http://youtu.be/y9hOl8TuBUM?si=gCwQPfNHQm3yNAwC

Victoria Nuland US has invested $5 billion in Ukraine (USAID)
http://youtu.be/rPVs5VuI8XI

F* the EU: Alleged audio of US diplomat Victoria Nuland swearing
http://youtu.be/L2XNN0Yt6D8

Tell me, after 2014 was Ukraine still politically independent, and if not - then they shouldn't have nukes.
This is about them becoming a vassal state of the west, enlarging NATO borders and Blackrock bankers making a fortune buying the country at pennies on the dollar, but only if Russia doesn't win.

So everyone of us have to pay for it so the money men can get a return on their investment with everyone else funding all financial and military assistance as well the cost as immigrants and loss in global GDP.

Friedrich Merz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Merz
He has served on the boards of numerous companies, including BlackRock Germany.

http://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw7vllepx7o
German chancellor promises to help Ukraine produce long-range weapons

Its all about the money, have to keep the war going to defend the banksters interests.

'Betrayed by Obama, Biden and Trump.'
- They all played a part in either overthrowing the country and putting the NAZIs in power, rearming it and providing military training to a NATO standard, fighting the separatists, continuing the war, maligning any peace process and providing weapons to fight Russia.

Reds under the beds yellow peril garbage. Stinks of white Australia regressive racism.
This is 2025 not 1950. Albanese is PM not menzies.
Australia needs a DEFENSE force not a help the septics attack force.

Fester

We all know there has never been a nuclear war. What is the point you are trying to make?

Hi AC,

Good to hear from you. Truth be told, I think that the greatest threat Australia faces currently is from windmills and solar panels. All made in China, so maybe that is a communist plot? So poor economically, but I amazed that so many are still sucked in by the con.

mikk

A defence force is what we are talking about, you ninny.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

Well, if the Chinese take us over by persuasion or by force, with their 1.4 billion population, they could easily capitalise on that by transferring 100 million or so of their people to us initially as permanent settlers and gradually build on that.

That extra 100 million or so would certainly dwarf our current population of 27 million.

Maybe we should invite Trump to Australia to see if he thinks it’s worth saving.

He has never been here, neither in his first term as president nor in his second term.

It’s obviously not one of his priorities.

A pity, really. Maybe we should send him a kangaroo or a koala bear (or both) as a present.

.

.

If that doesn’t work, we could get my fellow Queenslander, Kevin Rudd, to apologize to Trump (he’s very good at that) and maybe kiss his ring or something.

.

Hi Banjo,

Does it surprise you that there are many Australians ready and willing to sell the country out to Trump and his Trumpism. Not since the Vietnam War and the visit of Johnson, have we see crass Americanism, to the extent it is now. Back in the 1960's when the Tories sold out Australia to America with the bloody of young men, there were the old women from the 'blue rinse set' crying out; "All the way with LBJ" and "Please make us your 51st state"! It sickened me then, and it sickens me now. Good on the people of Canada, telling Trump to "piss off, we don't want you here" as did the Greenlanders.

ttbn

"We all know there has never been a nuclear war. What is the point you are trying to make?"

Well, you began your comment quoting Blainey:

"“Australia was ill-prepared for war in 1941. In 2025, we’re making the same grave mistake”. (historian Geoffrey Blainey)."

A nuclear ally changes Australia's sovereign risk. We didn't have one before 1945. We do now. Trump seems to be treating the US nuclear arsenal less as a means of protecting democracy and more as a protection racket. Throwing Ukraine under a bus (Is he being bribed/blackmailed by China and/or Russia?) is not a good look.

Fester,

Are you saying that the US's nuclear capability will protect us? How about China's nuclear capability that could wipe us out in a flash?

“Protection racket”? Well, nuclear weapons and the threat of their use is what is keeping opposing sides from using them, is it not? Pretty good protection.

As for our nuclear equipped US ally protecting Australia from our nuclear equipped China enemy, well, if that stuff is loosed, there won't be anything left to protect.

The reason for being well armed is to stop war, not start it. Nuclear weapons make the US and China scared enough of each other to keep them from conflict,

Australia has nothing to scare anyone.

Ukraine? Nothing to do with us; at least it wasn't until the idiot Albanese started yapping that “we” stand by it, and made sure that Russia, no threat to us previously, now is.

ASPI has responded to Albanese's hissy fit, saying the public deserves to know what politicians are not telling them. The dangerous geopolitical climate demands more spending on defence.

We face a “perilous strategic environment”, with multiple conflicts around the world, evolving terrorism, foreign interference, and cyberwarfare.

Australia is ill-prepared for threats coming in the next decade. “Given that most of the major acquisitions won’t arrive until well into the 2030s and 2040s, we must ask the unnerving question of whether the ADF is too hollow for military operations”.

ttbn

"Are you saying that the US's nuclear capability will protect us?"

It has in the past, but with that schmuck in power we might get told to stop causing trouble and do a deal with Donald's good friend Xi, and in any case we've got no cards.

Thank goodness for the two term limit.

A US enquiry has concluded that even America would be challenged beating China because of their lack of defence spending in the past. Under President Trump they are doing something about. As an ally, Australia will be expected to do the same.

In fact, yesterday, US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, urged Australia to boost our defence spending to 3% of GDP now, not some time in the future. 2.23% in 2034 doesn't cut the mustard.

Only the defensive Richard Marles was interviewed. He defended the government's pathetic efforts, of course. That’s all Australian politicians are capable of defending: themselves, their poor performance, and their stupidity.

The warmongering ttbn claims our military spending doesn't "cut the mustard". Some unelected Trumpster has ordered Australia to increase military spending immediately to 3% of GDP. Its only another order 'to pay the Piper', as Australia has been doing since WWII. Pray tell ttbn, where will the money come from, and where should it be spent? COULD WE CUT AGED WELFARE!

Indyvidual

Most taxpayers’ money seems to go on freebies for the brainwashed helpless youngsters and on bribes to get votes for politicians whom only the thickest of people think should be there in the first place.

The freebie phenomenon took off with Howard's Family Tax Benefit. Then free universities that the Left wants reinstated now. As it is, taxpayers cop the bill for the unpaid debts of people who should never have been let into university in the first place.

Middle-class welfare and massive subsidies for unreliable energy carpetbaggers is another very expensive rort.

Economist Judith Sloan notes that the ‘free stuff’ dates back to the second half of the century:

. Taxpayer Contributions to the costs of child sport
. Back to school grants
. Free pre-school
. Energy rebates
. Free public transport

Now, the added cost of subsidies for having kids 'parented' by strangers during the day and other gifts too numerous to mention, usually without any means testing. Kids going to very expensive private schools travel for nothing, too.

All bribes to keep people under the thumb of the tyrannical uniparty.

Hand out subsidies, help people to buy a house, and all the prices go up.

How about the free “pads and tampons” (Victoria) for under-18 year olds! Girls are “reported” as staying home from school because they can't afford to buy them.

Women have been menstruating since Eve, and they have managed. And, let's not hear about ‘cost of living’. The re-election of the Albanese Labor party proved that one to be a lie.

Maximising free stuff has been ingrained into the younger generations. So things will only get worse as us old folk die out, leaving the young ones to deal with it. All this stuff about us oldies leaving the bill to future generations is bullsh.t; they, the young, are the ones expecting, and voting for, free stuff. There will be even less available to defend the country. Of course, it probably won't be worth defending by then. Problem solved.

Albanese is “defying” calls from the US to increase defence spending.That makes him sound (and look?) like a naughty little boy, not the “handsome boy” his bestie China calls him.

Richard Marles responded with this word salad:

“I mean, the Americans have been very clear about wanting to see more from their friends and allies around the world. It's a sentiment that we understand, and as I've repeatedly said, that's a conversation we are totally up for in terms of the way in which we engage with the United States. And as I said, I think on Friday, in our bilateral meeting Secretary Hegseth did raise the question of increased defence expenditure on the Australian side. Of course we have already engaged in the last couple of years in the single biggest peacetime increase in defence expenditure in Australia's history, so we are beginning this journey.”

They don't have a clue.

James Paterson from the Opposition says we are not spending enough, but I don't remember his lot being any better on defence. Now, of course, it doesn't matter what the remnants of the Liberal Party think about anything. The halfwitted voters have spoken, and the country continues its voyage down the gurgler.

.

The U.S. Navy’s Virginia-class submarines are among its most advanced, but their numbers are insufficient to meet current and future demands, particularly in potential conflicts with a near-peer adversary such as China.

America’s naval shipyards are overwhelmed, unable to keep pace with production needs, and face significant delays. China, meanwhile, is rapidly expanding and modernising its submarine fleet, potentially outpacing the U.S. in both quantity and technological advancement.

China can mass produce its submarine fleet and replace their lost systems in combat at a significantly higher rate than U.S. shipyards.

Should conflict in the Indo-Pacific break out in the next few years, the Americans will be at a numerical disadvantage in the domain of submarine warfare. The U.S. submarine force is spread throughout the world, whereas China’s is concentrated in the conflict zone.

Given Trump’s “America First” policy, it is highly unlikely the Americans will be able to deliver on their promise, in the early 2030s, of “at least 3 Virginia Class submarines with an option for 2 more if needed”.

It probably won’t be able to deliver in the 2040s either !

Perhaps that is why US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth insists heavily on Australia increasing its defence spending from the current 2% of GDP to 3.5% of GDP, now.

In other words, Australia will just have to look after itself.

It sounds like good advice to me.

It would be foolish for us to count on any hypothetical submarines, whether it be from the Americans or the British, for that matter.

It's a bit of a long shot, but maybe the French could do something for us.

It's probably worth investigating - before it's too late !

.

Having this Trump lackey Hegseth, a non elected foreigner trying to dictate to Australia how much we should commit to military spending is an obscenity. What America is demanding from Australia is payment for so called American "protection". Like the school yard bully, demanding the little kids lunch money! Albo should tell this Trump lackey to stick it where the sun don't shine!

How can a nation defend itself against itself because that's the state Australia's got itself into !
Or, should I say that's what Australia's been guided to by Labor Governments since Whitlam !

BP

Yes. Hegseth's "good" advice should be heeded, but Albanese has stupidly said it won't be. And yes, America 'ain't what it used to be'; and unlike WW11, when it saved Australia's arse and the rest of the world's, we could very well go under if there is a serious conflict in our region.

Trump has made it clear that he is an America-first man, as he should be. He was elected by Americans to be that - not to piss about with a stupid country like Australia whose politicians are so chock-a-block up Communist China that we wouldn't notice much difference if we became a satellite of China, with Albanese or someone like him a puppet ruler; and a lot more Chinese living here a la Tibet. The Commos have been claiming for years that they really discovered Australia. They just haven't said that it belongs to China - yet.

Australia is now described by the commentariat as a left wing country. Given the behaviour of Albanese, we wouldn't need to do much adjusting.

Not unreasonably, the US wants us to become more self-reliant within the US alliance.

I don't understand the objections to that from the US-haters who are actually saying we should distance ourselves from the US. Looks like schizophrenia to me.

Putting aside the ‘per GDP method’ to help their understanding, the current government spends 6.5% of the overall budget on defence.

In comparison, when the world was a safer and more stable place than it is now, the Hawke government spent 10% of the budget on defence.

Now, thanks to government induced inflation, the 6.5% doesn't buy what it once would have.

Communist China is the biggest military spender. Yet this goes unremarked in the hubbub of criticism against the idea of Australia lifting its spending to a realistic level because of that fact.

Another lie from the American sycophant ttbn.

"Communist China is the biggest military spender"

The United States is the biggest spender, and also the biggest arms dealer, America led the way with nearly $916 billion in military spending, followed by China at $296 billion and Russia at $109 billion.

The war mongering Americans outspend China $3 to $1 and Russia $9 to $1. Wake up ttbn, pull your head out, and take a look at the real world situation.

The aggressive Chinese Communists are livid over talk of Australia taking back its own property, the Port of Darwin.

Albanese talked about it before the election - only, I suspect, because the stupid Opposition sold the Communists a 99 year lease. But his yap was just political. He won't talk about now that he is more than safely back in power. He has neither the intestinal fortitude nor the intelligence and common sense to fix the Opposition's ridiculous blunder. And, he is frightened of Xi, the man who obviously holds ‘handsome boy’ in utter contempt. For an Asian, Xi doesn't do ‘inscrutable’ very well. Contempt is written all over his face whenever Albanese clings to his arm.

I loathe Communism, but I get China's chagrin. They entered into the astoundingly stupid agreement with the astoundingly stupid Australian government at the time in good faith. The deal should never have happened, but it is Australia, not China who is looking untrustworthy. Both members of the uniparty are on the nose, and not to be trusted by Australians or the governments and people of other countries.

https://youtu.be/Fd37buEbho8?si=Twfn5kwQOd0YYXGg

It seems that Marles and Albanese disagree on defence, and the Greens continue to be wan kers. Cop Albanese in the Mao suit.

The Chinese government doesn't make a move, until they have consulted with the silly Old Fart from South Australia. He must be an "insider", down there in his bedsit, the other side of Nowhere. At least his comments are worth a laugh. The Chinese are "livid", the Old Fart "suspects", its all "contempt".

ASPI Director Peter Jennings rightly points that it is “shame” (disgrace really) that it takes an outsider (Pete Hegseth) to get our government to talk about the defence of our country.

Obviously things have to be done the Australian way, but it is well past the time that the Albanese pulled out his finger and did the job of leadership that he has squibbed on for the last three years, and looks like doing nothing for the next three years,only now with almost no Opposition to ginger him up.

I watched an interview with The Australian's foreign editor Greg Sheridan who had some interesting things to say about Albanese's “balderdash” recently about defence.

Sheridan, like many other commentators and people generally, finds it “hard to trust” anything the government tells us on defence. We only found out about Hegseth's call for Australia to spend 3.5% on defence from a Pentagon briefing; and Albanese is doing his best to suppress information from ASPI.

Sheridan also pointed out the bleeding obvious that, unlike Europe, Australia has no close allies, yet we are doing nowhere enough to defend ourselves.

He also advised that it takes 300 days for anyone interested in enlisting in the services to receive a response.

We now know that Marles lied when the ABC asked him what figure Pete Hegseth had put on the request for more defence spending. Marles said ‘no figure’. Hegseth got wind of the lie, and promptly said that he had suggested 3.5% of GDP, ASAP.

President Trump said on TV tonight, “If you are not going to pay your bills we are not going to defend you”.

Former Head of Army General Peter Leahy announced that, without the US, we would be almost defenceless.

Albanese has ignored him too. He has ignored ASPI. He has ignored former Air Force Chief Air Marshall Geoff Brown, Angus Houston and Dennis Richardson.

Albanese presumes to know better than all these experts in defence and warfare.

We don't need to be told how much to spend on militarism by some Trumpster blow in from America. Australians firmly rejected Trumpism at the election. Also we don't need the advice of old has-been saber rattlers, warmonger's and alike, ex-army, ex-navy whatever. Can anyone tell me where Australia would find an extra $40 or $50 billion to fund this nonsense, where would the cuts be made?

Once upon a time, Albanese said he was sh.t scared of Donald Trump. His coming face-to-face with Trump should be interesting. It might be best if Albanese sits in the lavatory, and Trump talks to him through the dunny door. Trump might treat him the same way he treated Ramaphosa and Zelensky.

No matter who is President of the US, the US is essentially Australia's defence policy, thanks to Albanese, who ignores all advice on the crucial matter of Australia's defence, even advice from Australians.

Albanese is , “Shrugging off that request (to increase defence spending ) in a public show of self-defeating stupidity is a serious miscalculation”. He is painting Australia as a bludger. His petulant ‘we will decide our defence budget’ could well see Trump telling him and his silly little country to piss off. After all, Albanese is one of those who thinks Trump is erratic and likely to do anything.

And it's Xi Jinping who Albanese should be sh.t scared of.

Those people not rusted onto the rusty MSM for their information will know that Defence Minister Marles broadly agreed with Pete Hegseth, US defence secretary, ex-marine, military officer, and National Guard officer.

But, when the poor man got back from Singapore, Albanese crapped all over him. He treated Marles with contempt; he treated the US with contempt, and we all know he treats us with contempt.

Marles tries to get more money for defence, but Albanese apparently doesn't think that he and his portfolio are all that important.

Albanese is putting our alliance with the US at risk. President Trump has been called all sorts of things - patient isn’t one of them.

ASPI's Director, Peter Jennings, has labelled as “bizarre” Albanese's reaction to the organisation's defence report, when Australia is “facing a crisis” that is recognised by almost everyone who looks at defence. Even those who don't like the American alliance agree that we need to be spending more on defence.

Jennings reminded us that Communist China has “demanded” that think tanks like ASPI be closed down!

The Albanese government has made virtually minimal changes to the 2016 Defence White Paper. 9 years ago! We are still riding on the “coattails” of the US.

Xi Jinping, now 72 years of age, is not going to wait much longer to invade Taiwan. 2027 seems to be his target.

Shadow Minister Angus Taylor is saying nothing.

ttbn,
Good !

Indyvidual,

'Good' how? Don't you think the Opposition should be doing it's job? It has a lot of catching up to do, but the silence is proving the accusations that they are just Labor-lite?

I know that the Liberal Party Opposition has been shaken to its core by its election drubbing. But it now has to get on with what it is supposed to be doing - opposing; not sitting back and waiting three years for the electorate to get sick of Labor.

The only squeak we have heard from them so far is Ted O’Brien's offer to help the Socialists out with screwing people with ‘too much’ superannuation, on the condition that they lay off capital gains tax. Both of these Socialist money grabs are vile, and should be OPPOSED.

The Liberals really must make amends for Peter Dutton's cowardly betrayal of the right side of politics if they want to survive at all.

What other deals will these wet drongos do with the Socialists to get a slightly better result? They are deadly quiet on defence.

Bipartisanship, except in very rare circumstances is bullsh.t; Oppositions are there to oppose.

Albanese has put rare and important bipartisanship to sleep with his betrayal of the US alliance and the historic friendship towards Israel.

Unless the Liberals pull their fingers out, a Socialists/Communist one party system is a monty for Australia.

Even though it was thought by some that, given the parlous state of security in the region, the 2025 election would be a khaki election, defence was barely mentioned in the campaign. Both members of the uniparty were more interested in outbidding each other with bribes to elect them. It was all about their cushy jobs.

The Liberals didn't try to convince us that they were more serious about defence than the government. Neither crowd had anything to offer voters concerned about defence. Laughingly, the government rested on its laurels.

Even the rumours of a possible Russian airbase in Indonesia raised a few eyebrows.

On that particular matter, the Russians have said that they are looking for a satellite launching site close to the equator, so who knows what they might want to set up to protect such a facility: something that could well be a threat. And, remember, Indonesia is in the BRIC alliance, and not a great friend of Australia or the West. Russia is also a member, and the latest Indonesian president is keen for a closer relationship with Russia, a country that mightn't have been the threat to us that China is if the idiotic Albanese told the world that we ‘stood’ with Ukraine against Russia.

China is a rising authoritarian country that wants to change the world order. Anyone not seeing that is a moron or pro-China. The only people who are comfortable with Communist China and its terrible beliefs and actions can only be other Communists.

Peter Jennings, Director of ASPI offers the suggestion that Albanese doesn't involve himself in any detail of the big issues, and defence is not “in front (of his) mind”.

His advice to Albanese is;

. Read a book
. Ensure that AUKUS is on track (Jennings fears that it is not - too much left to bureaucrats)
. Commission a non-political/non-public person from the private sector to investigate and report
. Tell Wong to ensure that China is not undermining us in PNG, and what we need to do there
. Recognise that the ADF is going backwards very quickly because of stargazing into the future
. The consequences of China taking Taiwan will be truly dire for us and the region
. Put real effort into ADF recruitment
. Get out and talk to defence personnel
. Make an effort to talk to Donald Trump - he plaits his legs to talk to Xi Jinping
. Learn how to deal with America generally

Australia is failing to have a real voice in the region, thanks to Albanese's - and to some extent the previous government’s - stupid pigheadedness and tin ears, and our alliance with the US is not as solid as it used to be. Trump has said, ‘if you don't pay your bills, we won't defend you’. That doesn't apply to us good old Aussies? If the government remains mired in complacency, we might find out

The book ‘No Higher Priority’ has recommendations for Australia's defence:

. Acquire B-21 bomber. Host US B-21 here
. Expand US Marines here to 16,000
. Bring Japan into ANZUS
. Develop defence and intel with India
. Build force with Pacific Islands
. ADF presence in Cocos, Christmas, Norfolk Islands
. $1 billion Rapid Acquisition Fund
. Restore missile defence procurement
. PM to take charge of fixing ADF crisis
. Get drones
. Cut barriers to non-traditional firms in military production
. Stockpile munitions and war equipment
. Lift performance of Australia’s contribution to global security. Discuss with US
. Raise defence spending 3% of GDP now review regularly
. Develop a homeland defence strategy
. Harden military bases against attack
. Mobilisations plan for for industry
. Make Northern Australia capable of military operations
. Build onshore fuel reserves
. End Chinese lease on Port of Darwin
. Two additional squadrons of F-35 jets
. Ask PNG to accept ADF military bases
. Reduce by a third ADF senior officers and senior public servants in Defence

Next time you hear Albanese whining about what Australia (meaning him) thinks is a good spend on defence is (barely 2% of GDP, and a pissy little 2.3% by 2033), think about what might happen if we were involved in a war (because China knows how low our spending is, and how unprepared we are).

What effect it would have on Australian civilians, when the spending might suddenly jump to 41% of GDP, as it was at the end of WW2. Shortages. Poverty. Premature deaths.

The population would fall apart, being lovers of the nanny state and free stuff as they are, and lacking the toughness and resilience of Australians of those times.

Spending on militarism is a pointless excise for Australia. I am in favour of real defence spending. Now we have Trump reviewing the ridiculous AUKUS nonsense. That's after the fools in Canberra paid over $770 million with no strings, and no guarantees attached. I thought used car salesmen were shonks, but looks like they are out done by used submarine salesmen. If I was America I would string Australia alone for as long as possible, and milk em' for what they're worth. Australia has form, gave the Frogs $830 million for nothing! That with the recent gift equals the cost of building 100 new primary schools.

AUKUS is not just about submarines, but the maybe-never submarines are wasting money that could be spent on on the here and now. See options above.

One of those options is anti-missile defence. China can already lob missiles on us without leaving home.

Back to submarines. We are entangled - after the French fiasco - in a deal via AUKUS that was bipartisan. Both sides of politics fell for it.

Also on submarines: if we don't need America, can look after ourselves, WTF can we keep only one of our existing submarines serviceable! Assuming it is still serviceable.

If the rumours about Trump thinking of pulling out if AUKUS of it doesn't fit in with 'America First', given the Albanese regime's attitude to America and Trump, I wonder if we will get a refund.

All that money blown in the French fiasco: will it be the same with AUKUS?

The person tasked to investigate AUKUS has already advised, three months ago, that America should not be providing Australia with subs when it can't keep up with its own requirements.

And, Donald Trump has said that he will not defend countries who don't spend enough to protect themselves. And, he didn’t say ‘except for Australia’, whose government is not only not spending enough, but is also criticising Trump himself when they get a chance. Not to mention the current cancellation of a visa for an American Jew whose private tweets - nothing to do with his reason for coming here - don't suit Tony Burke.

Don't censor Americans, Trump has warned. And, Australia has officially criticised Australia for sanctioning two Israeli politicians because of their politics.

The Albanese regime seems determined to see America leaving Australia up sh.t creek on defence.

If we don't do our very best to protect ourselves, we cannot expect help from elsewhere.

"Well, I think Australia should decide on what we spend on Australia’s defence. Simple as that”, Albanese said.

48 hours after that statement came the news that the US might be rethinking AUKUS.

The news this morning has Albanese “rejecting” Trump's call for more defence spending at their face-to-face meeting.

I hope the meeting is televised; it should be good entertainment.

The discussion will be on the “sidelines”. We had better hope that out idiot PM, and our little left-wing country is not sidelined by the US. Australia is certainly not the “Mouse That Roared” - for those old enough to remember the Peter Sellers film.

https://www.facebook.com/100020839057358/posts/1649486299089323/?rdid=1Czmxnxsg39SgqSX

My guess is that the parasite Patriots will denounce this !

Indy,
In NZ, but this fool is too much! You should join him.

Paul1405,
What are you still doing here, shouldn't you be in Iran by now fighting for your cause ?