With some possible co-operation between us and others (Japan).

Some of the nations we'll be stirring are our best trade partners.

For or against?

With the F-35 the US will not be giving buyers the key codes to kernel computer systems. Any missile defense shield must allow us to have control over own destiny, even if there are two shields a global [to support the US) and a regional under own control.

Against
- Australia faces little obvious threat of a broad scale missile attack.
- Development and deployment of an effective missile shield would be massively expensive.
- Keeping a missile shield effective would be massively expensive and unlikely to succeed - our scientists would have to find defences against every possible avoidence strategy our oponents scientists might come up with and keep adding them. As they say we have to get it right every time, they only have to be right once.
- As the complexity increases the risk of failure increases. The more able the system is to work against any conceivable threat the more likely it is to fail when needed.

Far better to put our efforts into reducing the conditions that increase our risk of being attacked and confronting real life threatening risks that people face in this country and elsewhere.

R0bert

"Far better to put our efforts into reducing the conditions that increase our risk of being attacked and confronting real life threatening risks that people face in this country and elsewhere."

It seems to me that the efforts of our governments foreign "policy" (frightenly similar to GW Ballbags) is only creating a risk of being attacked.

I believe there's a defense shield...and then there's a DEFENSE shield. Nothing wrong with a pre-emptive effort of a battery of patriots or something. That should be a fairly standard thing these days, but I'd agree that a co-ordinated defense shield (as per proposed) would be unnecessary.

I think though, that because of our close affliation to the States currently can potentially put us in a position of a very real threat. Why else would Bush want us so close for?...new U.S base in QLD remember.

if we don't fire missiles at other people, why will they fire missiles at us? we don't have missiles, do we? or nuclear warheads?

surely the chief purpose of missile defense systems is to transfer large sums of money to the american defense companies that make them. there may be an attempt to further ensnare australia in america's imperial ambitions by locating launch sites and/or target acquisition bases here, as well.

hard to believe ozzies would be dumb enough to allow this to happen, but i've had a lot of practice, and i'm willing to believe they are. good thing oz is a lucky country, 'cause smart they ain't.

In Australia "Defence" is spelt with a "c" and not an "s" which is the Yank spelling.