Fred[OZ75]
Jihad Jeep Driver
+19|6999|Perth, Western Australia
Australia doesn't use the Steyr but the Austeyr, under international agreement the Steyr could only be used defensively like the leopard tanks. This is why Australia started building the Austeyr and is also why Australia didn't send tanks to either gulf wars or afganistan (besides they are too heavy to transport), but we will have M1A1s soon enough and the planes to carry them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austeyr
4_Phucsache
Property of BF2s©
+112|6822|Brisbane Australia
Yes I will be interested to see what happens with the new C17 program
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6801

anzus wrote:

24hours and their entire naval fleet will be sitting on the bottom.
Not unless there's an American carrier in the area which I'm not aware of.  Our military is too small for that.  And they'd get backing from the rest of south-east Asia.
vedds
Member
+52|6994|Christchurch New Zealand

Bubbalo wrote:

And they'd get backing from the rest of south-east Asia.
Justify that with hard facts buddy.

I find it very hard to believe that in a regional engagement such as this the "rest of south-east Asia" would side with Indonesia militarily.  Im too tired to go through this in depth now but indonesia has a history of not playing friendly that should make most SEA nations wary.

In fact name a military alliance Indonesia belongs to.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6914|Canberra, AUS

vedds wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

And they'd get backing from the rest of south-east Asia.
Justify that with hard facts buddy.

I find it very hard to believe that in a regional engagement such as this the "rest of south-east Asia" would side with Indonesia militarily.  Im too tired to go through this in depth now but indonesia has a history of not playing friendly that should make most SEA nations wary.

In fact name a military alliance Indonesia belongs to.
Am I correct in saying that this behaviour led to US sanctions on military equipment?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
vedds
Member
+52|6994|Christchurch New Zealand

Spark wrote:

Am I correct in saying that this behaviour led to US sanctions on military equipment?
Yup, Embargo in 99, was lifted for  non-lethal equipment to help the Tsunami recovery effort last year.  Thats why the bought Sukhoi Flankers (I think 27s and 30s) in the early 2000s. They cant buy spare parts for their Skyhawks and Falcons.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6801

vedds wrote:

Justify that with hard facts buddy.

I find it very hard to believe that in a regional engagement such as this the "rest of south-east Asia" would side with Indonesia militarily.  Im too tired to go through this in depth now but indonesia has a history of not playing friendly that should make most SEA nations wary.

In fact name a military alliance Indonesia belongs to.
The fact that they all hate us?
vedds
Member
+52|6994|Christchurch New Zealand

Bubbalo wrote:

vedds wrote:

Justify that with hard facts buddy.

I find it very hard to believe that in a regional engagement such as this the "rest of south-east Asia" would side with Indonesia militarily.  Im too tired to go through this in depth now but indonesia has a history of not playing friendly that should make most SEA nations wary.

In fact name a military alliance Indonesia belongs to.
The fact that they all hate us?
You seem to be incapable of cogent argument. If you cant debate properly I suggest you stop cluttering the forums with useless flippant quips that add nothing to the debate.

now either front up with a decent argument that contains words with more than one syllable(hell i dont care, if you can put forward a decent post with one syllable words go for it) or STFU.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6801
It adds plenty to the debate.  Australia is in a very precarioues position, we have no geographically close allies of good strength (New Zealand is too small to be of any real threat, East Timor and Papua New Guinea are also of little use).  The second they smell blood, they'll be all over us.
Nemessis1982
Member
+2|6956

Cougar wrote:

There are still enough troops left in Australia to defend against an American attack.

So the answer is no.  Pls send more troops kthx.
Well when you think about it one aussie army cook with a 9mm pistol is about as effective as one thousand yanks with machine guns.............
Nemessis1982
Member
+2|6956
Personally I believe that we should have Annexed East Timor and West Papua at the end of WW2 when the population of both countries loved us.  Not only would it have kept the region a lot more stable politically but also strategically it would have given us a buffer between us and the rest of Asia incase the shit ever did really hit the fan.

Atleast the very least we should have maintained a minimum battalion strength garrison in each country similiar to what the yanks do all over the world.

Last edited by Nemessis1982 (2006-06-01 03:20:45)

Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6956

Nemessis1982 wrote:

Cougar wrote:

There are still enough troops left in Australia to defend against an American attack.

So the answer is no.  Pls send more troops kthx.
Well when you think about it one aussie army cook with a 9mm pistol is about as effective as one thousand yanks with machine guns.............
.45cal would be more like it, 9mm is too weak... thats one aussie army chef now, but in ww2 is different but i agree w/ u
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Nemessis1982
Member
+2|6956
Have you ever shot the Army's 9mm pistol?  Most people think you are better off throwing it at your enemy, I think it would be good enough though against yanks   lol

As for Army Chef's.....   They still can't cook for shit...
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6914|Canberra, AUS

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Nemessis1982 wrote:

Cougar wrote:

There are still enough troops left in Australia to defend against an American attack.

So the answer is no.  Pls send more troops kthx.
Well when you think about it one aussie army cook with a 9mm pistol is about as effective as one thousand yanks with machine guns.............
.45cal would be more like it, 9mm is too weak... thats one aussie army chef now, but in ww2 is different but i agree w/ u
Tell that to the guy who shot himself in the head with a 9mm!
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
BVC
Member
+325|6935

Bubbalo wrote:

It adds plenty to the debate.  Australia is in a very precarioues position, we have no geographically close allies of good strength (New Zealand is too small to be of any real threat, East Timor and Papua New Guinea are also of little use).  The second they smell blood, they'll be all over us.
*armchair general alt="Indonesian invasion speculation*
All the defence exercises involving Aus/NZ I read about seem to be based around a large poor nation invading a small wealthy nation.  Imagine the large poor nation being Indonesia and the small wealth nation being Australia/NZ (okay two nations but hey)...

If something like that did happen I imagine the Aussie air force and navy would have its hands full keeping boats away from the Aussie mainland, while us lot scambled to get the skyhawks (which we still haven't gotten rid of!) ready to go...all the while both countries scrambling to train up as many troops and find/make as many guns as we can, quickly.
*/armchair general*
Fred[OZ75]
Jihad Jeep Driver
+19|6999|Perth, Western Australia
OK Indonesia is going to invade us....

First we've really pissed of the Yanks and they ain't interested in; talking to their satellites for a third of the time (Pine Gap), or want the back up submarine communication system (Exmouth), or the only really friendly port for their nuclear ships in the Indian ocean(Garden Island, WA) so we can't count on any help from them.

The Indonesian navy is currently made up of the old east Germany navy and a few patrol boats they bought off us so actually making to Australia is not exactly easy for them and they ain't going to be taking any long boat trips down to the southern populated regions of Australia... they are going to land in the north and face a huge desert to get to the populated areas.

As Rommel found out (and the Italians before him, and the Turks before them) taking on Australian troops in a desert is not much fun and the Iraqi army found that out just recently (i.e. about a third of Iraq was occupied by about 700 Australian SAS). The average Australian soldier is highly trained and would be highly motivated in defending Australia and it would make for a very difficult task to drive from northern Australia to Southern Australia while being attacked by the RAF and being ambushed by regular ADF, let alone having a 1000 or so SAS running around behind your main front just making life difficult.

Not least of all the Australian people, I'm quite sure there would be plenty of experienced bush men with rifles taking pot shots at the advancing army also, laying traps, blowing things up (i.e. sources of water).

As you may have guessed ain't too worried about Indonesia yet... wait till they have nukes and I'll worry.

PS... the only reason we have F111 is to drop bombs on Jakarta

Last edited by Fred[OZ75] (2006-06-03 01:39:00)

Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6801

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

First we've really pissed of the Yanks and they ain't interested in; talking to their satellites for a third of the time (Pine Gap), or want the back up submarine communication system (Exmouth), or the only really friendly port for their nuclear ships in the Indian ocean(Garden Island, WA) so we can't count on any help from them.
Oh, they'll back us up.  New Zealand will only give safe haven to ships they know aren't nuclear, and the US refuses to say which are and which aren't.  They need their south east Asian outpost.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

they are going to land in the north and face a huge desert to get to the populated areas.
Which is exactly why Japan had decided early on that they would never invade Australia.  This is a particular problem for Indonesia as their military outnumbers us, but is less skilled.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

As Rommel found out (and the Italians before him, and the Turks before them) taking on Australian troops in a desert is not much fun
I would argue that was due more to situation and strategy than environs, the Australians were well suited to an isolated, defensive role.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

Not least of all the Australian people, I'm quite sure there would be plenty of experienced bush men with rifles taking pot shots at the advancing army also, laying traps, blowing things up (i.e. sources of water).
It would also be interesting to see how the city dwellers reacted (i.e. would the trimmings of modern society have made them soft, or would it be just as bloody as the urban fighting in poorer nations)

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

As you may have guessed ain't too worried about Indonesia yet... wait till they have nukes and I'll worry.
Oh, I don't think they could successfully invade and occupy Australia (if they could they would have done so already), I just thought anzus assessment was a bit optimistic.
anzus
Wheres the trigger?
+34|6883|Wangaratta, Australia

Bubbalo wrote:

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

First we've really pissed of the Yanks and they ain't interested in; talking to their satellites for a third of the time (Pine Gap), or want the back up submarine communication system (Exmouth), or the only really friendly port for their nuclear ships in the Indian ocean(Garden Island, WA) so we can't count on any help from them.
Oh, they'll back us up.  New Zealand will only give safe haven to ships they know aren't nuclear, and the US refuses to say which are and which aren't.  They need their south east Asian outpost.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

they are going to land in the north and face a huge desert to get to the populated areas.
Which is exactly why Japan had decided early on that they would never invade Australia.  This is a particular problem for Indonesia as their military outnumbers us, but is less skilled.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

As Rommel found out (and the Italians before him, and the Turks before them) taking on Australian troops in a desert is not much fun
I would argue that was due more to situation and strategy than environs, the Australians were well suited to an isolated, defensive role.

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

Not least of all the Australian people, I'm quite sure there would be plenty of experienced bush men with rifles taking pot shots at the advancing army also, laying traps, blowing things up (i.e. sources of water).
It would also be interesting to see how the city dwellers reacted (i.e. would the trimmings of modern society have made them soft, or would it be just as bloody as the urban fighting in poorer nations)

Fred[OZ75] wrote:

As you may have guessed ain't too worried about Indonesia yet... wait till they have nukes and I'll worry.
Oh, I don't think they could successfully invade and occupy Australia (if they could they would have done so already), I just thought anzus assessment was a bit optimistic.
I wasn't even talking about the Military (troops) sides of thing, Naval is what I was on about, yes if they are sending their entire fleet to the ocean border those old things wouldn't last 24hrs. Our ships, subs & aircraft would make very short work of them. And please don't tell me there ain't US warships & subs in the area. Probably a US sub sitting there right now laughing at them. And when it does come to the troops no we don't have the numbers to protect ET from an Indonesian invasion that is why ET has asked the Malaysian army to secure its borders. Yes the rest of Asia has its dislikes for Indonesia for decades now and would most likely love to invade them using any excuse.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard