Give our allies extra time and cause. Great idea, bat eaters

This entry was posted in Fake News, War and peace. Bookmark the permalink.

97 Responses to Give our allies extra time and cause. Great idea, bat eaters

  1. Mark A says:

    Can’t see anything wrong with that assessment except OZ being the first being hit in retaliation.

    Why? We are smaller than minnows in this.
    Waste of good rockets.

  2. Ed Case says:

    Our Leaders are also the Front Runners on the China/Bad screechiness.
    Worth remembering that our wonderful Ally didn’t even see fit give us a heads up that it was about to recognise Red China in 1972.

  3. Entropy says:

    We will stop them with our squadrons of Pyne Class Submarines. Lol.

  4. Eyrie says:

    Can’t see anything wrong with that assessment except OZ being the first being hit in retaliation.
    Not retaliation. A sign of earnest intent. We’re serious. See what we just did to Australia?
    Australia doesn’t count and that will not trigger all out war, rather everybody gets to re-think their plans.
    I did hear that during the cold war each side agreed to nuke one inconsequential city on the other side to signal this before the all out madness started. Allegedly each side knew the targets.

  5. Albatross says:

    Even NK are better at diplomacy than the Chunks. Sad!

    As CL says: right over target.

  6. Crossie says:

    Albatross says:
    May 25, 2021 at 6:43 am
    Even NK are better at diplomacy than the Chunks. Sad!

    When the crazy Kim thinks you are crazy you are crazy.

    The Chinese think that they can hit us and still retain their present status. Even if not a shot is fired in their direction trade to and with them will be cut off by the rest of the world. Stagnation will be followed by implosion.

  7. Herodotus says:

    If we are “insignificant militarily” it is because of self-inflicted idiocies.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    They sound very defensive. If a war occurred because China attempted to invade Taiwan then China would be isolated. No iron ore, no coal, no lurvely oil from Iran and Saudi, no widgets exported to roundeye. Untold millions would be put out of work in China, with no welfare. I have no idea what would happen domestically as a result but it wouldn’t be good.

  9. duncanm says:

    Sounds like a strategy.

    Hit a country half way around the world that has no strategic value in your quest

  10. duncanm says:

    Btw.. that is a misquote.

    Australia’s forces would be first hit of they were to participate in a war with China

  11. PeterW says:

    I have no idea what would happen domestically as a result but it wouldn’t be good.

    China has the fourth largest reserves of iron ore and considerable reserves of coal. It imports both from us because our sources are higher in quality and it is more economic to transport high-quality raw materials than use low-quality local materials.

    However. Every military power contemplating war does the sums – if they have any sense – regarding resources and the political cohesion of their population. If you believe , as Germany and Japan did when they started WW2, that you can fight a short war and hold what you take, then it looks attractive. There is also nothing like having a foreign threat to bring a population together.

  12. Scott Osmond says:

    So, will our defence leaders and the politician’s cutting the cheques take defence seriously? Moving several billions from foreign aid might be a start. I’ll know things are about to get sporty when the navy stops painting it’s fingernails pink in solidarity with the latest fad. Or maybe they will shock me and do a re-enactment of December 7th 1941 with the only changes having Australian bases being the targets.

  13. min says:

    Really with cracks in the the 3Gorges Dam , serious flooding still occurring in China , food shortages and funnily enough the only country to be Covid free ? More problems at home I think but still threatening .others and all for show at home.

  14. H B Bear says:

    Most Ch!nk press is for domestic consumption. Just like a Greens presser.

  15. Ubique says:

    Why worry? Pyne’s South Australian defence industry will soon master canoe building and churn out maybe several a year.

  16. Iain Russell says:

    It is entirely realistic for Australia to be the first victim. China’s overarching aim is to bring all of SEA into the Han Empire. It will not repeat Japan’s mistake of WW II and allow Australia to remain a giant support base for the Allies. Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines will all fold. Vietnam will fight like hell but will ultimately be crushed. Happy future, Asia!

  17. thefrollickingmole says:

    I hope the Chinese dont find out how vital to the war effort Canberra and the various state governments are.
    It would be truly crushing, and probably lead to immediate capitulation if they were all erased from the map with the occupants inside.
    Even worse if the chucked a bit of conventional ordinance on most shire councils as well.

    Devastating
    Crippling
    They would walk in unopposed.
    The party would still be going on weeks later.

  18. duncanm says:

    Iain,

    they may be able to deal us some mortal blows.. but holding the country will not occur easily. We’re just too remote and isolated for supply lines to be sustained in the face of global boycott.

  19. Roger says:

    Btw.. that is a misquote.

    Australia’s forces would be first hit of they were to participate in a war with China

    In a report from a different news source the CCP spokesman said China’s missiles could reach Australia. Hard to believe they would follow through on such a threat as the consequences for them would be dire, but there it is.

  20. Rosie says:

    We should definitely be accepting tens of thousands of Chinese students and other Chinese immigrants though.

    These people are mad.

  21. Figures says:

    Our allies?

    The UK and the US?

    I can just imagine them running up the beaches at a Chinese army controlled Jervis Bay constantly tripping up on their rainbow coloured HAZMAT suits and then one of the transgender midget US soldiers hears a faint cough in the distance and the order goes out for all of them to fall on the ground and chew on a cyanide tablet – because the one in a million chance of getting a mild cough from COVID is apparently worse than certain death.

  22. H B Bear says:

    Today in Teh Paywallian Mavis cracks the sads when the ALPBC says Nifty was a crook.

  23. H B Bear says:

    Oops. Wrong thread.

  24. calli says:

    Nifty was a crook.

    ???

    Inconceivable!

  25. calli says:

    Oops. Wrong thread.

    #metoo

  26. Dot says:

    Wow.

    We’re the nuclear whipping boy (NWB).

    Shit.

    The US and UK will also hit us to calibrate their guidance systems.

  27. Cynic of A says:

    Not sure the Chinamen aren’t correct with Campbell running the show, with his focus on making sure everyone has rainbow underpants on.

  28. bollux says:

    They wouldn’t stand a chance against our transgender troops. The ADF should be fast tracking the surgery about now.

  29. nb says:

    Hmm. Australia has a (relatively) conservative government, and does not use Dominion software. Let me think, there’s got to be another way…

  30. jupes says:

    Meanwhile, how’s the plan to bring back thousands of Chicom students going?

  31. Andre Lewis says:

    We may be a target for CCP aggression but their only easy kills are our cities with small military centres decentralised. Massive damage either way and we would not be a formidable enemy. But maybe a few of our long range bombers could make it to the three gorges dam and put a couple of cruise missiles through it. China would take a while to clean up the mess that would make.

  32. Iain Russell says:

    Duncanm, I think Northern Australia can be held for Phase 1, then resupply from SEA will be a snack.

  33. Deano says:

    I don’t know anything about military strategy, but if I was planning a war with someone I wouldn’t be publishing my intentions in a newspaper.

  34. Mother Lode says:

    but if I was planning a war with someone I wouldn’t be publishing my intentions in a newspaper

    Surely this is meant to bring us to heel so they don’t have to attack.

    And regardless of the temper of the rest of the country the simple fact our ruling class is a moral and intellectual vacuum. They would rather hand the who country over to whomsoever if doing so spares them being reported in the paper as being responsible for the death of a single transgender person of colour from the SIDHMU (Strategic Interpretive Dance and Hemp Macramé Unit) sent forward to confront an enemy with our cultured reason.

  35. Roger says:

    I don’t know anything about military strategy, but if I was planning a war with someone I wouldn’t be publishing my intentions in a newspaper.

    The odds of China attacking us directly are long.

    This is bluster.

    All it does is makes the case for our further decoupling from the regional bully.

  36. Roger says:

    All it does is makes the case for our further decoupling from the regional bully.

    Including a ban on Chinese students and migrants, as others above suggest.

  37. Infidel Tiger says:

    And yet we are still sending them billions of dollars of coal and ore each week.

    Are we mad?

  38. Infidel Tiger says:

    China doesn’t have the capacity to attack anyone militarily, but it can wreak havoc with our institutions.

    It’s already conquered New Xi-Land.

  39. sfw says:

    Cheapest and best defence for Australia would be 30 or 40 ICBMs with nuclear warheads, spread out along the northern coastline and a political class that were willing to use them if required. Subs, boats and planes etc are nice but if China knew that they would lose several cities in response then I doubt that they would try. Not gunna happen though, no votes in SA or other places in a relatively cheap defence system.

  40. mh says:

    China says ‘weak’ Australia would be first hit in a war over Taiwan.

    But…China is only a developing nation, right?

    Just ask the United Nations.

  41. Roger says:

    China doesn’t have the capacity to attack anyone militarily…

    I reckon the Taiwanese might surprise them if ever they tried it on.

  42. Snotball says:

    China has already tested these waters with the virus. Interesting how they are COVID free? Vaccine developed for local consumption prior to the strategic release perhaps? Anyway they now know the strategy works and will cripple an enemy without much expense or effort.

  43. Dr Faustus says:

    The odds of China attacking us directly are long.
    This is bluster.

    This is correct.
    A quick glance at the Global Times home page shows that it is about Anglophone shitposting and CCP boosting.

    Having a reputation as the Mouth of Xi allows it to make frightening noises designed to be picked up and breathlessly repeated by useful idiot western journalists – to terrify the punters into pressuring their politicians from below.

    Not saying the South China Sea won’t become kinetic: but, as others have noted, that would trigger a destabilising change of state for China.

    With 600 million citizens just above the disgusting-death-at-any-time poverty line Xi doesn’t need that.

  44. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare says:

    Are we mad?

    Perhaps. Right now though no-one is interested in being very poor.

    Without selling our coal and iron ore to China we would be just that.
    A search for new markets is imperative for us to decouple from China.
    And by then, maybe they would just march in and take what they want.
    Nuke Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane and the nation would be in tatters.

    I quite like the nuclear missiles launch on our western coastline, aimed and the creaking three gorges dam. The contemporary version of mutually assured destruction, Australia’s own ‘iron dome’.

  45. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare says:

    aimed ‘at’

  46. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare says:

    The odds of China attacking us directly are long.
    This is bluster.

    Of course it is bluster. That always comes first, missiles much later.

    One can only hope that cooler heads and pure self-interest defuse things.

  47. rickw says:

    I would have thought “gay” was a better description of Australia?

  48. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    This is why we should scrap the corrupt subs in the sky when we die deal.devote the money to creating a strong missile corps which has anti aircraft ,anti surface craft ,anti submarine and N uclear ICBM capabilities . With sattelite and zdrone patroling Let us become a very nasty target that will hit back hard . Bit like zswitzerland was to the German National Socialists , they could be conquered but at what cost .? Become like Israel with a Tungsten Dome defence system . Cutting reliance on china tradeand curbing chinese migrants wit repatriation of thosewho threaten our freedom ,these badtards play for keeps ,you cant appease them only confront them tey understand only force ._

  49. RobK says:

    Not saying the South China Sea won’t become kinetic:
    ….we only have second row seats.

  50. sfw says:

    Wasn’t the reason behind the F111 planes was the ability to take any war to the home cities of the enemy? If you can’t project power in some form you essentially have to fight at home.

  51. Lee says:

    China’s rhetoric has been a lot more aggressive since Biden got into the White House.
    Very predictable.

  52. Spurgeon Monkfish III says:

    If you can’t project power in some form

    Our military (if it can be dignified with such a term) is utterly unable to project power in any way, shape or form.

    This is entirely deliberate.

  53. Fair Shake says:

    Watches clock, excitedly waits for subs to arrive.
    Then realises he will be 90 years old by that point.
    Sighs.
    Downloads app How to speak compliant CCP.

  54. egg_ says:

    Chi na threatens to beat up the retarded kid on the block?

    Timeh! Timeh! Timeh!

  55. Terry says:

    ‘This is why we should scrap the corrupt subs…’

    The argument for capable subs, born of an efficient delivery programme still exists (just, not the corrupt mincing poodle class).

    Off-the-shelf Nuke boats are preferable (Virginia or Astute), or else off-the-shelf modern conventionals (Soryu Class) but most important is time to delivery/commissioning. We need them NOW (for this war), not in the 2030-60’s (the next one or the ones after that).

    For anything conventional, we suffer the same problem as our surface fleet, aircraft, and land forces…fuel supply (a huge strategic risk given the geography of our most likely adversaries).

    With the advent of increasingly smaller, safer, and efficient nuclear reactors, I would have thought there’d be a credible argument for pursuing nuclear propulsion/power for our surface fleet as well (at least the larger vessels). It’s been done before (60’s) with Cruiser-size vessels, so no reason it could not be done now (with smaller, more powerful reactors) and ships of similar displacement (7-9,000 tonnes).

    ICBMs are not going to happen unless we get over ourselves and our child-like anti-nuclear power and propulsion pathology first (the “weapons” argument takes the hysteria to another level).

    But in the meantime, it should not stop us from deploying conventional long-range Surface-to-Surface, Air-to-Surface, Surface-to-Air, and Surface-to-Space capabilities.

    The nuclear strategy also has the potential to return our energy production to a cheap input and a strategic advantage (along with taking the shackles off coal), rather than the strategic impediment it has become via the “green energy” shakedown that we have allowed and encouraged to destroy our economy from within and therefore put our national security at great risk (criminal and negligent from our chattering class).

  56. Xenophon says:

    If Australia was a target it would be pine gap. Whether the Chinese could afford the long range missiles in such an event is doubtful. But if course if the misfiled were flying we are all toast in any case.
    Can’t fit the life of me understand why Dutton and pezzulo have been yabbering war talk. Our near allies think we are idiots.

  57. Crossie says:

    Lee says:
    May 25, 2021 at 12:12 pm
    China’s rhetoric has been a lot more aggressive since Biden got into the White House.
    Very predictable.

    Predictable by anyone but our idiot politicians and the even stupider media.

  58. PB says:

    “Waste of good rockets.”

    Using our destruction to send a message to the Americans? Actually an economical use of their rockets, if the message is loud enough.

  59. Paul says:

    So why are we not a realistic threat?
    Because the globullists and their lackeys in Western govts profited from Making Communist China Great, more millionaires than we have people, powerfull modern military.
    Stop selling them our iron ore and coal, they used it to make more weapons

  60. Luke73 says:

    Using our destruction to send a message to the Americans? Actually an economical use of their rockets, if the message is loud enough.

    Yep, that’s why maybe we need to get ownership of our own nuclear deterrant and not just rely on the US umbrella, as Greg Sheridan ventured a year or so back.

    If the Chicoms were thinking to take it out Darwin or even Brisbane as a warning to the Yanks, us having our own nukes would compel them to choose a different target. We should do this quietly though, with a minimum of sabre rattling.

  61. Snoopy says:

    Fortunately we have shed loads of Chicom hostages. If it was up to IT and Arky we wouldn’t have any.

  62. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    Why have expensive subs with expensive highly trained people when you can develop tracking decvices with sub killing missiles that can destroy the enemies subs remotely, many miesaway , like te Yank drones killing Iranian terrorist leaders remotely ,there wasnt a white man within miles of him when hewaseliminated . Thats progress for you .

  63. Bela Bartok says:

    Sure, I can just see the ol’ shuffling Paedo-Joe going to war over Australia…
    and Boris Johnson? Come on, man!
    They will hit the Chinese with a wet lettuce leaf and that will be it!

  64. Chris M says:

    If it was up to IT and Arky we wouldn’t have any.

    Wow, what would they do with them?

    we need to get ownership of our own nuclear deterrant

    Exactly right Luke.

  65. Terry says:

    Why have expensive subs with expensive highly trained people when you can develop tracking devices with sub-killing missiles that can destroy the enemies subs remotely, many miles away…’

    …because the subs can do other things (like park a mobile missile battery within striking distance of your cities).

    Why not both?

  66. shatterzzz says:

    Between 60 000 & 125 000 years went into the research & development of the boomerang and the Chicoms think they can out military technology Oz … duuuuh!

  67. areff says:

    Dear Xi,
    If you hit the button, please make Danistan the target. After what your jug-eared toady has done to the place, a nuke or two won’t make much difference.
    Yours,
    etc etc

  68. Oscr says:

    Of course they would not hit Australia first. The intent is to make Morrison lose his nerve now and bolt, making the next anti-Chinese smaller player do the same. Kind of how in Appaloosa Virgil, the Ed Harris character, talked down a gang sent to run him and Viggo Mortensen out of town. Virgil admits to being outgunned but says he will take some of them down starting with the kid at the back, who panics and rides off, then they all do.

  69. Jupes:

    Meanwhile, how’s the plan to bring back thousands of Chicom students going?

    I tried to make the point several years ago that the presence of tens of thousands of Chinese students in Australia, who had done their military training, were a greater threat to the nation than just about anything else.
    Bring in several hundred containers of rifles/RPGs/grenades/uniforms, etc and what have you got?
    If one a week came in under Diplomatic protection, in a year you’d have quite a respectable light infantry force.
    Don’t be so paranoid was the casual reply…

  70. yarpos says:

    They seem to lack any self awareness on how they look on the world stage (or just dont care) School yard bully , agree with me or else, seems to be the limit of their diplomatic sophistication.

  71. TBH says:

    Do we actually have any working subs at present? They’d be pretty handy in this sort of situation I would think.

  72. Primer says:

    “develop tracking devices with sub killing missiles that can destroy the enemies subs remotely, many miles away”

    You’re doing it again Fred. The beautiful thing about deep submerged subs is they are undetectable. Sure, if you have a near exact location sonar buoys and an air dropped homing torpedo might get you rarely lucky. Please get used to the fact there are no “sub killing missiles” for distant destruction of subs….US, China, Russia…none.

  73. DaveR says:

    If any of these Chinese aggression scenarios are remotely possible, then Australia should now be looking at what we would have to do to maintain a war effort, such as:

    1/ urgently build a joint US-Aus naval base somewhere about Darwin;
    2/ reopen all mothballed oil refineries (remove all impediment taxes overnight);
    3/ restart all domestic oil production facilities (remove all carbon taxes overnight);
    3/ urgently restart all steelmaking facilities
    4/ reopen steel tubemaking mills (all shut)
    5/ urgently reopen shipyards – maybe Newcastle – and Williamstown

    only the beginning of a long list, and Australia is so far away from where it needs to be.

  74. duncanm says:

    Professor Fred Lenin says:
    May 25, 2021 at 1:39 pm
    Why have expensive subs with expensive highly trained people when you can develop tracking decvices with sub killing missiles that can destroy the enemies subs remotely, many miesaway , like te Yank drones killing Iranian terrorist leaders remotely ,there wasnt a white man within miles of him when hewaseliminated . Thats progress for you

    ermm… I think you’ll find the Iranian leaders may have been carrying a mobile phone at the time.

    There are no magic long-distance sub-finding drones.

  75. Davey Boy says:

    This is our last territorial demand!
    Peace in our time!

  76. Terry says:

    ‘Davey Boy says:
    May 25, 2021 at 5:43 pm
    This is our last territorial demand!
    Peace in our time!’

    Indeed.

  77. Terry says:

    DaveR says:
    May 25, 2021 at 5:26 pm
    ‘…then Australia should now be looking at what we would have to do to maintain a war effort…’

    Cheap, reliable, and available electricity is a strategic prerequisite for any of these.
    So:
    A) Unban Nuclear Power;
    B) Remove “green” subsidies to “renewables” as a matter of national security (the rest will take of itself on that one); and
    C) Commence immediate procurement of new, modern, Coal Power plants.

    Then your list starts to look viable, including fast-tracking approvals for Project Iron Boomerang to help take care of ‘3/ urgently restart all steelmaking facilities’

  78. Lee says:

    I tried to make the point several years ago that the presence of tens of thousands of Chinese students in Australia, who had done their military training, were a greater threat to the nation than just about anything else.
    Bring in several hundred containers of rifles/RPGs/grenades/uniforms, etc and what have you got?

    Sounds like a slight variation on the film Invasion U.S.A. (1985).

  79. Squirrel says:

    The petulant spawn of the one child policy will eventually run out of countries to bribe and bully – they dropped the “bide and hide” mask too soon, and now they’re getting very, very shrill.

  80. PeterW says:

    Paul says:
    May 25, 2021 at 1:13 pm
    So why are we not a realistic threat?
    Because the globullists and their lackeys in Western govts profited from Making Communist China Great, more millionaires than we have people, powerfull modern military.

    Errrrrr, nope.
    Contrary to myth and legend, it takes real money to build an effective defence capacity.
    Depending on who does the measuring, Australia is the 12th, 13th or 14th largest economy in the world. If we spent a responsible percentage of our GDP on defence, we would be a mid-level Power , comparable to Russia.

    But you can’t do this without a wealthy economy to tax, and a willingness to spend these taxes on something other than buying votes from the Free-Shit-Army. It’s not the globalist bogeyman making these decisions, but the Social Justice Warriors and Pork-Barrel merchants in our own Parliament.

  81. PeterW says:

    Another way of putting it.

    We have the money…. some of it supplied by China.
    We could build a very decent defence capability.

    It isn’t the Chinese that are stopping us. We could use their money against them.
    We could, but we ain’t.

  82. Terry says:

    ‘We could build a very decent defence capability.’

    In line with your comment: ‘it takes real money to build an effective defence capacity.’

    A Defence Capability is more than just the toys deployed to the field when the time comes, nor the well-trained personnel operating them.

    Just as important (actually, probably more important) is the productive capacity that underpins the ability to make war (when the times require it).

    Unfortunately, we’ve spent the best part of 50 years pissing our capacity for war (which is needed to keep the peace) right up the wall on a litany of woke schemes, indulgent boondoggles and “generous” remuneration for those that have sold the country down the river.

    Once we (have been forced to) deal with the emergent international threats we must not forget to deal with the internal threats that have led us here – it will be important in the war(s) after the next one.

  83. SIMON NICHOLAS MORGAN says:

    Note to Xi Jingping:

    Hitler thought Britain and her colonies were weak in the 1940’s. In fact he thought he would wring our necks like a chicken – and look what became of him!!

  84. Nighthawk the Elder says:

    China fears the Chinese more than anything else, i.e. its own people. As others have mentioned, all this sabre rattling is largely for domestic consumption. The population doesn’t even trust their own government’s compulsory vaccine, that there was some crap on the news about a jingle to convince them to get the jab.

    As for others who would come to our aid if they did decide to fire one across our bow, then this will sort out the principled from the appeasers. Definitely do not rely on the EU, that scum would happily see off a perceived trading rival. The US and UK? Yeah, nah, I doubt they give a stuff either. India? Kind of dropped the ball on that one. Maybe some stern words from Iceland or the some obscure Central American nation spoken at the UN, is what we might expect.

  85. Bruce in WA says:

    I think China would find an eager ally in Indonesia if it came to actual fisticuffs. I have personally seen maps with Australia marked as “South Irian”. While a takeover of the entire continent is Hollywood stuff, given its size, the concept of the NT becoming an Indo “province”, a la New Guinea, seems not too far a stretch … if push came to shove.

  86. PeterW says:

    Just as important (actually, probably more important) is the productive capacity that underpins the ability to make war (when the times require it).

    Unfortunately, we’ve spent the best part of 50 years pissing our capacity for war (which is needed to keep the peace) right up the wall on a litany of woke schemes, indulgent boondoggles and “generous” remuneration for those that have sold the country down the river.

    Yes, that too, and you are not wrong to raise it.

    However the appropriate response is that the productive capacity of the Allies was well known to the Axis before they kicked off WW2. They knew that they could not match it, long term.

    They gambled tgat they could win in the short term, then negotiate a peace. They gambled that nations which had not prepared for war would lack the motivation to carry on with one following early reverses.

    Si vis pacem……

  87. PeterW says:

    Bruce in WA says:
    May 25, 2021 at 8:19 pm
    I think China would find an eager ally in Indonesia if it came to actual fisticuffs

    I’m not so sure.
    The Indos may not be our best buddies, but the Chinese are a distinct ethnic group that is not well loved, either. The greatest concerns in Indonesia at the moment are internal conflicts – they are not culturally cohesive – and there is considerable apprehension that China would only be in it for the Chinese, while non-Chinese Indos would be the losers.

    To put it another way…. if China came south, it would be for our resources. The idea that they would help Indonesia take over those resources so that they could buy from the Indos instead of from us, is not convincing. The alternative would be Indonesia trying to maintain itself as an independent nation in an Imperialist Chinese ocean. That would be neither attractive, nor secure.

    If they really didn’t like us, they would have fought a lot harder to keep East Timor.

  88. PeterW says:

    The other aspect of Indonesia-China relations is that Indonesia is 85-90% Muslim. They know how China is treating the Uighurs.

    Things could change, but at the moment……

  89. Bruce in WA says:

    Good points, PeterW

    But I believe it would be the Indos helping China to access our resources in return for control of land.

  90. PeterW says:

    Bruce….
    Possible, but how would you see that working out?
    Land is only of value according to the resources it can produce.
    Do you see the Indos undertaking the risks and costs of war in return for the Simpson Desert? Or maybe those bits of Kakadu that don’t sit on top of Bauxite or Uranium?

    War is a really expensive business…. which is why countries that trade with each other on an equitable basis rarely start shooting at each other. It’s cheaper just to buy…..

  91. Bruce in WA says:

    PeterW

    Hope you’re right and I’m wrong … just don’t trust our northern “neighbours”.

  92. PeterW says:

    Bruce…

    I don’t think that you should…. except to look after their own interests.
    I just don’t see it as being in their interest to be a partner with the CCP. It wouldn’t be anywhere near an equal partnership and the Indos should know that they’d come out sucking on the hind tit.

    It’s not as though they have anything in common. The Chinese may consider it useful to stir up trouble in this region, but they aren’t natural allies. The big sign that something has changed would be for the Indonesian government to change from the secular state that it is now, to some form of totalitarian or Islamic State. If they had a Mussolini or a Khomeini at the helm, I’d be more wary.

    Regardless, we should bespending 3% of GDP on defence.

    Si vis pacem,.,,

  93. Write says:

    ‘I think China would find an eager ally in Indonesia if it came to actual fisticuffs.’
    The general dislike of Australia on the street in Indonesia has been obvious for decades and China is no threat to Indonesia, no-one lusts after owning it. They might be part of an Asian cheer squad but their air force is nearly non existent as a threat v the RAAF, even given the F35 will spend most of its combat time on the ground.

  94. Boambee John says:

    ‘I think China would find an eager ally in Indonesia if it came to actual fisticuffs.’

    It is hard to imagine Indonesia allowing Chinese bases in the archipelago, or Chinese ships to control the straits. Apart from these, what could the Indonesians do to help China? Indonesia sits there passively as a major barrier to movement, northward or southward.

  95. Terry says:

    Nighthawk the Elder says:
    May 25, 2021 at 7:55 pm
    China fears the Chinese more than anything else, i.e. its own people.

    Agreed. China’s ultimate destiny will be to fracture internally. Keeping a billion plus people under the totalitarian jackboot can exist for only so long (still possibly decades away though).

    Their external sabre rattling is largely to provide an external threat as a distraction against this.

    It doesn’t mean that fracture will not create massive problems for the world while they go down. eg Hong Kong, most likely Taiwan, etc

    Our strategic planning should include how to enhance/accelerate that demise (of the CCP, moreso than China itself). Without the CCP China is likely to dissolve into smaller nations around ethnic, social, and ideological lines (No way HK and Taiwan want any part of the CCP’s greater China global hegemony).

    We should also be thinking about our Antarctic territories in the next decade or two. China will see any conflict with Australia as an opportunity to “adopt” them and then exploit them.

    In our current condition, we have absolutely no way to prevent it.

  96. Tel says:

    There are no magic long-distance sub-finding drones.

    That’s correct … no magic whatsoever.

    There are however electronic long-distance sub-finding drones that might be sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable from magic … h/t Clarke and all that.

    https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/sea-air-space/2016/05/18/boeing-showcases-new-sub-hunting-torpedo/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.