Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: China (Read 13783 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: China

Reply #75 –
Quote from: Mav – on
So, because the LNP thought they were protected by the US so all they had to do was talk tough, it falls to Labor to do all the hard work and find the money? I'm thinking this is a bit like the Libs in Victoria committing $50b to the East-West Link on the eve of an election and imposing penalties for cancellation in the hope it would stuff up Labor's priorities.

We've recently discovered that a sharp increase in gas prices that ordinarily should have been revealed on 1 May was mysteriously delayed until after the election and just as mysteriously the RBA has just realised it needs to make serial interest rate rises. And now, without saying flatly that the LNP dropped the ball, you say that Labor needs to massively increase military expenditure to such a point it will become unpopular. Pardon me if I'm a bit cynical about your viewpoint that diplomacy is useless and a massive military buildup is the only way.
Everyone knew about the RBA rises well out from the election, inflation was running at 8% in the USA and is about 5% here, the RBA target about 2-3% inflation. The previous interest rate rise was too low as the RBA didnt want to go hard, there will be more rises as there will in the USA where we take our lead from. The reality is people who have over borrowed will be in trouble but low interest rates were never a given to stay that way even though Phil Lowe promised no hikes till 2024.
Australia is in for a tough time like a lot of countries but the Ukraine War, China Lockdown and inflation are the reasons...no one is blaming the Labor Government and the RBA are only doing their job.
Gas prices are due to the hike in global prices, bad timing for labor but not exactly a secret that energy prices are up around the world, no one is blaming Labor again, fossil fuel prices are up...supply and demand. Less reliance on fossil fuel energy needed...maybe time to think nuclear but someone needs to pay for the transmission line upgrades as the Australian system is falling apart, that means foreign investment and your Chinese friends owning more of our Electrical Suppliers/Distributors but you wouldnt mind that I guess?
Dan Andrews is your expert on how to blow money on infrastructure capital expenditure, think he holds the record for so many overblown budgets on infrastructure projects in Victoria. Dan isnt good with figures though and has a problem with working out who signs off on contracts and where the money went so maybe dont waste your time...

Re: China

Reply #76 –
Don't military contracts have a bit of a history of blowing out? After all, wasn't that the LNP's justification for cancelling the contract for the French subs, even though the defence department officials in charge of it stated that the contract was within expectations? And we ended up paying out $5b to the French for nothing in return. And let's not even mention the F-35 deal ... Oh, what the hell, let's mention it:

Australia spent billions on jet fighters off the plan. Now, we’re having trouble even flying them, The Conversation.

Quote
Continuous upgrades at tremendous cost
...
Most of Australia’s fleet is planned to be upgraded to be broadly similar to the US fleet, although this will cost even more money. It may seem strange to have to pay extra to upgrade a brand new aircraft on delivery, but that’s not the end of the problems. There is another complication.

Australia’s latest F-35s (as well as the upgraded older ones) use the Block 3F software, a digital operating system designed by Lockheed Martin. It is proving to be just as costly to keep updated as the jets themselves.

Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, the US Air Force’s deputy chief of staff, has serious concerns about the outdated software, saying last year, "the block that is coming off the line right now is not a block that I feel good about going up against China and Russia".

He noted recent war games focused on the prospect of defending Taiwan from Chinese air attack showed "Every [F-35] that rolls off the line today is a fighter that we wouldn’t even bother putting into these scenarios."

This means Australia’s F-35s appear not to be as good as the potential opposition. It seems Australia is paying to lose the air combat battle.

The only solution: another upgrade
So, what is the solution to these seemingly intractable and eye-wateringly expensive problems?

Lockheed Martin is advocating a major operating system software upgrade: the Block 4. It might not be surprising to hear this is now running years late, with delivery expected in 2027 or later. It is also significantly over budget.

In a small piece of good news, the last nine F-35 aircraft Australia will get off the production line next year, and may be partly Block 4 compatible. Hinote thinks these F-35s might be capable of fighting against first-rate adversaries.

The bad news is the full Block 4 upgrade now requires a major engine upgrade or even a new engine. So, this means Australia’s current F-35 fleet might not be able to use all the Block 4 software until after 2030 – and at a substantial cost.

Buying another hugely expensive upgrade for a brand new fighter is actually the cheap way out. The US Air Force’s focus is already shifting to the Block 4 upgraded aircraft. Countries like ours with older F-35s will be left to fend for ourselves if we don’t embrace the new technology, as well.

But the costs do keeping going up, and the problems with these F-35 jets haven’t seemed to stop. It’s the price of buying off the plan, which anyone who’s bought a house or apartment would surely know.

Why would you want Labor pouring infinite amounts of money into defence procurement when apparently Labor has difficulty preventing blowouts?

Re: China

Reply #77 –
Wouldn't it be good if previous federal governments had clearly identified what our defence needs are, the equipment needed to fulfil those needs, the time frames for its supply, the expenditure needed and how it will be paid for.

Instead, senior Defence personnel cannot agree on whether we need to prepare for a long-range war, such as supporting the USA in defending Taiwan if it is attacked by China, or prepare for our own defence and that of  nearby neighbours.

I watched an interview a few days ago where one of our most senior navy commanders would not have a bar of ordering an interim sub before the delivery of the first nuclear sub somewhere in the 2040s.  Given the rapidly changing global situation I thought he was delusional.

Despite numerous White Papers over several decades identifying what Australia should do for its own protection, we have managed to waste billions of dollars on equipment not fit for purpose.

With no clear path forward we are virtually defenceless.  China could collapse our economy within a matter of a few weeks without firing a shot in anger.  We are supposed to have a minimum 90 day oil reserve but only a few days of that reserve is in Australia at any time: the rest is held in the USA because it is cheaper to store there!

Just the threat of sinking oil tankers crossing the Pacific to Australia would cause them to be uninsurable and there goes our oil reserve.

I just see more years ahead where the powers that be will continue to dither and leave us completely unprepared to defend ourselves.



Re: China

Reply #78 –
Federal governments.  I spit in their general direction.

They've been too busy knifing each other over whos the leader in the last 15 years to make a concerted effort to do anything properly.  Most of them have wasted a golden opportunity to lead us in the boom times by throwing money away like it was confetti on both sides of the political spectrum.

This forum is a perfect example of what's wrong.  You criticise one, the comeback is often about the other, which serves only to deflect rather than learn how to do it better.

I hated John Howard but he was arguably the last proper leader we've had.  The rest have had the title without the stones to actually lead.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: China

Reply #79 –
Quote from: Macca37 – on
Wouldn't it be good if previous federal governments had clearly identified what our defence needs are, the equipment needed to fulfil those needs, the time frames for its supply, the expenditure needed and how it will be paid for.

Instead, senior Defence personnel cannot agree on whether we need to prepare for a long-range war, such as supporting the USA in defending Taiwan if it is attacked by China, or prepare for our own defence and that of  nearby neighbours.

I watched an interview a few days ago where one of our most senior navy commanders would not have a bar of ordering an interim sub before the delivery of the first nuclear sub somewhere in the 2040s.  Given the rapidly changing global situation I thought he was delusional.

Despite numerous White Papers over several decades identifying what Australia should do for its own protection, we have managed to waste billions of dollars on equipment not fit for purpose.

With no clear path forward we are virtually defenceless.  China could collapse our economy within a matter of a few weeks without firing a shot in anger.  We are supposed to have a minimum 90 day oil reserve but only a few days of that reserve is in Australia at any time: the rest is held in the USA because it is cheaper to store there!

Just the threat of sinking oil tankers crossing the Pacific to Australia would cause them to be uninsurable and there goes our oil reserve.

I just see more years ahead where the powers that be will continue to dither and leave us completely unprepared to defend ourselves.




Dont disagree, I dont rate the Morrison years as great for defense planning and my expectations of Labor are similar so I expect the same reliance on the USA and as a standalone nation we are as you say defenceless.
Also agree we have wasted money on poor choice equipment, the Fench sub deal as Mav suggests and its been a balls up because most including the public think it doesnt matter because our friends in the USA will come to our rescue anyway.

re: Mavs question on blowouts, no I dont expect Labor to increase defense spending and my budget blowout issues are with the Victorian State Government. I didnt vote for either major party so I'm not sitting in judgement on Albo and crew yet  who have only been in Government 5 minutes and who probably dont see it as a priority and will pursue the diplomatic route as their form of defense. Australia has a massive national debt due to Covid and will also have issues retaining its AAA credit rating so I dont think anyone expects money to be plucked out of thin air for extra defense spending.

Re: China

Reply #80 –
The world's a little bit rooted at the moment and it kind of has a feeling of inevitability that it's going to blow somewhere.

It's not a simple situation, as treaties and alliances seem to be intertwined and in some cases conflicting.

How any Australian Government can limit our exposure to threats, and at the same time fulfill our obligations under such treaties is not an easy task.






Re: China

Reply #81 –
This isn't a turnbull kicking session but he was responsible for the french submarines deal.  A complete stuff up.

Re: China

Reply #82 –
Quote from: Lods – on
The world's a little bit rooted at the moment and it kind of has a feeling of inevitability that it's going to blow somewhere.

It's not a simple situation, as treaties and alliances seem to be intertwined and in some cases conflicting.

How any Australian Government can limit our exposure to threats, and at the same time fulfill our obligations under such treaties is not an easy task.







Agree, its not a good time to inherit Government after a Pandemic, with high inflation leading to high interest rates across the globe due to supply/demand issues and with all the hot spots developing and countries having to act quickly and make important decisions on how they will spend their budgets with pressure of issues like climate change, wages growth vs defense spending etc and work out who their friends are.

Re: China

Reply #83 –
Quote from: Lods – on
The world's a little bit rooted at the moment and it kind of has a feeling of inevitability that it's going to blow somewhere.

It's not a simple situation, as treaties and alliances seem to be intertwined and in some cases conflicting.

How any Australian Government can limit our exposure to threats, and at the same time fulfill our obligations under such treaties is not an easy task.







Also, with a population of 26M and our geographic location, we are a pimple on the worlds ass. We have zero buying  power when it comes to supply of things like cars, medical supplies, building materials etc. I have mates that work for Toyota, they have told me many time how low we are on the pecking order in terms of getting cars. People crapcan companies like big bad CSL, if they weren't here in Australia manufacturing the speciliast drugs they do, we'd be forked.
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time
2025-Carlton cannot win the 2025 AFL Premiership
 

Re: China

Reply #84 –
https://au.yahoo.com/news/chinas-ominous-move-military-operations-other-than-war-233355216.html

I wouldnt be bothered with wasting the air fuel on envoys, foreign minister visits and talking peace with these lovely folk, be the same waste of time when Britain and France tried to talk sweet nothings to Hitler while he was arming his country to its eyeballs and preparing for war. Its clear China havent spent all this money on the military to play wargames amongst themselves and want the real thing and have some targets in mind. ie Taiwan as the article suggests.
I do like their sense of humor though and how they manage to talk disaster relief, humanitarian aid, escort, and peacekeeping, as well as safeguarding China’s national sovereignty, security and development interests as reasons for Xi making it legal in China for them to make war on anyone they choose...legal basis to make war?????. Very nice PR for the local Chinese folk who the regime want to convince its all good now to send them off and right is on their side.
Anyone in Taiwan with somewhere else to go might want to think about a quick exit.......

Re: China

Reply #85 –
Not sure why you think diplomacy is useless. Without it, we’re at the mercy of a much bigger military unless the US military will intervene. Using diplomacy to understand the opponent and convey our positions clearly is better than twiddling our thumbs. And it’s better than using bluster or megaphone diplomacy as Dutton and Co. loved to do.

Fortunately, we rely on Embassies staffed by experienced public servants rather than political friends and donors which is the US model. Having a PM & Foreign Minister who act in accordance with the best advice is much better than creating political dramas for domestic political advantage.

Re: China

Reply #86 –
Quote from: Mav – on
Not sure why you think diplomacy is useless. Without it, we’re at the mercy of a much bigger military unless the US military will intervene. Using diplomacy to understand the opponent and convey our positions clearly is better than twiddling our thumbs. And it’s better than using bluster or megaphone diplomacy as Dutton and Co. loved to do.

Fortunately, we rely on Embassies staffed by experienced public servants rather than political friends and donors which is the US model. Having a PM & Foreign Minister who act in accordance with the best advice is much better than creating political dramas for domestic political advantage.
Not sure why you think China are interested in being diplomatic about anything? Convey our position and understand our opponent? You would have to be living under a rock on Mars not to know our position and understand how delicately balanced things are with our Chinese opponent(good choice of words, I like opponent) .
Begging to the Chinese to take their boot of our throat will only work if we give up something and I hope you dont mean selling Taiwan down the Yangtze river, ending our military agreements with the USA and then calling that a diplomatic solution....Bravo Penny and Albo.....if they chose that route.

Re: China

Reply #87 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
https://au.yahoo.com/news/chinas-ominous-move-military-operations-other-than-war-233355216.html
they manage to talk disaster relief, humanitarian aid, escort, and peacekeeping, as well as safeguarding China’s national sovereignty, security and development interests as reasons for Xi making it legal in China for them to make war on anyone they choose...legal basis to make war?????. Very nice PR

Peacekeeping?  Under their rules of course

Re: China

Reply #89 –
Strange that you think diplomacy is useful only if you can bend the other side to our will.

Maybe we should save money by pulling out our Embassy and consulate staff in China. Then we can kick out the Chinese embassy staff. If we ever need to send them a message, we could follow in the footsteps of Dutton by doing it via the Australian media or perhaps we could do it via the French now we’re back on terms with them.