[Ahovking]

I want to share my views and see if im alone on my views.

I believe Australia should have a larger military, to me we are making the same mistake we did with the British "don't worry if anything happens the British would come to our aid" and yet they didn't, they pulled out of asia and so we turned to the united states and now we are doing the same thing "don't worry if anything happens the Americans would come to our aid".

so my question is should we foces more on our military or continue on relying on our "bigger brother" for Security.

[Igor Antunov]

A bigger military is pointless without an independent foreign policy. We need to start looking out for Australian interests, and then we have something to defend, because nobody else will defend our interests beyond their own, as your example shows. To Americans, the US comes first, Japan second, Australia is down there somewhere. Same with Britain and other great powers. Our puppet master is not our brother. A big brother would sacrifice himself for his sibling.

[Ahovking]

A bigger military is pointless without an independent foreign policy. We need to start looking out for Australian interests, and then we have something to defend, because nobody else will defend our interests beyond their own, as your example shows. To Americans, the US comes first, Japan second, Australia is down there somewhere. Same with Britain and other great powers. Our puppet master is not our brother. A big brother would sacrifice himself for his sibling.

Amazingly i didn't connect the two (independent foreign policy and larger and more independent military force.). To Americans i don't even think we are on the list because when we commit to an alliance we really become like a puppet state with out actually being a puppet state. i would like to point out however that if we did have a larger military, the american might see us a possible threat if we had a independent foreign policy and therefor might look out a little bit more for our interest and may even treat us like we weren't one of their Sovereign puppet state.

But do you think we should have a "independent foreign policy" and therefor an increased military size.

[JohnRawls]

Not to be a party pooper but can australia even have a independant foreighn policy. America or China will always be stronger no matter how large your military is, why is being a pupet so bad ?

[pugsville]

Smaller Military. Who is the threat? Currently the Military does some peace keeping and some doing whatever America wants. We can do without the later. We should stop buying US equipment they keep screwing us over.

[JohnRawls]

This begs the question, what is the alternative?

[Ahovking]

Not to be a party pooper but can australia even have a independant foreighn policy.

Australian has a higher standard of living than america and china it also has higher wages, Political and economic freedoms. So we have a very Independence Political and economic policy but as soon as it comes to out side of Australia we just seem to lose it, also i do believe Australia can have a "independent foreign policy" last year there was a leak showing plains of possible military invasion of Fiji if the current dictatorship fails. so there has been times where we have shown that we can have an "independent foreign policy".

This begs the question, what is the alternative?

I think we should have a independent foreign policy of staying out of wars that not concern us, like the Vietnamese and the middle east wars, how ever having a large military would make sure we can not only defend our self's from what happen in the past but even defend other defenseless nations. to be honest i never though what was the alternative ive just always believe the current policy of following america blindly to every war america starts is a silly and even a dangerous one.

[JohnRawls]

The issue is that if you will have an independant foreighn policy it will someday in the near future collide with the foreighn policy of the 3-4 major world blocks. Australia just dont have the resources nor the manpower to have one. This is my opinion atleast. Your best bet is not interventionist neutrality policy. Something like the northern european states in europe. I dont understand what exactly do you gain by having an independant policy, for example, independant estonia would need to spent 4 times more money on defence which would decrease its standard of living. So right now i just dont understand,

1) Why would you want to have an independant foreighn policy?
2) Even if you do want it, how can you emplement it and enforce it?

[Igor Antunov]

1) Why would you want to have an independant foreighn policy?
2) Even if you do want it, how can you emplement it and enforce it?

Force multipliers; technology, education, access to resources. This is how a small force confronts and keeps at bay a large force.

We build a sizable conventional or nuclear detterrent (because we can't win a total war with a major power, we can at least be dangerous to them in some way-i.e north korea is holding the US empire at bay without an economy to speak of) and then play the various powers off one another.

Be in bed with all of them at the same time, and when one says 'cut off your close relations with those chaps and adopt our banking system' we say 'nope, make me' and then the others say 'hey leave that kid alone' and then the hostile power looks at your 50 ICBM's or 50 super quiet diesel submarines and says 'geez, ok, but can we have more coal', and you say 'sure-double the price-here you go, take all the coal you can afford'.

[AVT]

You have already answered why we can't really afford a larger military, mainly we have very high wages and so the cost of say an extra brigade is massive. Our sole strategy since WW2 has been to be one step ahead in terms of equipment of our neighbours, where we have fallen down recently has been cost overuns in both domestic and international acquisitions. This needs to be sorted out so we can accurately gauge what the true cost will be of upgrading our air power and naval power, and it may come to prioritising and moth balling pie in the sky projects eg submarines.

As for our alliance stance, our demographic and geopolitical positions (pop of 23 mill, an entire continent to defend, far away from our cultural kin) means to guarantee our security we have to align ourselves with a greater power. It was once the UK being our mother country, it is now the US, I do not see this changing anytimes soon mainly because the only rival China is both politically and culturally alien to us.

Can we have an 'independent' foriegn policy? Sure but it will jeopadise our security, also on many issues we will come down on the side of the US anyway being a western nation with similar interests. Australia will always be a middle power, we should not delude ourselves otherwise, but we can be a good middle power that has many niche capabilities to offer our allies.

[JohnRawls]

Excluding the ICBMs its an non-interventionist neutral foreighn policy. I agree with your igor regarding, but why the hell do you need nukes. The only one you will be able to nuke, will be yourself anyways.

[Ahovking]

The issue is that if you will have an independant foreighn policy it will someday in the near future collide with the foreighn policy of the 3-4 major world blocks. Australia just dont have the resources nor the manpower to have one. This is my opinion atleast. Your best bet is not interventionist neutrality policy. Something like the northern european states in europe. I dont understand what exactly do you gain by having an independant policy, for example, independant estonia would need to spent 4 times more money on defence which would decrease its standard of living. So right now i just dont understand,

1) Why would you want to have an independant foreighn policy?
2) Even if you do want it, how can you emplement it and enforce it?

Your Joking Australia does have the resources we current fueling china with its 7% growth, (22% of the worlds uranium supply, world's leading coal exporter, with massive oil reserves to name a...Few) resources is not an issue, how ever manpower would be an issue, but im not saying Australia should be a superpower nor should it act like the worlds police. It should have like you said a neutrality policy so we dont get dragged into wars, and in a event of some sort of war between powers we can choose not to be apart of it or to join which ever side we wont.

1) Why would you want to have an independant foreighn policy: So we don't get dragged into wars mainly.
2) Even if you do want it, how can you emplement it and enforce it: enforcing a independent foreign policy isn't an issue we have a modern military that operate around the world, we have the money and the resources what we lack is leadership.

[Igor Antunov]

US political and economic interests are alien to ours. That trumps culture and we aren't culturally American anyway, we have a huge contingent of people from Asia and non european origin and growing.
The basis of our economic well-being is not the US or Europe. We must integrate ourselves with our neighbours bcause it is the more natural and safer stance to take, they are our growth driver, they are in our immediate proximity, we are a major regional enabler of growth through provision of resources and education.

As it stands we have both feet and one hand in asia, and one hand in the US. We risk losing an arm. Why in a million years should Australia for example intervene in a war between Japan and China or China and the US? How do we benefit from making ourselves a major target and comprehensively ending our rapid economic rise? How do we benefiting from turning what will be the defining world region of this century and beyond against us? Europe and the US are in relative decline. Time to join the highly beneficial bandwagon here at home or risk being torn to pieces and left for dead. This year Indonesia is set to surpass us economically. They will want more coal and more student places at university. We can become a hub of higher education and enlightenment. China has shown that it is willing to work with countries without forcing political change upon them by exporting its system (like the US does).

Currently we are a pathetic little stooge and it hurts us in the long run.

[JohnRawls]

Sorry for double post but igor, the increase in conventional force and research and development will require increase in your military spending 3-4 fold. This will mean less money for infrastructure, lower wages and other social programs. I just dont see how australians will be happy about this. Our entitelment cultures are dependant on america being the world police.

1) Why would you want to have an independant foreighn policy: So we don't get dragged into wars mainly.
2) Even if you do want it, how can you emplement it and enforce it: enforcing a independent foreign policy isn't an issue we have a modern military that operate around the world, we have the money and the resources what we lack is leadership.

I dont think even with your current allighment that if a war between China and Japan breaks out, that you would participate. Your to far away and you dont have a sizable fleat to even put a dent. The only thing that might happen is that america will use you for power projection. Just keep your head down and keep neutrality.

[ralfy]

It can be done as long as you are willing to pay for it.

Various sacrifices will have to be made, though, especially given problems like this (from 2010):

"Australia Has Highest Household Debt to Disposable Income Ratio in World"

http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/austra ... 010/02/03/

[Igor Antunov]

the increase in conventional force and research and development will require increase in your military spending 3-4 fold.

Asia will help fund this by providing us with growth and revenue.

[Godstud]

Why waste money on a larger military? Why does Australia need a large military?

I highly doubt that anything will come of Japan and China's posturing. They've long held animosity to each other but the USA is the lynchpin in their relationship.

[Ahovking]

Why waste money on a larger military? Why does Australia need a large military?

I highly doubt that anything will come of Japan and China's posturing. They've long held animosity to each other but the USA is the lynchpin in their relationship.

That's the problem we think why do we need a larger military, nothings going to happen between Japan and China nor with the united states but guess what, we were in the same situation as we were in before when Britain was out "puppet muster" and japan started flexing their muscles, and what happen then we scrambled to the united states for help and what happens if china was able to hold of an american defensive attack, We need to be able to defend our self.

if a war was to happen and im not saying it will but if a war was to happen between China and the US, by having a larger military not only will we be able to help the side we are on (most lucky the united states side) if all things fail with the us pushing them from the east and Australia pushing south we can stop a Chinese military expansion.

[The Clockwork Rat]

As Igor said, become an indispensable resource and the requirement for a military capable of force projection is pretty much obviated. Training a military force specialising in home guerilla tactics would be also be a relatively cost-effective military deterrent against invasion, especially considering the necessarily expensive supply chain any foreign force would require.

Basically, become Switzerland.

[Godstud]

Great thinking, TCR. Power projection need not be the aim of the Australian military. That's all this would be.