World peace!Black Orchid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:39 pmOn that we agree!billy the kid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:35 pmCouldn't run a game of marbles....liberals or labor.....
What are you praying for Red?
Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Forum rules
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. Random guest posting.
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. Random guest posting.
- Redneck
- Posts: 6275
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:28 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
- Redneck
- Posts: 6275
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:28 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
How many aircraft carriers do we have BO ???
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cleve ... tent-navy/Author : Richard Menhinick had an extensive career in the Royal Australian Navy, including commands at sea, ashore and on operations. He has also worked in strategic analysis and policy formulation.
"The navy of today and tomorrow is the same size in a ship sense as it was in 1976 when I joined, with about a dozen destroyers and frigates. However, strategically we’re significantly less effective vis-à-vis the region. The minister’s introduction to the 2016 defence white paper states that it ‘sets out the most ambitious plan to regenerate the Royal Australian Navy since the Second World War’. That sounds impressive, but it’s essentially misleading—in essence, we’re doing ship replacement. The navy remains too small and it’s a self-defence force, with limited power projection or ability to conduct sea control at distance.
We should be talking to the Australian public about strategic truths in a language they understand, explaining to them the new reality. To have self-reliance and self-help in this era requires a much larger, more potent navy. Fixed-wing, strike-capable aircraft carriers are required to project maritime air power via the short take-off, vertical landing version of the joint strike fighter. And we need perhaps twice the number of destroyers and frigates, so that we can really carry out aggressive operations against numerically larger air, surface and submarine threats, to dominate, deter and if necessary defeat. The submarines we’re getting are potentially good, but that’s an isolated area of improvement."
- billy the kid
- Posts: 5814
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:54 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
theconversation.com/security-in-doubt-as-australias-aging-oil-refineries-shut-down-5553
A little history on the topic....
A little history on the topic....
To discover those who rule over you, first discover those who you cannot criticize...Voltaire
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
- brian ross
- Posts: 6059
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:26 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Interesting. Didn't you suggest we should vote the Tories back in at the last election, Black Orchid? Looks to me that you've got the Government you deserved...Black Orchid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:39 pmOn that we agree!billy the kid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:35 pmCouldn't run a game of marbles....liberals or labor.....
Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. - Eric Blair
- Black Orchid
- Posts: 25688
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:10 am
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Show me where we are being requested to send aircraft carriers to the Strait of Hormuz?Redneck wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:50 pmHow many aircraft carriers do we have BO ???
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cleve ... tent-navy/Author : Richard Menhinick had an extensive career in the Royal Australian Navy, including commands at sea, ashore and on operations. He has also worked in strategic analysis and policy formulation.
"The navy of today and tomorrow is the same size in a ship sense as it was in 1976 when I joined, with about a dozen destroyers and frigates. However, strategically we’re significantly less effective vis-à-vis the region. The minister’s introduction to the 2016 defence white paper states that it ‘sets out the most ambitious plan to regenerate the Royal Australian Navy since the Second World War’. That sounds impressive, but it’s essentially misleading—in essence, we’re doing ship replacement. The navy remains too small and it’s a self-defence force, with limited power projection or ability to conduct sea control at distance.
We should be talking to the Australian public about strategic truths in a language they understand, explaining to them the new reality. To have self-reliance and self-help in this era requires a much larger, more potent navy. Fixed-wing, strike-capable aircraft carriers are required to project maritime air power via the short take-off, vertical landing version of the joint strike fighter. And we need perhaps twice the number of destroyers and frigates, so that we can really carry out aggressive operations against numerically larger air, surface and submarine threats, to dominate, deter and if necessary defeat. The submarines we’re getting are potentially good, but that’s an isolated area of improvement."
- billy the kid
- Posts: 5814
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:54 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Well, we've got 72 US castoff F35s that need a paint job every time they fly, and cant fly in a storm...Redneck wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:50 pmHow many aircraft carriers do we have BO ???
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cleve ... tent-navy/Author : Richard Menhinick had an extensive career in the Royal Australian Navy, including commands at sea, ashore and on operations. He has also worked in strategic analysis and policy formulation.
"The navy of today and tomorrow is the same size in a ship sense as it was in 1976 when I joined, with about a dozen destroyers and frigates. However, strategically we’re significantly less effective vis-à-vis the region. The minister’s introduction to the 2016 defence white paper states that it ‘sets out the most ambitious plan to regenerate the Royal Australian Navy since the Second World War’. That sounds impressive, but it’s essentially misleading—in essence, we’re doing ship replacement. The navy remains too small and it’s a self-defence force, with limited power projection or ability to conduct sea control at distance.
We should be talking to the Australian public about strategic truths in a language they understand, explaining to them the new reality. To have self-reliance and self-help in this era requires a much larger, more potent navy. Fixed-wing, strike-capable aircraft carriers are required to project maritime air power via the short take-off, vertical landing version of the joint strike fighter. And we need perhaps twice the number of destroyers and frigates, so that we can really carry out aggressive operations against numerically larger air, surface and submarine threats, to dominate, deter and if necessary defeat. The submarines we’re getting are potentially good, but that’s an isolated area of improvement."
...and we are soon to get (30 years) 12 submarines designed in France...maybe built in.....wait for it....
South Australia.....so maybe when the wars over...we might have an aircraft carrier built somewhere...Spain comes to mind.....
Makes one wonder who are the political imbeciles running our military....I can hear someone yelling......Yosemite Sam....
To discover those who rule over you, first discover those who you cannot criticize...Voltaire
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
- Black Orchid
- Posts: 25688
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:10 am
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
I never suggested any such thing. I didn't even vote for them myself you scramble headed twat. Take your medication.brian ross wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:00 pmInteresting. Didn't you suggest we should vote the Tories back in at the last election, Black Orchid? Looks to me that you've got the Government you deserved...Black Orchid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:39 pmOn that we agree!billy the kid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:35 pmCouldn't run a game of marbles....liberals or labor.....
- billy the kid
- Posts: 5814
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:54 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Within 21 minutes of Black Orchid posting, the resident moron crawls out from under his rock...…
And...instead of saying something constructive on the topic...posts like the troll he is......nothing changes.....
And...instead of saying something constructive on the topic...posts like the troll he is......nothing changes.....
To discover those who rule over you, first discover those who you cannot criticize...Voltaire
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
Its coming...the rest of the world versus islam....or is it here already...
- Redneck
- Posts: 6275
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:28 pm
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Where did I say that?Black Orchid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:02 pmShow me where we are being requested to send aircraft carriers to the Strait of Hormuz?Redneck wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:50 pmHow many aircraft carriers do we have BO ???
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cleve ... tent-navy/Author : Richard Menhinick had an extensive career in the Royal Australian Navy, including commands at sea, ashore and on operations. He has also worked in strategic analysis and policy formulation.
"The navy of today and tomorrow is the same size in a ship sense as it was in 1976 when I joined, with about a dozen destroyers and frigates. However, strategically we’re significantly less effective vis-à-vis the region. The minister’s introduction to the 2016 defence white paper states that it ‘sets out the most ambitious plan to regenerate the Royal Australian Navy since the Second World War’. That sounds impressive, but it’s essentially misleading—in essence, we’re doing ship replacement. The navy remains too small and it’s a self-defence force, with limited power projection or ability to conduct sea control at distance.
We should be talking to the Australian public about strategic truths in a language they understand, explaining to them the new reality. To have self-reliance and self-help in this era requires a much larger, more potent navy. Fixed-wing, strike-capable aircraft carriers are required to project maritime air power via the short take-off, vertical landing version of the joint strike fighter. And we need perhaps twice the number of destroyers and frigates, so that we can really carry out aggressive operations against numerically larger air, surface and submarine threats, to dominate, deter and if necessary defeat. The submarines we’re getting are potentially good, but that’s an isolated area of improvement."
- Black Orchid
- Posts: 25688
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:10 am
Re: Australia kisses US arse to secure oil
Well you brought up aircraft carriersRedneck wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:13 pmWhere did I say that?Black Orchid wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:02 pmShow me where we are being requested to send aircraft carriers to the Strait of Hormuz?Redneck wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:50 pmHow many aircraft carriers do we have BO ???
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cleve ... tent-navy/Author : Richard Menhinick had an extensive career in the Royal Australian Navy, including commands at sea, ashore and on operations. He has also worked in strategic analysis and policy formulation.
"The navy of today and tomorrow is the same size in a ship sense as it was in 1976 when I joined, with about a dozen destroyers and frigates. However, strategically we’re significantly less effective vis-à-vis the region. The minister’s introduction to the 2016 defence white paper states that it ‘sets out the most ambitious plan to regenerate the Royal Australian Navy since the Second World War’. That sounds impressive, but it’s essentially misleading—in essence, we’re doing ship replacement. The navy remains too small and it’s a self-defence force, with limited power projection or ability to conduct sea control at distance.
We should be talking to the Australian public about strategic truths in a language they understand, explaining to them the new reality. To have self-reliance and self-help in this era requires a much larger, more potent navy. Fixed-wing, strike-capable aircraft carriers are required to project maritime air power via the short take-off, vertical landing version of the joint strike fighter. And we need perhaps twice the number of destroyers and frigates, so that we can really carry out aggressive operations against numerically larger air, surface and submarine threats, to dominate, deter and if necessary defeat. The submarines we’re getting are potentially good, but that’s an isolated area of improvement."
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 93 guests