Australia must consider bringing back conscription as ‘all-out war’ with Russia looms

[Buckshot Bear]

Australia must consider bringing back conscription as ‘all-out war’ with Russia looms

 

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/australia-must-consider-bringing-back-conscription-as-allout-war-with-russia-looms-expert-says/news-story/b1ced960b821027163b05b15ad47e5e6

 

There must be things behind the scenes happening for even hinting at bringing back subscription, seems the world is a powder keg.

 

I'm sure that the U.S is going to have to hit Iran hard after the deaths yesterday of U.S serviceman.

 

The fact the Australia is getting Nuclear subs from the U.S (Australian Navy personal are already in the U.S training on nuke subs) and is just the third nation after the U.S & U.K to have secured a stockpile of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles from the U.S, our increasing number of RAAF F-35a fighters and the increasing number U.S bases in North Australia.......the think tanks must be considering that something is imminent. 

[Pat Riot]

Let’s hope not. 

[Buckshot Bear]

Just now, Pat Riot said:

Let’s hope not. 

 

We all hope so Pat, but Xi is itching for Taiwan, the Muslim World is itching to hurt the Big Satan.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't some fully loaded B1 lancers refueling now for a flight over Iran. 

[Eyesa Horg]

And who knows what our sniffy is going to do with Iran. 

[Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728]

I hope Bear that the folks in charge of Australia's defense from foreign aggression/invasion are smarter than the ones we have in the US right now.

[Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474]

I'm afraid of Canada's current unpreparedness.

[JD Lud]

Might make sense to order some ammo tonight if light….good point that the retaliation and other things going on might further elevate pricing 

[Buckshot Bear]

32 minutes ago, Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728 said:

I hope Bear that the folks in charge of Australia's defense from foreign aggression/invasion are smarter than the ones we have in the US right now.

 

One never knows though until it hits the fan. Australia's governments (same as the U.S & U.K) knew of Japan's expansionist dreams right through the 1930's there's a ton of documents, yet they were all so ill prepared.

[Buckshot Bear]

Just to add even just mentioning Conscription is a huge thing as we currently have a Labour govt elected.

 

This (Liberal Party) is confusing to many Americans but our two main parties are -

 

Liberal Party = Right Wing

 

Labour Party = Left Woke Wing

[Subdeacon Joe]

Could defuse it all by saying that only women will be drafted until the percentage in the military matches the percentage in the general population.  

 

That should get the diplomats off their butts.

[watab kid]

i do hope that subscriptions is not in the cards for you - i think reinstitution of a draft here would upset things beyond anything the admin could ever imagine , but then there are a lot of things this admin is doing that are upsetting things beyond what they are aware of , we shall see , 

[Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L]

3 hours ago, Eyesa Horg said:

And who knows what our sniffy is going to do with Iran. 

 

I am sure it will be very severe..

 

He will probably send them to bed without dessert!

 

And dessert was ice cream!

[Buckshot Bear]

Sadly I think the Free World is walking like in a trance into Gulf War III.

[Chantry]

13 hours ago, Buckshot Bear said:

 

One never knows though until it hits the fan. Australia's governments (same as the U.S & U.K) knew of Japan's expansionist dreams right through the 1930's there's a ton of documents, yet they were all so ill prepared.

 

No country was ready for WWII and everyone drastically underestimated the Japanese

[Seldom Seen #16162]

Australia is a Commonwealth Country of England so I imagine they are required to provide military assistance in the event of war with Russia which is now being predicted in the five years.

 

So where is Waldo in our government?

[bgavin]

My immediate concern is more about the tens of millions of illegals currently in America.
The statistics show vast numbers of single, military age men of all nationalities coming across the border.

[Texas Joker]

[Chantry]

21 hours ago, Buckshot Bear said:

Australia must consider bringing back conscription as ‘all-out war’ with Russia looms

 

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/australia-must-consider-bringing-back-conscription-as-allout-war-with-russia-looms-expert-says/news-story/b1ced960b821027163b05b15ad47e5e6

 

There must be things behind the scenes happening for even hinting at bringing back subscription, seems the world is a powder keg.

 

I'm sure that the U.S is going to have to hit Iran hard after the deaths yesterday of U.S serviceman.

 

The fact the Australia is getting Nuclear subs from the U.S (Australian Navy personal are already in the U.S training on nuke subs) and is just the third nation after the U.S & U.K to have secured a stockpile of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles from the U.S, our increasing number of RAAF F-35a fighters and the increasing number U.S bases in North Australia.......the think tanks must be considering that something is imminent. 

 

While I won't disagree that Australia, like many Western countries, has neglected its military, I don't think Russia is Australia's biggest concern.   Australia needs to be a lot more concerned about China and possibly its relations with South Korea and Japan.

 

As an aside, I think almost everyone is underestimating the Japanese military AGAIN.  

[Buckshot Bear]

6 minutes ago, Chantry said:

 

While I won't disagree that Australia, like many Western countries, has neglected its military, I don't think Russia is Australia's biggest concern.   Australia needs to be a lot more concerned about China and possibly its relations with South Korea and Japan.

 

As an aside, I think almost everyone is underestimating the Japanese military AGAIN.  

 

Do you think the Japanese could ever be a threat? 

[Chantry]

1 hour ago, Buckshot Bear said:

 

Do you think the Japanese could ever be a threat? 

 

No and yes. 

 

No, I don't see Japan becoming expansionist again like it was in WWII

 

Yes, because their front line equipment is as good or better than anyone else in the  world, including the U.S.  Within 500-1000 miles they can probably defeat any navy or air force.  About the only thing Japan doesn't have is the ability project power outside of the 500-1000 mile limit I mentioned above.  

 

I believe that buried deep down there is still a warrior mindset and same "raw material" (for lack of a better description) that made Japan's military so formidable in the past.

 

India is another country in your part of the world to keep an eye on.  Like Japan they are unlikely to become expansionist.  Their equipment and right now isn't up to US or Japanese standards, but they do have the ability to project power farther than the Japanese.

Edited January 29 by Chantry

[watab kid]

4 hours ago, Chantry said:

 

No and yes. 

 

No, I don't see Japan becoming expansionist again like it was in WWII

 

Yes, because their front line equipment is as good or better than anyone else in the  world, including the U.S.  Within 500-1000 miles they can probably defeat any navy or air force.  About the only thing Japan doesn't have is the ability project power outside of the 500-1000 mile limit I mentioned above.  

 

I believe that buried deep down there is still a warrior mindset and same "raw material" (for lack of a better description) that made Japan's military so formidable in the past.

 

India is another country in your part of the world to keep an eye on.  Like Japan they are unlikely to become expansionist.  Their equipment and right now isn't up to US or Japanese standards, but they do have the ability to project power farther than the Japanese.

  

 

i tend to agree with all he said , i suspect that we need india as an allie if the SHTF , we needed them last go round , japan is an allie i feel confident in at this point , i have some misgivings of others but then we shall see , 

 

right now we need to eliminate the threats to shipping and we need to stop the constant attacks on us in the mideast , BUT MORE THAN THAT we need to stop the invasion of our country we need our boarders controlled 

 

BTW , we wont need a draft to do the latter - i think the population is getting to the point of doing it ourselves if our government wont do it as the constitution requires it to , 

Edited January 30 by watab kid

[Buckshot Bear]

6 hours ago, Chantry said:

 

No and yes. 

 

No, I don't see Japan becoming expansionist again like it was in WWII

 

Yes, because their front line equipment is as good or better than anyone else in the  world, including the U.S.  Within 500-1000 miles they can probably defeat any navy or air force.  About the only thing Japan doesn't have is the ability project power outside of the 500-1000 mile limit I mentioned above.  

 

I believe that buried deep down there is still a warrior mindset and same "raw material" (for lack of a better description) that made Japan's military so formidable in the past.

 

India is another country in your part of the world to keep an eye on.  Like Japan they are unlikely to become expansionist.  Their equipment and right now isn't up to US or Japanese standards, but they do have the ability to project power farther than the Japanese.

 

 

Chantry do you think that Japan could defend against a full Chinese onslaught? 

 

The world really is a powder keg isn't it, but I suppose it has been for a long time. 

[Chantry]

On 1/29/2024 at 11:39 PM, Buckshot Bear said:

 

 

Chantry do you think that Japan could defend against a full Chinese onslaught? 

 

The world really is a powder keg isn't it, but I suppose it has been for a long time. 

 

Not sure, but it would be Japan and US in that fight.  I don't think China is capable of a successful amphibious assault against Japan*.   It would  very likely be an air/sea conflict and while the US and Japan would get hurt, Chinese losses are going to be very high.  The big question is how good is Chinese training and planning?

 

Historically China really hasn't done well in military conflicts with other countries.  Like most Communist countries it tends to rely on mass attacks rather than maneuver warfare, a method that didn't work very well during WWII or Korea.  Given the advances in military technology mass attacks are mostly a good way to lose a lot a of soldiers in a short period of time.

 

The two biggest questions: How good Chinese training and planning; do the US & Japan have enough ammo (missiles, artillery shells, etc) stockpiled?

 

Playing around with Google Earth it is about 100 miles from China to Taiwan at its closest point.  Shanghai to Nagasaki is 470 miles, which at 20 knots is about a 21 hour trip, under air and sea attack the whole way.  Just how good is China's anti-submarine warfare?  On paper and in photos, Chinese equipment looks good, but how well does it actually perform and how good are their troops and leadership?

 

*There is some question out on some of the military related sites as whether China can even manage a successful amphibious assault against Taiwan.

 

"The world really is a powder keg isn't it, but I suppose it has been for a long time."  It's the worst I can remember in a long time. I wonder sometimes why humans feel the need have major wars on a regular basis.

 

 

 

Edited January 31 by Chantry
I need to proof read before hitting the Save/Submit button

[Cypress Sun]

 

The Chinese government has proven time and time again that they do not care how many of their citizens get killed or die from other means in pursuit of their goals. All one has to do is look at the recent testing of a biological weapon on their own people that ended up getting out of hand...Covid 19.

[Raylan]

Some possible insights into how and why:

 

https://tuckercarlson.com/the-tucker-carlson-encounter-russell-brand/

[watab kid]

.".... "The world really is a powder keg isn't it, but I suppose it has been for a long time."  It's the worst I can remember in a long time. I wonder sometimes why humans feel the need have major wars on a regular basis...." 

 

cant agree with you more , this war scenario never pays back to anyone but , you cant continue to turn the other cheek or you will get more than slapped in the face in this world we live in , it seems no-one is content these days to stay within their own boarders and/or relocate legally , sorry if its tuff - life is tuff , national politics is even worse 

[Marshal Dan Troop 70448]

There was a time when the USA was considered strong and any aggression would lead to payback immediately.

There was a time we had strong leaders were we were tested and war was diverted, because of strong leadership. Remember Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis? Today we have been antagonized, our bases overseas have seen attacks by missiles and drones hundreds of times and mostly repelled. 

Decade ago we had a SOS who was running an ad preparing to be our next leader with the ad who you gonna call at 3AM when a crisis occurs, yet we lost an Embassy, Ambassador, and the men who were there to protect same. Help close by were ordered to stand down and no help sent and rather then put blame were it belonged and action taken, the blame was put on a video on YouTube that started it all.

Believe me, I know friends, and have relatives overseas in several countries. The word there is that we are weak and have weak leaders who have investments overseas which are more important then starting a war and losing their investments.

[Wild Eagle]

A fair amount of it is just America fear mongering.  It's an election year.  If we can scare a lot of people we can start spending a lot of money building military arms.  This pumps money (debt) into the economy which makes things look rosey at least for a little while.  China is unlikely to attack us, we're their major customer, and will be for quite some time.  Mostly America is afraid that China's economy will surpass ours.  It probably will since we don't seem to want to compete anymore.  DEI (DIE) seems to be about not competing.  Also, schools teach that competition is bad because you may not win.  Russia won't attack the US, they still remember WWII and the damage done to their country.  And atomic bombs being thrown around would be bad for everyone.  I'm not too sure that America wouldn't attack Russia though.  American politics is more emotional than cerebral.  And Russia has no reason to attack Europe.  Europe has little or nothing that Russia needs.  However, I think that the real reason Europe antagonized Russia with Ukraine was they thought that if Ukraine was given enough money and weapons they could take over Russia. That would give them all of Russia's natural resources, and about 500 miles of border with China that they could line with rocket launchers.  That would go a long way to help contain China, without having to compete with them.  At some point NATO needs to either go away or shift from a military order to one of economic partnerships focused on helping to improve the world rather than dominating it.  Right now it seems that either you are a member of NATO, aligned almost perfectly with NATO, or an enemy of NATO.  Not much room for Diversity Equity or Inclusion.  It's a big world out there, with a lot of people with different wants, needs, and ideas.  One size does not fit all, and it doesn't have to be my way or the highway.  

[Chantry]

9 hours ago, Wild Eagle said:

A fair amount of it is just America fear mongering.  It's an election year.  If we can scare a lot of people we can start spending a lot of money building military arms.  This pumps money (debt) into the economy which makes things look rosey at least for a little while.  China is unlikely to attack us, we're their major customer, and will be for quite some time.  Mostly America is afraid that China's economy will surpass ours.  It probably will since we don't seem to want to compete anymore.  DEI (DIE) seems to be about not competing.  Also, schools teach that competition is bad because you may not win.  Russia won't attack the US, they still remember WWII and the damage done to their country.  And atomic bombs being thrown around would be bad for everyone.  I'm not too sure that America wouldn't attack Russia though.  American politics is more emotional than cerebral.  And Russia has no reason to attack Europe.  Europe has little or nothing that Russia needs.  However, I think that the real reason Europe antagonized Russia with Ukraine was they thought that if Ukraine was given enough money and weapons they could take over Russia. That would give them all of Russia's natural resources, and about 500 miles of border with China that they could line with rocket launchers.  That would go a long way to help contain China, without having to compete with them.  At some point NATO needs to either go away or shift from a military order to one of economic partnerships focused on helping to improve the world rather than dominating it.  Right now it seems that either you are a member of NATO, aligned almost perfectly with NATO, or an enemy of NATO.  Not much room for Diversity Equity or Inclusion.  It's a big world out there, with a lot of people with different wants, needs, and ideas.  One size does not fit all, and it doesn't have to be my way or the highway.  

 

1. I don't use American politicians or American MSM for sources, so I disagree it is just fear mongering

2. From a western viewpoint it IS common sense that the China won't attack us because we are their biggest customer.  Only the Chinese aren't westerners and don't share the same viewpoints as westerners.  That same mistake was made in WWII trying to use western views to figure out the Japanese.

3. Russian can't attack the US without using nukes, I don't pretend to understand Putin, but I'm not willing to get into a direct pissing contest with Russia because I think they might just use nukes if they feel they have nothing left to lose.

[Chuck Steak]

I would say we should never conflate incompetence with indifference.

 

The current administration could have easily managed the current state of affairs better if they possessed the desire.

but they don't

[Chantry]

7 hours ago, Chuck Steak said:

I would say we should never conflate incompetence with indifference.

 

The current administration could have easily managed the current state of affairs better if they possessed the desire.

but they don't

 

No fan of the current administration, but we started down this path long before the Vacant One took office

[watab kid]

14 hours ago, Chuck Steak said:

I would say we should never conflate incompetence with indifference.

 

The current administration could have easily managed the current state of affairs better if they possessed the desire.

but they don't

you are correct - there is no desire at this point , seems everyone wants status quo , no argument on my part as to the desire for peace and tranquility , its what all of us want that are sane , itsa the insane among us we need to delete , just sayin , if we deleted the insane among us that want to kill us we might be safer , but the current trend is to arrest and release , that only increases the probability of perpetuating the problem , 

 

i never assume a recent release from incrassation will reoffend but statistics show it if you release with no penalty its near inevitable , XXX do we expect ?