If the US were smarter they might commission Australia to police and control South East Asia and the South Pacific to get the job done effectively and allow them to save face and to be seen to be "minding their own business", with more operational hardware we could be a much greater force ! Your thoughts ?
2007-10-04 16:05:20 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Happy, you may hate Howard, but they have ordered and paid for the new US Strike Aircraft to replace the F111. Plus a billion $ airborne control platform.
2007-10-04 19:23:38 · update #1
Because the government in Canberra has never asked us for an aircraft carrier. A total of seven former U.S. Navy ships have been transferred to Australia for use by its Navy. Five destroyer types and two landing ships.
Given the little dust-ups that have been happening in some of the island nations in Australia's part of the world, I would think the Ministry of Defense would be concentrating on improvements in amphibious warfare capabilities. I doubt very much that an aircraft carrier would have been of much use in the recent deployment of Aussie Diggers to East Timor, Guadalcanal in the Solomons or even Bouganville in Papua New Guinea.
2007-10-04 18:02:20 · answer #1 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the eastern wanted to wreck the full U.S. Pacific fleet, battleships, businesses, and each little thing else. whilst they attacked the contains weren't in port, which means they prevented injury. Had they been, the eastern could have made the two the battleships and businesses their priority targets. It grew to become into partly because of the fact the businesses weren't there and the eastern did not comprehend the place they have been that they did not come returned and thoroughly end Pearl Habor off, like they could have executed. The businesses weren't interior selection to help Pearl Harbor however the Japanes did not comprehend that on the time.
2016-11-07 07:29:16 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Australian government are to tight to spend the money. they have a billion dollar surplus but they let air Air force fly around in F-111! for god sake they saw action in Vietnam. they only grounded the sea king helicopters when one fell out of the sky. I mean they are older than most cars on the road, its a joke.we struggle to police our own waters. basically to great a risk to lose and Indonesia would have kittens about it.
it would be nice for the government to give our brave man and women in our defense force the equipment they deserve. but they'll just do what they've always done, rely on the US to supply us with decent equipment once the sh.t has hits the fan.
p.s up the bulldogs!
yes they have the f-35 and when will they be flying over Australia exactly? the aircraft we use right now this minute are substandard to our enemies. that's the facts.
you don't like the bulldogs do you.
2007-10-04 19:03:14 · answer #3 · answered by Cooter 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not a case of whether or not Australia has the resources to equip themselves with aircraft carriers of their own.
It's a case of them just not wanting any. After the decommissioning of the HMAS Melbourne, Australia just didn't make any effort to find a replacement. It's all related to a shift in defence policies.
2007-10-04 16:10:33 · answer #4 · answered by Gotta have more explosions! 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Bless the Royal Australia Navy, but I really DOUBT they'd want to take on the expensive of operating a carrier... PLUS, they'd need MORE destroyers to provide protection to the carrier.
AND, you really can't operate with ONE carrier... you need three: one on deployment, one recovering from deployment, and one working UP for deployment.
I know you say "WE"... why don't you propose that to the Australian Government
2007-10-04 16:29:42 · answer #5 · answered by mariner31 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Uh, Wayne. Nobody wants a 40 yr old carrier. As to your policing point? Between the USN, RAN, RNZN, French, RN, & Phillipines what More policing is needed?
2007-10-04 16:22:41 · answer #6 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Have you ever been on the Kitty Hawk?? I have and believe me...it's nicknamed the "Sh*tty Kitty" for a reason.
And no country with any self-respect would want a 45 year old, diesel powered carrier.
2007-10-04 22:29:54 · answer #7 · answered by mAT2t 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you know what it costs to operate a carrier task force? Australia wouldn't want to pay to do it.
2007-10-04 16:10:48 · answer #8 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I doubt if the Aussies would want to pay the tab to keep a Carrier in service.
2007-10-04 16:13:33 · answer #9 · answered by The Voice of Reason 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe Australia doesnt want the job or spend the money???
2007-10-04 16:39:56 · answer #10 · answered by Bob D 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋