It seems that everyone is concerned about the U.S. being here and a place called North Korea. But I want to open it up on Indonesia.

Let's talk INDONESIA and its THREAT TO AUSTRALIA.

I'll kick it off with the following taken from an online article.

On August 30 it will be a decade since the people of East Timor defied the genocidal occupiers of their country to take part in a United Nations referendum, voting for their freedom and independence. A “scorched earth” campaign by the Indonesian dictatorship followed, adding to a toll of carnage that had begun 24 years earlier when Indonesia invaded tiny East Timor with the secret support of Australia, Britain and the United States. According to a committee of the Australian parliament, “at least 200,000” died under the occupation, a third of the population.

Filming undercover in 1993, I found crosses almost everywhere: great black crosses etched against the sky, crosses on peaks, crosses in tiers on the hillsides, crosses beside the road. They littered the earth and crowded the eye. A holocaust happened in East Timor, telling us more about rapacious Western power, its propaganda and true aims, than even current colonial adventures.

The historical record is unambiguous that the US, Britain and Australia conspired to accept such a scale of bloodshed as the price of securing South-East Asia’s “greatest prize” with its “hoard of natural resources”. Philip Liechty, the senior CIA operations officer in Jakarta at the time of the invasion, told me, “I saw the intelligence. There were people being herded into school buildings by Indonesian soldiers and the buildings set on fire. The place was a free fire zone ... We sent them everything that you need to fight a major war against somebody who doesn’t have any guns. None of that got out … [The Indonesian dictator] Suharto was given the green light to do what he did.”

Britain supplied Suharto with machine guns and Hawk fighter-bombers which, regardless of fake “assurances”, were used against defenceless East Timorese villages. The critical role was played by Australia. This was Australia’s region. During World War II, the people of East Timor had fought heroically to stop a Japanese invasion of Australia. Their betrayal was spelt out in a series of leaked cables sent by the Australian ambassador in Jakarta, Richard Woolcott, prior to and during the Indonesian invasion in 1975. Echoing Henry Kissinger, he urged “a pragmatic rather than a principled stand”, reminding his government that it would “more readily” exploit the oil and gas wealth beneath the Timor Sea with Indonesia than with its rightful owners, the East Timorese. “What Indonesia now looks to from Australia …,” he wrote as Suharto’s special forces slaughtered their way across East Timor, “is some understanding of their attitude and possible action to assist public understanding in Australia”.

Two months earlier, Indonesian troops had murdered five newsmen from Australian TV near the East Timorese town of Balibo. On the day the capital, Dili, was seized, they shot dead a sixth journalist, Roger East, throwing his body into the sea. Australian intelligence had known 12 hours in advance that the journalists in Balibo faced imminent death, and the government did nothing. Intercepted at the spy base, Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) near Darwin, which supplies US and British intelligence, the warning was suppressed so that it would not expose western governments’ part in the conspiracy to invade and the official lie that the journalists had been killed in “crossfire”.

The secretary of the Australian Defence Department, Arthur Tange, a notorious cold warrior, demanded that the government not even inform the journalists’ families of their murders. No minister protested to the Indonesians. This criminal connivance is documented in Death in Balibo, Lies in Canberra, by Desmond Ball, a renowned intelligence specialist, and Hamish McDonald.

The Australian government’s complicity in the journalists’ murder and, above all, in a bloodbath greater proportionally than that perpetrated by Pol Pot in Cambodia has been cut almost entirely from a major new film, Balibo, which has begun its international release in Australia.

Claiming to be a “true story”, it is a travesty of omissions. In eight of 16 drafts of his screenplay, David Williamson, the distinguished Australian playwright, graphically depicted the chain of true events that began with the original radio intercepts by Australian intelligence and went all the way to prime minister Gough Whitlam, who believed East Timor should be “integrated” into Indonesia. This is reduced in the film to a fleeting image of Whitlam and Suharto in a newspaper wrapped around fish and chips.

Williamson’s original script described the effect of the cover up on the families of the murdered journalists and their anger and frustration at being denied information and despair at Canberra’s scandalous decision to have the journalists’ ashes buried in Jakarta with ambassador Woolcott, the arch apologist, reading the oration. What the government feared if the ashes came home was public outrage directed at the West’s client in Jakarta. All this was cut.


Indonesia has and continues to be the biggest threat to our safety - Red Baron

Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th.

Compare the two militaries here:

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp

Our relationship with Indonesia has always been strained, but both governments continue to give them considerable aid, through fear I suppose, keep your enemies close ra ra ra.

The closest we came to a friendly relationship was under Keating.

I would be far more worried about Indonesia than any middle eastern country. Although, it seems we are the only nation in this region that are talking up enemies.

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 5:11pm:

Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp

Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia.

[Since 1642, military expeditions led by the Portuguese Francisco Fernandes took place. The aim of this expedition was to weaken the power of the Timor kings. In places where Portuguese rule was asserted, it tended to be brutal and exploitative. ]
---------
The territory had been Indonesian and the Indonesian troops weren't chasing butterflies, they were being shot at for 20 years. The massacres by Indon. were an outrage, but Timor was no innocent victim and the napalm bombs were what US was dropping on villages in Vietnam when Oz was its ally.

MOTR wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 5:43pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia.

They could smash us in a ground invasion tho, wouldnt be too hard for them to take a northern town like Darwin.

Unless the boofheads sort things out, the west Papua rebels will one day be pushed to PNG border. Then when Indonesia bombs them inside PNG, good old Oz will back PNG.

MOTR wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 5:43pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia.

You're not really being objective are you? ;D

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 6:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:43pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia. They could smash us in a ground invasion tho, wouldnt be too hard for them to take a northern town like Darwin.

I don't believe so. Indonesia simply doesn't have the specialized military forces required to launch such an invasion force. Their troop numbers mean nothing if they can't land or supply them.

If Indonesia and Australia went to war the US would be a willing audience. Forget America our future salvation lays with making friends in our region. Playing host to the declining Imperium aint doing it for us.
What we ought to be doing is cosying up to India.

The biggest threat to Australia is the US/Israeli axis.

The CIA has already overthrown the democratically elected Whitlam Government.

We have been pushed into spending our blood and treasure on useless Zionist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Our political parties are thoroughly infiltrated by US agents.

How much more interference will we tolerate?


Quote:

Pro-Zionist-led Coup ousts Australian PM Rudd About 35 years ago a CIA-influenced coup dismissed the reformist Australian Labor Party Whitlam Government. 6 year ago the US vetoed Labor Opposition leader Mark Latham’s bid for office. On 24 June 2010 a pro-Zionist led coup sacked an insufficiently pro-Zionist Labor PM Kevin Rudd. This was a dramatic change of leadership in Australia. Australia’s PM Kevin Rudd, who only about 30 months ago led Labor to a famous landslide victory after 11 years in the political wilderness, was abruptly removed from power in a ruthless process taking less than 1 day. According to The Age newspaper, Rudd was only told at about 7 pm on the evening of Wednesday 23 June and was kicked out by 9.30 am on Thursday 24 June. The sacking of Labor Hero Kevin Rudd  was significantly due to aggravation of the powerful Mining Industry, the subsequent highly successful Mining Industry advertising campaign and a precipitous loss of support for Labor. The excuse offered by Rudd’s post-coup  replacement, PM Julia Gillard, Rudd’s former Deputy PM, was that Labor “had lost its way” under Rudd.  But, of course essentially all of the Labor Parliamentary Caucus were complicit in the refugee, war, climate change  and taxation decisions of the Rudd Labor Government - they all had "lost their way". However the major Gillard Labor conspirators were all pro-Zionists as is the new pro-war and pro-Zionist PM Gillard.  Some of the key plotters had visited Israel on trips funded by Australian pro-Zionist organizations.  2 weeks before his demise the evidently insufficiently pro-Zionist PM Rudd attempted (unsuccessfully) to mend fences with the Zionist Lobby over gross Israeli violations of Australian border protection  and sovereignty by forging Australian passports and Israeli terrorism against Australians in International waters (piracy, kidnapping, false imprisonment, theft). Pro-Zionist Rudd’s responses were timid  - he called the piracy on the Gaza Aid Flotilla “deplorable” and asked Israel to conduct an investigation. He eventually followed the UK example and demanded the ousting of 1 Israeli diplomat over the Israeli forging of Australian passports for terrorism purposes. The Australian Zionists were furious at even these obsequious responses and were evidently not mollified by further Rudd obsequiousness. Many decent Labor supporters were devastated by this betrayal of a major Labor figure (indeed a “Labor hero” popularly called Kevin 07) in what has been described as a coup, a bloodless coup, a putsch, and a political assassination.  Julia Gillard has become Australia’s “first female PM”. This is what decent, humane and pro-human rights Labor MP Julia Irwin had to say: “Not since Brutus stabbed Julius Caesar have we seen such an act of betrayal. What happens if she [Ms Gillard] wins the [forthcoming, 2010] election and the polls go down? Will they do the same to her? With this standard of loyalty, federal Labor could take the same path as NSW [state] Labor [in deep electoral trouble]. I felt the party owed him that; he took us to victory. He led us out of the wilderness. He was voted in by the people, and if the people weren't happy with his leadership or with Labor, they could have voted us out. But the knife has been put in his back." Pro-coal, pro-US, pro-Zionist, pro-war  Rudd’s problems began when he put off his absurd and counterproductive Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) until 2013, alienating Labor voters who had elected him to “tackle climate change”. The ETS in actuality was so atrocious and pro-polluter that the pro-environment Greens rejected it in the Senate. However people concerned about global warming were appalled by this Labor decision to in effect not do anything about man-made climate change for a total of 5 years. Other issues surfaced to diminish his electoral support: thousands of refugees  trying to reach Australia by boat; a Government roof insulation disaster involving several deaths, over 100 house fires and hundreds of thousands of homes put at risk; cost over-runs in a huge boost to school infrastructure; and a huge increase in Government debt associated with poorly judged responses to the Global Financial Crisis GFC). However a deadly problem was the decision to apply a 40% Super-Profit Tax on Australia’s burgeoning Mining Industry. This resulted in a huge Mining Industry media campaign which the Government attempted to counter with its own  $38 million campaign that controversially involved taxpayer money. Indeed one of PM Gillard’s first actions as PM was to announce cessation of the taxpayer-funded Government advertising campaign (about $10 million has been spent so far) with the expectation that the Mining Industry would do likewise (they have, for the moment). A possibly key part of this story that is not being told in the generally pro-Zionist Australian Mainstream media is that many of the main conspirators and Gillard supporters shared Ms Gillard’s pro-Zionist views, had similarly visited Israel or had otherwise similarly addressed or attended pro-Zionist groups or gatherings. There is, of course, no evidence that the Israelis demanded Rudd’s head (which is not to say that they didn’t) but it is quite clear that this was a pro-Zionist-led coup against a  vulnerable Australian PM that the Zionists clearly felt was not sufficiently pro-Zionist. The actual major reason for the coup was declining electoral support for Rudd and a major reason for that in turn was a highly successful media blitz by the Mining Lobby over a proposed huge new tax on mining. This was a pro-Zionist-led coup that sacked pro-Zionist Rudd because his popularity had declined according to the media polls. Kevin Rudd was criticized by Australian Zionists for his concerns (albeit very timidly expressed concerns) over routine Israeli forging of Australian passports for terrorist purposes (an Israeli diplomat was eventually asked to leave) and over the Israeli terrorist attack on the Gaza Aid Flotilla that involved 3 Israeli Australians as perpetrators and 5 Australians as victims of this violent, criminal, Israeli terrorist  piracy in International waters (Rudd merely said that the incident was “deplorable”). Indeed, worried by increasing hostility to his Government from Australian Zionists and cessation of Zionist electoral funding, Rudd held a fence-mending dinner for leading Zionist lobbyists and MPs at The Lodge (the PM’s official Canberra residence) several weeks ago. A mainstream media  account of this last ditch attempt by Rudd to shore up Zionist support has been provided  by Peter Hartcher in the Sydney Morning Herald  in an article entitled “What am I , chopped liver? How Rudd dived into schmooze mode”(22 June 2010): “The Jewish community was deeply disturbed by the abrupt change in the government's Israel policy. And Rudd's treatment of the local Jewish fraternity, too. He had always been strongly pro-Israel. A former chairman of the World Jewish Congress Isi Leibler last year described him as "a Christian Zionist - he understands and has some sympathy for us”… [Rudd said] it was time for a "new momentum" in Australia's relationship with Israel. He said Australia would send Trade Minister Simon Crean to Israel, and this would doubtless lead to a reciprocal visit and a new energy. He promised new funding for the secure schools program, which provides security to Jewish schools, now the first $20 million was spent. The Jewish leaders left the Lodge shaken by the events of the last months but largely satisfied with Rudd's assurances and his promises. Which is just as well, because the food was reportedly terrible. The crisis over, fund-raising events for Labor are expected to resume.” Hartcher was evidently too optimistic. The Australian Jewish News put it thus: “Prime Minster Kevin Rudd attempted to rebuild bridges with the Jewish community last Thursday in the wake of the Government’s comments regarding the flotilla crisis and the expulsion of an Israeli diplomat over the passport affair… “There was no specific singling out of Israel for condemnation, just a condemnation of violence” …Rudd also called for a greater flow of humanitarian aid into the Hamas-controlled zone, but at no time spoke in favour of the removal of the blockade, noting that it was vital Israel prevented arms shipments into Gaza. On the matter of passport forgeries and whether or not the Australian Government was right in its decision to expel an Israeli diplomat …Rudd and some of the other dinner guests had “a difference of opinion there”” (see Naomi Levin, “Rudd reaches out to leaders”, Australian Jewish News, 10 June 2010). In the event, pro-Zionist Kevin Rudd was clearly found to be insufficiently pro-Zionist. Several weeks later he was ignominiously removed from power. Pro-war, pro-coal, pro-gas, pro-Zionist, pro-Israel Julia Gillard’s elevation was very warmly welcomed by major Zionist organizations. Zionist displeasure at Rudd’s feeble attempts to protest Israeli actions violating Australian sovereignty may have represented a relatively minor issue in comparison with Rudd’s backflip on climate change action, his aggravation of the immensely powerful Mining Industry and his consequent slide in the polls. However history will show that the main anti-Rudd conspirators came from the powerful pro-Zionist faction of the Parliamentary Labor Party. Thus as Deputy PM Julia Gillard had led a big delegation to Israel in 2009 s... http://mwcnews.net/focus/politics/3488-pro-zionist-led-coup.html

Grey wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

If Indonesia and Australia went to war the US would be a willing audience. Forget America our future salvation lays with making friends in our region. Playing host to the declining Imperium aint doing it for us. What we ought to be doing is cosying up to India.

I disagree. Not sure what time scale you're working from, but the US will remain the dominant super power for some time yet. There is no way the US would not provide support.

MOTR wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 7:21pm:

Grey wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 7:10pm: If Indonesia and Australia went to war the US would be a willing audience. Forget America our future salvation lays with making friends in our region. Playing host to the declining Imperium aint doing it for us. What we ought to be doing is cosying up to India. I disagree. Not sure what time scale you're working from, but the US will remain the dominant super power for some time yet. There is no way the US would not provide support.

Like the way it supported Britain over the Falklands? All they had to do was show solidarity and there never would've been a Falklands war.

The US will act in its own interest. That's the only way it acts. A war between Indonesia and Australia would severly weaken Indonesia and Australia. All to the good as far as the US is concerned. They'd like our resources cheap and they don't like our health care system and they don't like the competition our farmers give them. They might, at best, offer to look after us in the aftermath, ie take us over.

I believe you're wrong on this one, Grey. Even if you were right where is the incentive for the Indonesians. They would weaken themselves internally and still not gain access to our resources. I just can't see it.

Grey wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 12:46am:

MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 7:21pm: Grey wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 7:10pm: If Indonesia and Australia went to war the US would be a willing audience. Forget America our future salvation lays with making friends in our region. Playing host to the declining Imperium aint doing it for us. What we ought to be doing is cosying up to India. I disagree. Not sure what time scale you're working from, but the US will remain the dominant super power for some time yet. There is no way the US would not provide support. Like the way it supported Britain over the Falklands? All they had to do was show solidarity and there never would've been a Falklands war. The US will act in its own interest. That's the only way it acts. A war between Indonesia and Australia would severly weaken Indonesia and Australia. All to the good as far as the US is concerned. They'd like our resources cheap and they don't like our health care system and they don't like the competition our farmers give them. They might, at best, offer to look after us in the aftermath, ie take us over.

As for the Falklands, the US had treaty obligations to both sides, with the North Atlantic Treaty referring specifically to Europe. Argentina believed it has bought US neutrality by training Contras and supporting the Reagan Administration's dirty excursion into Central America. Perhaps they had, for while Reagan provided plenty of covert support to Britain it maintained an external stance of neutrality.

The US was not legally obliged to come Britain's support. Besides, Thatcher specifically knocked back a US peace plan that did not include "some retribution."

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 6:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:43pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia. They could smash us in a ground invasion tho, wouldnt be too hard for them to take a northern town like Darwin.

If indonesia was stupid enough to launch an invasion of Aus, it would be nothing more than providing us with a 'Target Rich' environment for our air force and navy.

They may have the numbers but we have the fire power and the advantage of a defence posture.

The Oz ships are anti-aircraft with 1 5-inch gun. The 24 Hornets carry 2 bombs. oye oye

chimera wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 9:03am:

The Oz ships are anti-aircraft with 1 5-inch gun. The 24 Hornets carry 2 bombs. oye oye

It's not like I demand you have served in one of the three services before you make a comment about the ADF and its capabilities, but I do like it if you can use google / wiki and have the comprehension and reasoning skill of someone who has passed at least Grade 8.


If you feel compelled to make moronic statements, try and utilise one of the many moronic threads available to you or even start a few yourself.

5 inch. 2 bombs.
I've found that when the word "moron" is used the person knows he is wrong.

chimera wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 10:20am:

5 inch. 2 bombs. I've found that when the word "moron" is used the person knows he is wrong.

Nah, I used it to describe your contribution, correctly.

Im pretty sure I know a great deal more about RAAF weapons systems than yourself, so i doubt im wrong.

The F18 carrys a greater range of weapons than 2 bombs, but feel free to express your self assured ignorance if you wish.

BigOl64 wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 7:13am:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 6:37pm: MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:43pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia. They could smash us in a ground invasion tho, wouldnt be too hard for them to take a northern town like Darwin. If indonesia was stupid enough to launch an invasion of Aus, it would be nothing more than providing us with a 'Target Rich' environment for our air force and navy. They may have the numbers but we have the fire power and the advantage of a defence posture.

RRemember that they also have the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Taiwan, China, India, Japan.. Plus a myriad of other countries.
Indonesia and the Philippines have huge numbers and military equipment alone.

If they were quick they could remove the defence posture and make the playing field more even.

It really depends what our response it, either fight with men or bomb our towns... If it is the first it would be a fairly even fight.

Also remember that if they were to attack it would be when we are committed to a war somewhere overseas having less troops and equipment in the country.


The first rule of combat is never underestimate your enemy.

There is not a single doubt in my mind that if Indonesia were to attack Australia./.The United States of America would be there big time.

Have no doubt about that, it would happen. We have been a great friend to the United States and THEY WOULD NOT let us down.

Not like Churchill did in the Second World War; when he didn't want Curtin to bring our 8th Division home from Egypt to defend Australia against the Japanese.

(Curtin brought them home anyway and they relieved those brave 20 year old kids on the Kokoda Track)

Don't let the scaremongers on this site worry you about The U.S.A.'s willingness to fight for us, they have in the past and they will now. The U.S. Marine presence in Darwin is great, it certainly sends out a signal to those barbarians in Indonesia.

MOTR wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 6:19am:

I believe you're wrong on this one, Grey. Even if you were right where is the incentive for the Indonesians. They would weaken themselves internally and still not gain access to our resources. I just can't see it.

which is precisely why we are not at war with Indonesia. For now!

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:15am:

There is not a single doubt in my mind that if Indonesia were to attack Australia./.The United States of America would be there big time. Have no doubt about that, it would happen. We have been a great friend to the United States and THEY WOULD NOT let us down. Not like Churchill did in the Second World War; when he didn't want Curtin to bring our 8th Division home from Egypt to defend Australia against the Japanese. (Curtin brought them home anyway and they relieved those brave 20 year old kids on the Kokoda Track) Don't let the scaremongers on this site worry you about The U.S.A.'s willingness to fight for us, they have in the past and they will now. The U.S. Marine presence in Darwin is great, it certainly sends out a signal to those barbarians in Indonesia.

You need to think about the scenario,
If there was nothing else going on in the world then yes they would help us.
But Indonesia and other similar nations would not invade Australia unless a theoretical WW3 was happening or something of equal disruption.
In this case the USA would have other things to worry about.
Their survival would come above ours and they would already be committed to war in Africa, Europe, the Middle East and possibly on their home front.

The US have shown in the past they don’t care about us and we are effectively just pawns for them in a time of war.

Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat.

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:30am:

Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat.

They would also probably not invade unless we had a lot of our troops and equipment overseas.

It depends on tactic, if it was a ground battle it would be fairly even.

Quote:

The F18 carrys a greater range of weapons than 2 bombs, but feel free to express your self assured ignorance if you wish.

Of course, but the bombs are what will damage Indonesia (rather than damage to Indonesian aircraft).
5 inch. 2 bombs.

MOTR wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 6:43am:

Grey wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 12:46am: MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 7:21pm: Grey wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 7:10pm: If Indonesia and Australia went to war the US would be a willing audience. Forget America our future salvation lays with making friends in our region. Playing host to the declining Imperium aint doing it for us. What we ought to be doing is cosying up to India. I disagree. Not sure what time scale you're working from, but the US will remain the dominant super power for some time yet. There is no way the US would not provide support. Like the way it supported Britain over the Falklands? All they had to do was show solidarity and there never would've been a Falklands war. The US will act in its own interest. That's the only way it acts. A war between Indonesia and Australia would severly weaken Indonesia and Australia. All to the good as far as the US is concerned. They'd like our resources cheap and they don't like our health care system and they don't like the competition our farmers give them. They might, at best, offer to look after us in the aftermath, ie take us over. As for the Falklands, the US had treaty obligations to both sides, with the North Atlantic Treaty referring specifically to Europe. Argentina believed it has bought US neutrality by training Contras and supporting the Reagan Administration's dirty excursion into Central America. Perhaps they had, for while Reagan provided plenty of covert support to Britain it maintained an external stance of neutrality. The US was not legally obliged to come Britain's support. Besides, Thatcher specifically knocked back a US peace plan that did not include "some retribution."

Britain and America were 'family' 'cousins across the pond' had a 'special relationship'. Nobody needed a treaty to know what that meant.

Except that the US has always played a double hand. US money financed the rise of Nazi Germany. US interests refused to deal with the rise of fascism and kept their eyes on the bottom line of having Germany as their major trading partner. Because the US has always had a chip on its shoulder and has always coveted the role the British empire had in shaping the world.

The US has always feared the South. The Spanish world has always been Anarchia's stronghold. It has, quite rightly, seen the main threat to Capitalism as being Anarchism. Therefore it has devoted its life to creating instability from the Rio Grande South. The US is a paranoid monster and its disease has bankrupted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9boCJEo5jk

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:15am:

There is not a single doubt in my mind that if Indonesia were to attack Australia./.The United States of America would be there big time. Have no doubt about that, it would happen. We have been a great friend to the United States and THEY WOULD NOT let us down. Not like Churchill did in the Second World War; when he didn't want Curtin to bring our 8th Division home from Egypt to defend Australia against the Japanese. (Curtin brought them home anyway and they relieved those brave 20 year old kids on the Kokoda Track) Don't let the scaremongers on this site worry you about The U.S.A.'s willingness to fight for us, they have in the past and they will now. The U.S. Marine presence in Darwin is great, it certainly sends out a signal to those barbarians in Indonesia.

The US has never fought for Australia in the past. They only joined WWII when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour.

The priority for the US is protecting Israel.

Most Americans do not even know where Australia is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuKMtLOKG8k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:30am:

Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat.

The dream of every military power is to win war from air and artillery bombardment. But from Stalingrad to Vietnam, Cambodia to Iraq and Afghanistan the answer has always been the same. The infantry is everything.

Grey wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

red baron wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 11:30am: Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat. The dream of every military power is to win war from air and artillery bombardment. But from Stalingrad to Vietnam, Cambodia to Iraq and Afghanistan the answer has always been the same. The infantry is everything.

That's soooo right. If all those GIs hadn't invaded Japan, we'd still be fighting.

Soren wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 12:19pm:

Grey wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 11:53am: red baron wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 11:30am: Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat. The dream of every military power is to win war from air and artillery bombardment. But from Stalingrad to Vietnam, Cambodia to Iraq and Afghanistan the answer has always been the same. The infantry is everything. That's soooo right. If all those GIs hadn't invaded Japan, we'd still be fighting.

So Australia was just lucky that Japan made the mistake of bombing Pearl Harbour?

US Navy jet crashes into building in Virginia

http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120406/h.sharifi20120406194010967.jpg

A US Navy F-18 aircraft has crashed into an apartment building in a residential area near Virginia Beach, Virginia, military officials say.


The incident happened in the Hampton Roads area at around 12:08 p.m. local time (1608 GMT) on Friday.

The two crew members onboard the aircraft ejected “safely,” according to a US Navy official.

There have been no reports of deaths so far and the cause of the crash is still unknown. Local officials, however, said three people, including the pilot, were injured.

Four buildings near the crash scene were also damaged.

The Hampton Roads area in Virginia has a large concentration of military bases.

In December 2008, four members of one family were killed when an F/A-18D fighter jet crashed in a residential area in San Diego, California, while returning to Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, after a training exercise. Two homes were also destroyed in the deadly incident.

http://www.presstv.com/detail/234940.html


Faulty chips could hinder military tech

The U.S. is always on the look out for complex kill switches that have been inserted into military chips. Unfortunately they seem to be susceptible to faulty manufacturing.

This became apparent when a classified avionics system failed when inserted into a military test plane. A source from the UK company stated:

Quote:

Many of the connecting pads on a key microchip had not been connected to the metal legs of the chip carrier – the plastic package that houses and protects the silicon. So when the chip carrier was soldered to the circuit board, the chip failed to work.

It is believed that the problem occurred when the chip was bonded by an unqualified third party. These are not the only fakes they are coming across. Some boxes show up empty and others use parts from recycled circuit boards that are made to look like high-tech military chips.

These counterfeit chips are costing the military millions of dollars. The counterfeiting is becoming more and more difficult to track. Military bases with large airplane graveyards, such as Davis-Monthan AFB, have to be cautious that chips are not being taken from old planes.

http://www.examiner.com/technology-in-tucson/fake-chips-could-hinder-military-tech

Counterfeit Computer Chips from China Compromised U.S. Military Equipment

Faulty procurement by the Department of Defense has allowed counterfeit computer chips made in China to wind up in the parts inventory of advanced weapons systems.

The embarrassing revelation was exposed by the U.S. Navy and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement service, which uncovered the fact that a small Florida company had brokered nearly $16 million in high-tech hardware from a Chinese supplier. The problem with the purchases was that the parts were made at factory in China using inferior and recycled materials that falsely labeled them as being products from Intel, Texas Instruments and Motorola, using a process known as “black topping,” in which the original brand markings are ground off, covered in black paint and remarked.

The company, VisionTech Components, has since been closed down by the federal government. But not before it sold bogus materials to the Pentagon for use in advanced fighters, radar systems and missiles.

The Government Accountability Office found that counterfeit routers with high failure rates had been sold to the Navy, and that counterfeit microprocessors had been purchased by the U.S. Air Force for use on F-15 flight control computers.

The owner of VisionTech, Shannon Wren, and the company’s administrative manager, Stephanie McCloskey, were arrested in September 2010. Wren died of a drug overdose in May 2011; McCloskey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to traffic in counterfeit goods and to commit mail fraud and on October 25 she was sentenced to 38 months in prison.

http://www.allgov.com/US_and_the_World/ViewNews/Counterfeit_Computer_Chips_from_China_Compromised_US_Military_Equipment_111109

The Infantry isn't everything. Saddam Hussein promised the mother of all wars' but his infantry melted before the U.S. armed might like wheat before a harvester.

You have a point about the infantry, it was the case in Vietnam, however the sophistication of armed might, is such now that even fighter aircraft may become redundant in the not too distant future.

The capability of drones is awe inspiring. Coupled with sophisticated links to satellite spies, there isn't anything they can't locate and blitz on the planet.

I recently watched the havoc wreaked by the latest Apache helicopters on a compound full of Taliban. It was like clay pidgeon shooting for the helicopters, which used laser and infra red imaging to seek and take out each single soldier they were after.

The comms were dedciphering who was civilian and who were the bad guys and talking them out individually, I have never seen such surgeon like military kills.

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

The capability of drones is awe inspiring

US UAV crashes in northern Afghanistan

Friday Apr 06, 2012

http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120406/tebrahimpour20120406153217873.jpg

An American unmanned aerial vehicle operated by the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has crashed in northern Afghanistan.


"An International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) rotary-wing unmanned aerial vehicle crashed in northern Afghanistan today," the NATO-led forces said in a press release.

The US-led alliance however did not announce the exact location of the incident.

"The cause of the crash is currently being assessed; however, initial reporting indicates there was no enemy activity in the area. The site has been secured and no injuries have been reported as a result of the incident,” the statement added.

The incident comes hours after a NATO supply vehicle transporting fuel destined for US-led forces crashed and went up in flames in Afghanistan's troubled southern province of Kandahar, killing at least seven people.

http://www.presstv.com/detail/234908.html

Did Iran Capture a U.S. Stealth Drone Intact?

For the second time this year, the Iranian government is claiming it forced down a stealthy U.S. Air Force spy drone. Only this time, Iran says it bagged the RQ-170 “with little damage” by jamming its control signal — a potentially worrying development for American forces heavily reliant on remote-controlled aircraft...

...The implication is that the Iranians somehow jammed the command signal beamed to the drone by remote operators.

That’s a pretty big deal, if true. The Predator and Reaper, America’s most numerous attack and surveillance drones, are remotely-controlled via radio link by a pilot on the ground. If the link is broken, they’re designed to enter a holding pattern or even return home. But these failsafes aren’t perfect, as the Air Force discovered in 2009 when a Reaper drone went haywire and had to be shot down by an F-15. The Air Force and Navy have admitted that the control link represents a critical weakness and have worked hard to make drones more autonomous.

Serious, widespread autonomy is for the next generation of drones. Most of today’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicles can probably be jammed, but before now no one has succeeded in actually doing it — again, if Iran’s claims are true...

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/did-iran-capture-a-u-s-stealth-drone-intact/

Iran to 'reverse engineer' US drone

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02079/drone2_2079293b.jpg

Parviz Sorouri, an MP on parliament's foreign policy committee, said that Iranian experts were in the final stages of recovering the data from the surveillance drone, which was captured on Iranian territory last week.

Tehran has paraded the loss of the drone as a blow to the US and claimed it plans to reproduce the technology. It said its security forces had shot the drone down using previously secret air defence systems.

The drone, which is made from the latest 'stealth' technology, has been presented as a valuable windfall for its defence scientists.

"Our next action will be to reverse-engineer the aircraft," Mr Sorouri said. "In the near future, we will be able to mass produce it. Iranian engineers will soon build an aircraft superior to the American (drone) using reverse engineering."

Other Iranian officials have hinted that it could allow American rivals such as China the opportunity to acquire the technology...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8951414/Iran-to-reverse-engineer-US-drone.html

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

The Infantry isn't everything. Saddam Hussein promised the mother of all wars' but his infantry melted before the U.S. armed might like wheat before a harvester. You have a point about the infantry, it was the case in Vietnam, however the sophistication of armed might, is such now that even fighter aircraft may become redundant in the not too distant future. The capability of drones is awe inspiring. Coupled with sophisticated links to satellite spies, there isn't anything they can't locate and blitz on the planet. I recently watched the havoc wreaked by the latest Apache helicopters on a compound full of Taliban. It was like clay pidgeon shooting for the helicopters, which used laser and infra red imaging to seek and take out each single soldier they were after. The comms were dedciphering who was civilian and who were the bad guys and talking them out individually, I have never seen such surgeon like military kills.

The only way we could win for sure is by bombing darwin or wherever they invaid.
Which hopefully would not be an option, but you never know our armies do like the term collateral damage.

Iraq war was 100x different, you have a small nation surronded by US bases from every angle making Iraq almost impossible to defend.

Drones are good but I think we will be using manned aircraft to drop bombs for some time to come.
There have been dozens of US drones crashing lately all over the world.

I wouldnt trust the US military to distinguish between civilian and enemy.

The ones they were taking down had weapons in their hands.

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 1:19pm:

The ones they were taking down had weapons in their hands.

Still wouldnt trust them

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 1:19pm:

The ones they were taking down had weapons in their hands.

Drones killed hundreds of civilians in Pakistan

A new report out of London challenges the US government’s claims that the CIA-led drone initiatives in Pakistan have spared civilians from unnecessary casualties.

Rather, writes the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, hundreds of noncombatants have been killed by US airstrikes overseas.

According to a new report published by the UK-based Bureau, at least 385 of the casualties caused by unmanned robotic America drones were of civilians. Additionally, the Bureau claims that at least 160 of those deaths were of children under the age of 18.

The Bureau concluded their investigation after analyzing 2,000 media reports, witness testimonies, field reports of NGOs and lawyers and Secret US government cables, among other accounts. The research spawned eye-opening findings that the Bureau has now published in a 22,000-word database that covers each US-involved strike over Pakistan.

Among the findings from the Bureau, the CIA has launched 291 attacks in Pakistan, 8 percent more than the government had reported. Of those, says the Bureau, President Obama was in office for 236 of the strikes, or about one every four days of his administration.

The Bureau has also figured that...as many as 775 civilians have been killed in the attacks...

http://rt.com/usa/news/drone-civilians-pakistan-bureau/

Hey falah....I know you like to post. But buddy...this is about Indonesia...INDONESIA...get it?

Not freaking the Middle East which I know you like to bang on about...BUT INDONESIA...GET IT? 

I..N...D..O..N..E...S...I..A

chimera wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:42am:

Quote: The F18 carrys a greater range of weapons than 2 bombs, but feel free to express your self assured ignorance if you wish. Of course, but the bombs are what will damage Indonesia (rather than damage to Indonesian aircraft). 5 inch. 2 bombs.

Please stop, you're making me stupid just reading your posts.

falah wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 12:29pm:

Soren wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 12:19pm: Grey wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 11:53am: red baron wrote on Apr 7th, 2012 at 11:30am: Remember those graphic images from Iraq when the U.S.A. launched its assault there; think Djakarta.  Because that would be their sorry arse if they even think about going for our throat. The dream of every military power is to win war from air and artillery bombardment. But from Stalingrad to Vietnam, Cambodia to Iraq and Afghanistan the answer has always been the same. The infantry is everything. That's soooo right. If all those GIs hadn't invaded Japan, we'd still be fighting. So Australia was just lucky that Japan made the mistake of bombing Pearl Harbour?

Look, pal, you are too Mohamedan to make sense for me.

Grey said land forces are everything.
I pointed out that it wasn't so in Japan's defeat.
You chime in with some crap nobody understands.

WHy don't you just sit back and grow your beard. You are good at that. You don't make sense even when you really, really try. So just grow some facial hair. Do what you can.

"If indonesia was stupid enough to launch an invasion of Aus, it would be nothing more than providing us with a 'Target Rich' environment for our air force and navy.
They may have the numbers but we have the fire power and the advantage of a defence posture."
I read that as "Indonesia is a target". We don't have the firepower for that with 5 inch guns and 2 bombs on planes.
But weapon:weapon Oz has the advantage in an invasion.

chimera wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 11:48pm:

"If indonesia was stupid enough to launch an invasion of Aus, it would be nothing more than providing us with a 'Target Rich' environment for our air force and navy. They may have the numbers but we have the fire power and the advantage of a defence posture." I read that as "Indonesia is a target". We don't have the firepower for that with 5 inch guns and 2 bombs on planes. But weapon:weapon Oz has the advantage in an invasion.

Do some basic research on the f18, I suggest starting with wiki.

I have no idea where this 2 bombs mantra is coming from but repeating it isn't helping your argument. Try to explain yourself in a bit of detail, there is zero chance you'll confuse me with your extensive knowledge of the F18 weapons platform.

So for a start which 2 bombs are you talking about?

Mk 82 iron / snake eye

Mk 84 iron  / snake eye

Mk 82 Pave Tack

Mk 84 Pave Tack

Mk 82 and Mk 84 JDAM

All of which can be fitted to the 24 super hornets and most to the 75 hornets we currently have in service.

This doesn't include the anti-aircraft and anti shipping capabilities in the form of sidewinders, sparrows and harpoon.

So with your vast knowledge of Australian air power capability, how does your '2 bombs' scenario fit into this conversation.

Computer says:
Australian Air force F18 Super Hornets  ...... "In terms of capability, it has 11 weapons stations - a 2000 pound bomb".
The discussion about targetting Indonesia is about the US firepower, not about Oz firepower.

red baron wrote on Apr 7^th, 2012 at 3:11pm:

Hey falah....I know you like to post. But buddy...this is about Indonesia...INDONESIA...get it? Not freaking the Middle East which I know you like to bang on about...BUT INDONESIA...GET IT?  I..N...D..O..N..E...S...I..A

I lived in I..N..D..O..N..E..S..I..A for nearly two years, and I can tell you that most Indonesians love Australians.

I personally got invited to have lunch with a government minister in his house solely on the basis of being an Australian.

The idea that there will be a war between Australia and Indonesia is far-fetched. I don't think that they are really that pissed off about Schappelle Corby smuggling marijuana into Bali.

There are only two countries at the moment with the ability to invade Australia - China and the US.

And did you assure him of the harmony in multi-cultural relations between religions in Oz and Islamic freedoms in this tolerant democracy?

No. I don't believe that the number of mosques that have suffered arson and shooting attacks in Australia came up in our conversations.

Do you think I should have mentioned it?

Google search for [2012 attack arson] shows 1 attack on : synagogue; mosque; and Hindu temple, on 2 pages of search for each. There may well be more, but evidently the ratio is equal for each religion. The attacks are rare and treated with equal disapproval. Do you disapprove?

chimera wrote on Apr 8^th, 2012 at 2:27pm:

Google search for [2012 attack arson] shows 1 attack on : synagogue; mosque; and Hindu temple, on 2 pages of search for each. There may well be more, but evidently the ratio is equal for each religion. The attacks are rare and treated with equal disapproval. Do you disapprove?

So as long as Australian persecute all minorities equally, shouldn't complain? Is that your gist?


     
Firebugs threaten mosque attacks

Arsonists who firebombed a Melbourne mosque overnight have threatened further attacks on Islamic sites, community leaders said today.

The arsonists vandalised the Umma Islamic Centre in East Doncaster with anti-Islamic slogans and left threatening notes before setting the mosque alight about 4.45am (AEST), centre spokesman Noor Dean said.

The attack, which caused minor damage to the centre, was a backlash against the Islamic community in response to the Bali bombings last Saturday, he said.

The Melbourne firebombing follows a vandal attack on a school and the home of a Muslim cleric in Sydney on Tuesday...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/17/1034561262558.html


Mosque firebombed in Australia

SYDNEY, Australia -- A mosque was firebombed in Australia overnight as race hate against Muslims simmered...

Police in the eastern state of Queensland said two Molotov cocktails were thrown at the mosque in the city of Brisbane...

Police were looking for a male caucasian who was seen in a car outside the mosque at the time...

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/09/13/attack.australia.muslims/index.html



Australian Muslims attacked

Australian authorities have stepped up security around mosques and Islamic schools after a series of assaults on Muslims.

A mosque in the eastern city of Brisbane was destroyed by suspected arson at the weekend in apparent retaliation for the US terror attacks.

Other mosques have been daubed with anti-Muslim graffitti and there have also been reports of verbal and physical attacks on Muslims.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1560639.stm

Judge urges tougher sentences for race crimes

December 11 2002

Legislation should be changed to allow tougher sentences to be imposed for racially motivated crimes, a judge said yesterday.

District Court Judge Manus Boyce was sentencing Terence George Hanlon, 24, for the arson of the Kuraby Mosque on Brisbane's southside on September 22 last year...Hanlon had pleaded not guilty, but was convicted by a jury in October.

Judge Boyce, sentencing Hanlon to six years' jail with no recommendation for parole, said Queensland should follow the example of England and adopt tougher penalties if an attack was motivated by racial hatred.

"Australia prides itself on being fair, just and tolerant. Racial intolerance is a threat to the maintenance of a safe and decent society," Judge Boyce told Hanlon. "I urge that the Queensland Criminal Code be amended to provide for more severe sentences for attacks that are racially motivated. The fact that a crime is racially motivated should be a serious circumstance of aggravation."

Hanlon had told his girlfriend just hours before the fire that he wanted the mosque burnt down, and had yelled out "let the war begin" to a woman passing by the mosque.

One week later Hanlon told a friend "we should nuke them all", and displayed great glee at the burning of the mosque, the judge said. The mosque was uninsured and suffered $113,000 damage.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/10/1039379840173.html

Man sentenced for mosque attack

A 24-year-old man with links to a national extremist group has been given a suspended prison sentence for an attack on a Perth mosque earlier this year.

Jacob Marshall Holt and 25-year-old Bradley Neil Trappitt fired three shots into the roof of the Canning Mosque in Queens Park in February.

The men are alleged to be members of Combat 18, which is an international neo-Nazi organisation.

Holt pleaded guilty to the attack and was sentenced to seven months jail, suspended for 12 months.

Trappit has also pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in August.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-07-30/man-sentenced-for-mosque-attack/926048

So that's about 5 in 11 years.
I said they're rare and equally disapproved. Probably about similar to the Indonesian experience of such crimes.
Do you disapprove of all these attacks?

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 6:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:43pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 5:11pm: Indonesia is roughly the 18th strongest military in the world, Australia 24th. Compare the two militaries here: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison.asp Focus on the middle of the list and it's pretty obvious there is no real threat from Indonesia. They could smash us in a ground invasion tho, wouldnt be too hard for them to take a northern town like Darwin.

Taking it wouldn't be hard.
Holding it would be impossible.

falah wrote on Apr 8^th, 2012 at 6:58pm:

Firebugs threaten mosque attacks Mosque firebombed in Australia Australian Muslims attacked Judge urges tougher sentences for race crimes Man sentenced for mosque attack

Muslims are being loved.
The Muslim way. (The Leb way, dare I say it).

Quote:

Let's talk INDONESIA and its THREAT TO AUSTRALIA.

I would hate to be a right wing conservative and live in a state of constant fear and paranoia. It seems their whole ideology is based on spreading hate and fear of anything that isnt a WASP.  ::)

I'm an extreme left-field commo plastic recycler. Indonesia makes me paranoid which says something.

chimera wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

I'm an extreme left-field commo plastic recycler. Indonesia makes me paranoid which says something.

...and Alan Jones is a tree-hugging hippie.

falah
what's your opinion about attacks on synagogues?

I am rolling around on the floor laughing at your last comment falah, Alan Jones a tree hugging hippie...mate you weren't sucking the pipe when you wrote that were you?