Australian defence cuts are inevitable
Hi ARH Tiger. I have to first challenge your political inference in post #154.
I voted conservatively for most of my life and was a member of the Queensland National Party for a few years, until I got some insights into what old Joh was up to (I even bought an aircraft off the old bugger). I began voting informal from 1996 onwards because of dissatisfaction re John Howard's intentions regarding defence matters and middle class welfare; and now, I am more or less apolitical because there are few in the political realm these days who can be respected.
Majority of the flawed military hardware acquisitions were generated during Howard's reign and his former Minister for Defence who jumped ship to ride the 'defence gravy train' drove the Tiger, MRH90, LPD procurements; the latter 2 being announced just a couple of days prior to calling of Election 2007. Just follow the people trail and you will find a former Army CDF also involved.
Had Army and Navy air arms been wise enough just to push for factory upgrades of Kiowa, Iroquois, Blackhawk, Chinook, Sea King, Seahawk; both force components would be in much better shape today. Instead, the disastrous ADF helicopter rationalisation strategy, which absurdly aims for only 4 types in service, has generated huge capability gaps and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars.
'Tis rather interesting that some ASPI staffers who were complicit in drafting Rudd's Defence White Paper 2009 are now saying that the futuristic military expansion agenda therein was never going to be economically achievable. But both of the major political parties are now stalemated because they said 'me too' regarding unrealistic unaffordable defence expenditure projections out to 2030.
In typical Canberra fashion, they will defend their flawed postures until economic necessities compel some remedial action. More unscheduled acquisitions to offset capabilities gaps, like acquiring a UK Bay class LSD, may trigger a bipartisan political deal to diminish intended defence spending downstream so both parties can save some face. If that eventuates, then there will obviously have to be some massaging of military acquisition projects in train. The nation simply cannot afford continuation of reckless defence expenditure.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 22nd Feb 2011 at 04:01.