RNZA-'freighter-force' reduced to 2jets!

[outboundjetsetter]

I maybe stating the obvious but does nz realise our proud RNZAF is now/very shortly to be reduced to 2 jets !!!
Correct me if im wrong but once the 727(s) A4K'S and macchi's (not in current active service) have gone we will be a quiet country indeed!. very sad.
I for one hope we dont stay venerable for too long

[wessex19]

this is old news mate:sad:

[Anti Skid On]

As opposed to Vulnerable - almost forgot we are likely to be invaded by someone - desperate to steal this years crop of Kiwi fruit, or the last drop of gas from Taranaki. Regrettably/thankfully (depending on how your world view is) NZ doesn't have many enemies - those we do have are of the sproting variety. NZ is astute not dumb in reducing our 'strike' capability - who are we going to attack - Vanuatu for not giving us cheap enough holidays?

[Ex Douglas Driver]

So by using that argument, the US shouldn't have any combat forces either? When was the last time that the continental US was attacked by another sovereign nation??

Imagine if the major countries of the world decided that their only political interest was inside their own borders. Would you be prepared to allow the many acts of genocide, invasion and terrorism to go unchecked? Should New Zealand?

Having a defence force (with an offensive capability- be it sea, land or air) is a lot more than having the ability to defend one's physical borders. It is about the ability to influence other countries' decisions i.e. make them think twice about going down a course of action. If the political pressure (at many levels) fails, then use of military forces is the only option.

You may ask how 17 A4s were a credible deterrent. As a standalone element in a large scale conflict, they would not fare too well. But NZ was, and is, never going to go it alone. As a coalition partner in a medium to low threat environment (as is found in the Asia/Pacific region), the A4 integrated reasonably well - in the short term. Yes, it needed upgrades in the very short term, and definitely needed to be replaced by 2005.

New Zealand certainly seems to want to be taken seriously on the world stage. We should be prepared to pay to support that desire.

[cjam]

I agree Ex D.

NZ used to do its share and then some when it came to maintaining political stability in its own back yard ( Asia Pacific) and now we seem to sit back and expect others to pay for it. There are a lot more things to think about than troops landing on the beaches. Anti-Skid, do you contemplate the likelyhood of corrupt/unstable regimes within SE Asian countries leading to unchecked piracy on the straits of Malacca and thereabouts, in turn raising the cost of imports as companies send there ships around the long way? .There are a hundred issues like this that politicians know about but choose to ignore as they know the votes for the next election lie with the idealists and beneficiaries.
Look at the world like a big school yard, if the majority of the big strong kids are well behaved by nature then the rat bags wont be the over riding influence.
PS. Contrary to what you probably read in the papers the A4's did well in a few specialised roles and there servicibility rates were as good as or better than most all squadrons they exercised with, they still needed replacing due airframe age but we were handed the replacements on a platter anyway.

[nike]

it would have been great to see a bunch of F-16's cruizing around godzone. military jets always make you stop and look.

[Alpha Leader]

For the time being, Helen Clark looks scary enough to frighten off any potential enemies. But what will happen when another PM takes over?:ok:

[CT7]

But all's not lost!!!

We've just got 105 (+/-) LAV 3's Yippee!!!! NOT!

[Thump & Go]

Now all we need is A/C large enough to transport them and an air combat force to provide air support for them.......I thought we were meant to be saving money!

Maybe LAV is a good analogy for them:p