|
Australia should nuke up
Interesting little debate going on down here.
Hugh White - quite a respected Govt advisor - has just written a book saying Oz needs to ask itself the question again whether it needs a nuclear deterrent. For those who can't be bothered to read his carefully worded and soundly reasoned book he's essentially saying:
Now - before you all jump down my throat - yes - i know - we can't even organise a working broadband network, or agree on coal, wind, solar etc. But it's an interesting debate... even if I have to ignore muppets like Helen Caldicott surfacing again. And it's dredged up all the John Gorton era stuff - how Gorton told Dean Rusk he didn't trust the Yanks - and started to build the Jervis Bay reactor etc, etc. I took the kids to see the foundations when we were down there watching whales - I'm a lot of fun like that! Personally, I think White is correct. We're going to be in a world of pain in 20-30 years unless someone makes some hard decisions. Hopefully by that time - I'll be in some old folks home, shouting at the TV... |
I agree with Hugh White. We need to be looking ahead, to a world where the USA isn't the worlds biggest stick.
|
Right.......... so in a world where the West is trying to stop nuclear proliferation, a new Cold War and arms race, you think Aus should just "nuke up"?
And what would we say to Iran and North Korea. "It's ok, Australia needs nukes and can be trusted"... |
If OZ feels they are needed, Iran and North Korea are irrelevant, Aussies will make their own decisions based on their perceived threat level. Where has softly, softly got US anywhere with those two nations. Go for it I say,
In this case "Jaw, Jaw allows time to prepare for War, War.. If you haven't noticed, the world is proliferating while we are sleeping. Anyway we could do with a bit of forward support in that region if only to balance out our own short comings. IG . |
If you haven't noticed, the world is proliferating while we are sleeping. |
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 10513784)
On the contrary, I think it has been quite remarkable how few nations have sought 'the bomb' over the years.
|
Originally Posted by sandiego89
(Post 10513853)
I also think it is quite remarkable that there has not been a pure first world war since 1945. Sure plenty of conflicts, but nothing like previous centuries. I do think nuclear deterrence has been part of formula.
|
The UK, France, USA, Russia and China developed nuclear weapons before signing the Nuclear non -proliferation treaty. Israel, Pakistan, India and South Sudan have never signed it. iran and North Korea are under sanctions because they signed the treaty but have tried to withdraw. The sanctions being because the other signatory nations (every one but the above four) do not accept their withdrawal meets the conditions of Article X of the treaty which only allows withdrawal when - "extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country". If Australia wished to develop nuclear weapons they would also have to announce their withdrawal, and meet the conditions of Article X, in order to avoid sanctions. |
We (us Ozzies) can't even manufacture our own AVTUR to fuel our jets. How anyone in their right mind reckon's we'd develop a home-grown nuclear weapon capability, I have no idea.
We'd probably outsource it to China... :E |
How about a joint venture with the UK? When we replace Trident, build one more sub and have that one stationed in the Pacific. Just a thought.
|
Originally Posted by Herod
(Post 10514066)
How about a joint venture with the UK? When we replace Trident, build one more sub and have that one stationed in the Pacific. Just a thought.
|
But it could be pooled with the rest of ours in Scotland: all the Ozzies would need would be a spare button! |
Surely this would only provoke New Zealand to acquire its own deterrent too?
|
Originally Posted by dead_pan
(Post 10514161)
Surely this would only provoke New Zealand to acquire its own deterrent too?
Are New Zealand and Australia likely to attack each other then? Apart from when it comes to sport naturally! |
Originally Posted by ShotOne
(Post 10514116)
But it could be pooled with the rest of ours in Scotland: all the Ozzies would need would be a spare button! Still a part time answer to a full time threat. The sub wouldn’t have to be located in the pacific btw. I’m not sure the UK citizens or govt would want to be in the financial hook to dedicate a boat to the defense of Oz. Just not a viable option. |
Why build a boomer? Plenty of room for silos in the GAFA. Or buy the technology off the Russians and have train convoys roaming the interior. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-23_Molodets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BZhRK_Barguzin |
Originally Posted by yellowtriumph
(Post 10514190)
Are New Zealand and Australia likely to attack each other then? Apart from when it comes to sport naturally! |
Well - the kiwis are further ahead - they've already developed the duluvery system ;)
|
I’m not sure the UK citizens or govt would want to be in the financial hook to dedicate a boat to the defense of Oz. The Brits are exactly spending extravagantly for their own defense.....so why ever would anyone think they would spring for defending Aussies!:rolleyes: |
The ability of the RAN to operate submarines hasn't been brilliant to date
But I can't see the voters being happy at having missile convoys wandering about the neighborhood................ Seriously tho' what circumstances could happen that would lead an Australian Govt wanting to nuke China? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:29. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.