Share
879 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 229
clock Created with Sketch.
16/03/23
16:39
Share
Originally posted by squidd:
↑
Keating still sees the USA as an "Atlantic power." This fundamentally flawed thinking ensures the conclusions he draws about the Pacific, and what our role in it should be, are also deeply flawed. Naval Station Pearl Harbor is closer to Asia than any major military base on the East Coast is to Europe. 60% of the US Navy is in the Pacific. The US has ~100k troops permanently spread across Japan, South Korea & Guam. US nuclear subs will be rolling through Australia in the future. It's like Keating has completely ignored the pivot. This pivot will only gather momentum as the Russian military continues to deteriorate & pose less and less of a threat to Eastern Europe. Russian losses of manpower & equipment while countries like Poland are strongly expanding their militaries. US won't need to prop up NATO as much and will re-deploy. The Pacific is where it's at, and the Yanks aren't going anywhere. We need military assets that act as a deterrent, are inter-operable with our allies, and can fight a long way from home. Nuclear submarines cover all 3 bases, it's a no brainer. We have F-35's for air, and will be investing heavily in mid-long range missiles. Our country is too big and our population too small to mount effective land defence, we have to be able to inflict our damage at range. Work to our strengths, which are distance any enemy would need to cover to get here, and the moat we have around the country. Cheers!
Expand
The submarines are no deterrent to China, you're kidding right , they are not interested in occupying or attacking Au anyway imo The submarine project will blow out to 700 billion, and like most fleets half of them are at the dock broken down The NSW government couldn't even get the harbour ferry project right Keating is correct by saying the money could be better spent elsewhere