Alliedassault - View Single Post

BallisticWookie · 10-03-2002, 09:24 PM

Australia is faced with a very similar problem in terms of manpower, logistic support and burden on troops. There has been big discussions in Australia about what we COULD do if there was military action taken in Iraq. I have long been a supporter of greater Defence spending by our government, God knows our soldiers who are over worked, under funded and most definately spread thin NEED the extra funding and increase in numbers so they can work efficiently and do the job they are meant to be doing.

Australia's problem is that the past Government's, in all their infinite wisdom, have decided to base Defence spending on the defence and security of our shores, not taking into account that Australian troops would very well be needed to act in Offensive/aggressive combat roles in overseas conflicts and UN Peacekeeping/making roles.

I have questioned my own thinking when still say I want to join the Army. Yes our Defence spending has been increased, our SASR and Commando unit are being outfitted with upto-date weaponry and support gear and our Airforce has joined the US in the Joint Strike Fighter program and upgraded it's avionics and communications equipment so it is compatible with with US/UN aircraft in operations overseas. But what about the Infantry ?? What about the men that make up the backbone of Australia's defence ?? What about the men that WILL be the ones called upon to go and join the fight, if and when "the fight" occurs ?? I will be one of those, and I'll be damned if I'm going to go into a combat situation with obsolete equipment and be asked to perform actions which will very likely get me killed on a rotation schedule of roughly 6 months which would test even the most hardened veteran, with poor logistical support.

Australia was spread thin in Vietnam, we were spread thin in Cambodia, we were spread thin in Somalia, we were spread thin in East Timor, and everywhere in between, and once again we are spread thin on the steps toward conflict with Iraq. I'm not doubting the efficiency of our troops, they are some of the finest fighting men this day, and that has been proven, they have the training and the guts, but when it comes to the Government making decisions based on "expert opinion" from people who have probably never seen a day of combat in their life, who are telling our infinitely wise Government what our troops are (NOT) capable of, but (seeing they pulled it off in East Timor, they can do it again, no matter the cost to the men as far as their mental well being goes) they will make our troops do it anyway.

Defence spending is what keeps the cogs greased and the wheels spinning, without it the men who defend our countries are all but useless. Ninty9, I hear EXACTLY what you're saying.

	(#15)
BallisticWookie is Offline Senior Member Posts: 4,202 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Queensland, Australia	10-03-2002, 09:24 PM Australia is faced with a very similar problem in terms of manpower, logistic support and burden on troops. There has been big discussions in Australia about what we COULD do if there was military action taken in Iraq. I have long been a supporter of greater Defence spending by our government, God knows our soldiers who are over worked, under funded and most definately spread thin NEED the extra funding and increase in numbers so they can work efficiently and do the job they are meant to be doing. Australia's problem is that the past Government's, in all their infinite wisdom, have decided to base Defence spending on the defence and security of our shores, not taking into account that Australian troops would very well be needed to act in Offensive/aggressive combat roles in overseas conflicts and UN Peacekeeping/making roles. I have questioned my own thinking when still say I want to join the Army. Yes our Defence spending has been increased, our SASR and Commando unit are being outfitted with upto-date weaponry and support gear and our Airforce has joined the US in the Joint Strike Fighter program and upgraded it's avionics and communications equipment so it is compatible with with US/UN aircraft in operations overseas. But what about the Infantry ?? What about the men that make up the backbone of Australia's defence ?? What about the men that WILL be the ones called upon to go and join the fight, if and when "the fight" occurs ?? I will be one of those, and I'll be damned if I'm going to go into a combat situation with obsolete equipment and be asked to perform actions which will very likely get me killed on a rotation schedule of roughly 6 months which would test even the most hardened veteran, with poor logistical support. Australia was spread thin in Vietnam, we were spread thin in Cambodia, we were spread thin in Somalia, we were spread thin in East Timor, and everywhere in between, and once again we are spread thin on the steps toward conflict with Iraq. I'm not doubting the efficiency of our troops, they are some of the finest fighting men this day, and that has been proven, they have the training and the guts, but when it comes to the Government making decisions based on "expert opinion" from people who have probably never seen a day of combat in their life, who are telling our infinitely wise Government what our troops are (NOT) capable of, but (seeing they pulled it off in East Timor, they can do it again, no matter the cost to the men as far as their mental well being goes) they will make our troops do it anyway. Defence spending is what keeps the cogs greased and the wheels spinning, without it the men who defend our countries are all but useless. Ninty9, I hear EXACTLY what you're saying.