Comments on: Aussies Battle Over Army’s Soul; Huge Spending Decisions at Stake

By: GusP

GusP — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:15:03 +0000

“arguably America’s closest ally, Australia.”

I think Australia fought along side the US in every major conflict from WW1 until now.Including 10 years in Vietnam

I’ve never read anything about UK forces in Vietnam.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 14:13:02 +0000

“arguably America’s closest ally, Australia.”

I think AIPAC would take exception to that comment.

By: Steve Innes

Steve Innes — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:09:54 +0000

I agree with S.Caine.
Aussie troops are leaving in droves — faster than they can be recruited, in fact.
Why? they are not getting involved in the fight in Afghanstan, or anywhere else, as much as they would like and the majority of active operations are reserved for the SF teams there.
This leaves experienced infantrymen, AFV and MBT crews, mortarmen, gunners MP’s and all the rest stuck at home twiddling thumbs or toiling in pointless civil unrest prevention tasks in Timor Leste or the Solomons.
Iraq they missed out on entirely and the majority of them feel they will miss out in Afghanistan too, unless their government grows a set in short order.
This is a source of embarrassment to them as well as frustration and at the end of the day it is not their fault but the government’s.
The Aussies are itching to fight and the sooner it can happen the better for all concerned.
I only hope, that with the appointment of a new gung-ho Defence Minister, replaced Joel Fitzgibbon only on Friday 5th June, that the ADF will now get the chance to rock.

By: ELP

ELP — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:11:08 +0000

No known price, schedule or known capability other than what is hyped on the F-35.

Before you can talk defence procurement, you have to know that the Australian Defence procurement system is broken. But yeah roll the dice on a jet with less than 2% of the flight testing complete.

By: Tordenskiold

Tordenskiold — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:26:48 +0000

A bit amazed by the fact that Australia still sees a land invasion from the north as a viable scenario to plan and prepare for. When that, which is so remote from the sort of missions that the Australian Army carries out from day to day is their structuring factor, of course they will end up in an imbalance!

By: S Caine

S Caine — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 23:48:18 +0000

Come on you lot — let’s not do a kids fight about whose friend is who. We are all allies and Australia is unique in many ways in that it shares a strategic region with the US along with many shared issues relating to this area. Overall, Britain doesn’t have a real strategic view in this region and hasn’t (in my view) since the fall of Singapore.
As for the UK/US swap with military personnel — same happens here with the UK/US and NZ.
As for the ADF, it is shackled by the politicians with the infantry battalions not deployed overseas on war-like operations — hence people are leaving flat out as they can’t get to do their jobs. Is it fair that Australia continually asks other nations to do the war-fighting while getting excited over “niche” capability like engineering tasks?
As for Rod’s view on gun laws and not being able to train with a calibre higher that 5.56 — rubbish! Nothing to do with gun laws and I’ve never had that issue in training.

By: Dave R

Dave R — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:39:43 +0000

Its position in the southwest Pacific, where it accesses both the Indian Ocean oil lanes and those lanes leading north to China, Japan and Korea, make Australia an indispensable ally. Beside, I suggest there is a bond among English speaking peoples.

By: rbrenzelsr

rbrenzelsr — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:58:57 +0000

It is easy to over and understate relationships’ value to the US of many nations. Governments change. Ideology of those governments sometimes get in the way of common sense. I have trouble with the “other colonies” governments from time to time and their internal policies but I always harbor a belief that the English speaking nations will hold together when any are threatened or attacked by outside force. Diplomacy, ideology do not trump blood (Language being a metaphor). I have begun to wonder, if the recent side take by the White House in the self-declared independence of Kosovo will haunt us when its look alike, California inhabitants,seek independence?

By: Colin Clark

Colin Clark — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 04:00:54 +0000

No doubt the UK has a greater population and greater national wealth than does Australia. And they are America’s good friends. In fact, those of you who argue Britain may be America’s most important ally may be right.

But I wanted to point out how intimate is our relationship with the Australians, which is why I said they are “arguably our closest ally”. An Australian by the name David Kilcullen is currently one of America’s top counter-insurgency advisors and has been granted clearances allowing him access to what may be an unprecedented array of classified information, according to intelligence sources I’ve spoken with. The strength of Australia’s relationship with America was greatly boosted under the previous Howard government and the current Labor government led by Rudd has fundamentally maintained that close relationship both in defense and national security terms.

And Australia and Britain are the only countries for which the US has taken extraordinary steps to draft and eventually pass treaties allowing the powers much greater and simpler sharing of military technology and weapons. On top of all that, the Aussies play a key role working with us in Asia and the Pacific, places of great military interest for us these days.

By: Chris Yelpoc

Chris Yelpoc — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 02:52:10 +0000

Australia our closest ally? What absolute nonsense! The UK is — and always will be — our closest ally…bar none. Most folks here don’t know just how close we are with the “Brits”. There are Royal Navy Captains commanding US Naval ships and vice-versa, we have umpteen Marine Aviation units stationed on Royal Navy carriers, literally hundreds of US Army officers command British Army units — from Regimental and Battalion levels down to Infantry Companies and Armored Squadrons — with their British counterparts doing the same over here.…don’t even get me started on their superb Special Forces (such as the SAS and SBS) and, my very best experiences, being attached to the Royal Marines was the highlight of my service life!

By: 3 War LTC

3 War LTC — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 19:05:51 +0000

The Aussie dilemma is cost versus wants versus real needs. Add to this the problem of the world wide near depression and you have an internal politcal problem.
Home land defense requires both power projection and the ability to drive an invading force back to the beach and into the water.
SAS and SOF support are very costly. However SAS and SOF cannot repel a major invasion from the sea or by conventional airborne forces. A modern military for a nation the size of Australia may well be a down sized military given the hugh costs involved…especially during a near depression.

By: Rod

Rod — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:09:35 +0000

The article reads a little like the author is trying to suck up to the Aussie military. Lots of questionable praise.
While I was there last year on business I was told that due to their goofy gun laws the military cannot train at home with ammo larger than 5.56. An incredible disadvantage when they have to use larger calibers to survive in the sandbox. People in government will tell you that their helicopters and submarines cannot be maintained and are less than marginal on today’s battlefield.
A better, more hardworking people does not exist than the Aussies, and their military history is a source of great pride for them. Unfortunately, like the U.S., they are being led by politicians who are more interested in implementing their ideologies than in addressing real-world threats to a free society.

By: P Scott

P Scott — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:17:11 +0000

America’s closest ally? What about the UK?

By: Reader Bob

Reader Bob — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:06:53 +0000

To be a regional force that is recognized in today’s ever changing world, one country can not go it alone no matter how big or small. There must be partnerships formed that are lasting and rock solid. This will assure peace as you prepare for war. It will also give each country an unique opportunity to invest into each other with will strengthen the bond that makes peace achievable. The USA has several of these partnerships throughout the world and works to strengthen them at every opportunity. Part of what comes with these partnerships are the costs. These costs are found in materials, training, equipment, and sadly in lives. Each country would rather fight, if there must be a fight, in their adversary’s country and not in one of the partnerships. Such is the case with Australia. They are buying new modern American aircraft to arm themselves. They no doubt have and will continue to train with American military. They also have upheld their partnership by going into battle with America in Iraq and Afghanistan. This bond they share with America has only been strengthened and they know should they need help or assistance America is but a 911 call away.
How Australia aligns its military and the role each of her services play is entirely up to Australia and will be respected accordingly.

By: Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:41:23 +0000

Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows the United Kingdom is still the United States closest ally. The Aussies are a distant second to the Palms. It is high time the US started being a good ally in return.