http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/flying-into-trouble/2006/12/29/1166895477918.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2006-03.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Giant-Gladiator.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/aph.html

A Happy New Year to all!

Don’t be ridiculous Jason.

He claims we don’t face any chance of an invasion from China or anyone else regardless of what we do.

Ergo he implies we don’t need any sort of capable airforce.

It doesn’t matter WHAT he says elsewhere.

Elsewhere he contradicts himself. So what? That does not speak in his favour.

Now if we need an airforce presumably we have an authentic defense-need and therefore we need a good airforce.

C.L will you stop this silly prestige talk. Its not that you are wrong exactly. But you are telling people that its all some sort of ego thing. Rather then a matter of survival.

You idiot?

How the fuck does this tie up with the idea that we face no threat whatsoever from China or (presumably) from anyone else?

It doesn’t matter what you say if none of your idiocy hangs together.

You have said this yes. But elsewhere you’ve implied something else.

Its the fact that you contradict yourself all the time that makes you an idiot.

Why do we need airpower if no-one would invade us?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

CL. You have to get away from this symbolism and prestige talk. I mean thats all true. But its misleading. Politicians have to talk like that but we don’t.

But why? If no-one will ever invade us under any circumstance…. in your idiots point of view…. then why have an airforce.

If we are magically immune from Chi-Com intimidation, though we are meeklky putting up with their spies, why have an airforce in the first place.

Now you are absolutely clear that we face no danger from China?

Presumably that goes for anyone else too.

So if you believe that why bother with an airforce.

It doesn’t matter what you SAY fatfingers. You are an idiot and you contradictt yourself with every other step.

I simply repeat the argument I’ve presented above. Namely, that the projection of regional power, will and commitment that would be flagged by a renewed big air power policy would BOLSTER our credentials and gravitas in the region, thus affirming - not diminishing - our boots-on-the-ground role. Opportunity cost arguments can always be mocked up - more of x could be less of y - but I think the weight of opportunity cost is offset by the dual strategy I’ve outlined.

Nor, as I’ve said, does a dualistic perspective mean that Australian Raptorism is merely symbolic; in the event of a big war, there is absolutely no good reason why Australia should not play an important airforce role; that hypothetical war could be large enough to include sub-theatres of operation wherein the Americans would appreciate it if we could do some of the heavy lifting (and bombing) for ourselves.

Bird, you are an outright liar. Or you are an outright idiot. Let’s peruse WHAT I ACTUALLY SAID:

“Having air power is a must, but we should be modeling it on the army - small, effective, reliable and flexible.”

“Boots on the ground are where the real work happens after the fireworks of air strikes and missiles, and where our limited resources should be targeted.”

“I am NOT saying we don’t need armed forces. I’m NOT saying we shouldn’t have fighters, bombers, missiles, drones”

“we really need more infantry. These new soldiers will need air support, so of course let’s buy air support.”

GMB, you have been shown for what you are - a big fat liar. You must go through your asbestos pants colelction at a fearsome rate.

I want a retraction, dopey. In your very next post on this thread. Otherwise don’t bother coming back.