Defence Strategic Review is a ‘significant step-up’

[@d00mg1rl]

We were self-sufficient once but, Labor signed us into the UN's Lima declaration, and Australia has been sliding down hill since.

[@cplbruiser8267]

Labor don`t care about the safety of our soldiers. To cut back 450 IFV`s to 129 is pathetic. Australia is a rich country. No excuse.Those vehicles would give our soldiers top protection and a cutting edge advantage in combat. But yeh, typical Labor. Useless !

[@rodives8844]

Why do you want APCs when we have UBER.

[@truefactjack]

How are we going to defend ourselves when blackout Bowen is turning the power off ???

[@gavwilson3413]

This review is just the latests in a long line of defence reviews that talks big. But doesn't really do much to deal with actual fighting. Because it doesn't matter how many missiles you have. At some point you need soldiers to close with, and kill, the enemy. It does talk about the littoral environment. Which requires bodies. A lot of bodies. Anyone who claims boots on the ground are a thing of the past is no expert on military affairs. Or history. This adds not one extra infanteer. I can't help thinking that is deliberate. Because recruitment has been an issue for a long time. I don't see or hear anything to address the twin issues of recruitment and retention. Which suits ADF senior leadership just fine.

[@kenreckless9845]

To a degree, yes. But only to a degree. All the infantry in the world does not help you one iota in a littoral environment like the Pacific if you cannot get them to where the enemy is. Or feed them once they are there. That requires ships, subs and aircraft. If you do not have the ability to dominate the air and sea routes your Army is only good for putting on the blue helmet and watching Third World countries implode. Or cleaning up after floods. That's a very, very long way off what the Army should be doing. Rebalancing the force to be better suited for a campaign to Australia's immediate north is very sensible.

[@gavwilson3413]

@@kenreckless9845 agreed. BUT, my point is that this is just the latest in a long line of defence reviews that promise much, but deliver little or nothing. Except often further reducing defence spending and capability. In the current strategic environment, that is, at very best, cavalier. But is consistent with the approach ALL Australian governments have employed for defence since shortly after Vietnam. If it doesn't change, and war comes, Australia will be in 'gunfights' with nary a 'knife'. Much less 'guns'.

[@kenreckless9845]

@@gavwilson3413 Can't argue with that mate

[@mayuleellaisri4135]

That what aussi dreams strong armys force. Because Australia have water around Need lot of jet, boat, Submarine. And need lot of aussi man joy armys, no more beer in pub or full of football stadium. Australia cannot fight China with glass of beer lol.

[@balung]

LOL😅😅😅 You CCP bots are hilarious.