| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Down Under | ||
| Australia May Buy American Missiles | ||
| 2004-01-13 | ||
| EFL Looks like somebody took the Bali bombing personally. Australia might buy U.S. missiles as part of the Bush administration’s planned defense shield, the defense minister said Tuesday while acknowledging the plan could fuel a regional arms race.
Defense Minister Robert Hill on Tuesday offered the first hint about the contents of the agreement being discussed, saying the government might incorporate the missile defense systems on three air warfare destroyers planned for the Australian navy. Hill previously had said his country likely would help research the multibillion-dollar defense project and had no plans for a ground-based missile defense system on its own soil. Hill said he was impressed by last month’s successful firing of a Standard Missile-3 interceptor missile from a Navy Aegis cruiser that knocked a target rocket out of the sky over the Pacific. "It’s got the capability to basically meet and intercept missiles outside of the atmosphere," Hill told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio. Hill did not give more details about the missiles being considered and a spokeswoman declined to comment while discussions with the American representatives were ongoing. Critics says the technology for such shields is complex, unreliable and expensive, and that the plans could spark a new arms race. So did critics of the gattling gun. Soon they changed their minds while low-crawling away from the battlefield. Asked if Australia’s moves could escalate an Asian arms race, Hill said: "There is an argument that that would encourage others to develop their attack missiles further or to proliferate them. But the proliferation is already there." Sounds sensible. Hill’s comments came just days before Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, was due to visit Australia for talks. Australia has in the past angered some Asian neighbors with its close strategic links to the United States. Getting blown up will change your friends. In Jakarta, an opposition lawmaker in the Indonesian parliament insisted Tuesday that Indonesia was a clear target of any proposed Australian missile defense system. No, you don’t understand. The target is the missiles that our flying at our populus. "We are really concerned with this military buildup, it’s not defensive anymore, it’s offensive already," lawmaker Djoko Susilo said. How exactly can shooting missiles out of the sky be considered offfen... Forget it. I figured out who might be offended. Ron Huisken, an expert in U.S. defense policy, said the government needed to justify why such systems were necessary. "It’s a complicated business. It makes a big difference whether you aspire to defend Australia itself or whether you aspire to defend Australian expeditionary forces going overseas, there’s a lot of holes in the story so far before we spend lots of money," said Huisken, who is based a the Australian National University. Ah, Mr. Huisken works at a University. What a surprise.
Hopefully, Japan will follow as well. Wouldn’t do to look like an easy target. This sea-based system was outlawed under the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, but the United States withdrew from the treaty last year. The plan also calls for the development of ground-based interceptors. Seems to me that any treaties held with the Holy Roman Empire and the Ching Dynasty would also be abrogated. | ||
| Posted by:Super Hose |
| #19 Anyone hear from Murat lately? How can we have a meaningful weapons system discussion without Murat's input? Hunting season on Armenians? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-1-13 10:56:34 PM |
| #18 Anyone hear from Murat lately? How can we have a meaningful weapons system discussion without Murat's input? |
| Posted by: Gasse Katze 2004-1-13 9:19:58 PM |
| #17 Many carpet kssing apologies Rantburgers. But today was a local in-service day and I couldn't find a sitter for Faisal. Normally he hang's out at the park but recently the local gendarmes had to remove him from.. well never mind about that. Anyway , thanks for being nice to Fritz. |
| Posted by: Mom 2004-1-13 9:06:17 PM |
| #16 According to Global Security, the SS-N-22 "Sunburn" missile has a 370 kg warhead, that is not enough to "take down" a carrier. And that is also the reason you have integrated radar coverage (i.e. Aegis, Hawkeyes, all tied into the carrier, I think) that can coordinate an appropriate response to a SU-27 or TU-95 Bear that is getting within launch range of the carrier and sending the intending aircraft to the bottom of the ocean. I am not saying it can't cause some serious damage, but if it was to make launch with the CAP coverage you would be able to track where the aircraft came from and a send them a special "gift." |
| Posted by: djhusmc 2004-1-13 8:45:21 PM |
| #15 Well if you're gonna be in an arms race, you might as well win it. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-1-13 8:10:00 PM |
| #14 LOL OP! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-1-13 7:44:37 PM |
| #13 Rafael... We don't talk about that weapon system. |
| Posted by: Mr..V. Braun 2004-1-13 7:29:19 PM |
| #12 We've already decommissioned our three flying aircraft carriers Yeah but we still have the 'Enterprise' commanded by Captain Picard. Not to mention all the other Star Fleet vessels. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-1-13 6:33:28 PM |
| #11 I read somewhere that these cuties can bring down any aircraft carrier Hey, Faisal, you're out of step, man. We've already decommissioned our three flying aircraft carriers. All that are left are the normal surface version and the two new submarine carriers that have recently been commissioned. The Sunburn, like the oil-seeking missile the Russians designed to bring down our older, shakey cargo aircraft, has been rendered obsolete by American advances in technology. So solly, non-GI, you ruse. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2004-1-13 6:18:35 PM |
| #10 Hi Faisal! Welcome back! When we going hunting? I need to train my Beagles not to laugh. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-1-13 5:43:07 PM |
| #9 SM3 wouldn't be aimed against a SunBurn. But for info a SunBurn carries roughtly 1/10 the explosive power of a Mitsubishi piloted by an educated Japanese warrior. Which needless to say is somewhat quicker that A. A Russian CPU and B. Any ten Jihais. C. Anything named after an Arab. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-1-13 5:41:57 PM |
| #8 Clearly, Australia get it, while the EU may not. Check out the Newsday article: EU makes Economic Overture to N. Korea. Warning - take migraine medicine before reading. Maybe we should make a point of meeting with each company that is setting-up shop in NK to discuss the unlikelihood of qualification for US funded rebuilding contracts in NK. I think everybody involved would catch our drift. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-1-13 4:29:25 PM |
| #7 I have never, ever been able to rationalize just how a defensive system escalates an arms race. Especially when said nation in question does not really possess offensive arms. While Oz could probably give the Indonesians an bloody nose in a naval conflict they do not have the means to prosecute an offensive champaign againt Jakarta. Not that they would anyways. But I think the Aussies are starting to have some of the same worries about their situation that I would in their shoes. A large mostly empty nation with populous neighbors to the north and west. I wouldn't be too suprised if the Kiwis start changing their minds in five to ten years too. |
| Posted by: Cheddarhead 2004-1-13 4:08:35 PM |
| #6 That "sunburn" might be followed by a couple of "sunbursts" over the launcher's capital. In any case, there isn't a Third World nation around that could maintain them well enough to launch them, and the Chinese aren't stupid enough to sign their own death warrants. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-1-13 3:14:59 PM |
| #5 Hmmmm might wanna take a look at the Russian 'Sunburn'. I read somewhere that these cuties can bring down any aircraft carrier and the Bears have it now in Syria and china has them too. |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-13 2:53:21 PM |
| #4 your clearly not a very military minded child are you faisal,to even think your sunburn missles would survive the first strike is a joke in itself.You best go and read about military tactics of the superior allied forces before you drag your russian made flying trash cans into this,after all we all know how good russian weapons systems are don't we? just ask the republican guard.oh wait they were wiped out along with all thier commie weapons before they knew what was happening to them.Don't mess with superior minds faisel it only makes you look even more stupid,oh ps you on boarded your bannana boat yet to come and get me? |
| Posted by: Jon Shep U.K 2004-1-13 2:51:21 PM |
| #3 Hmmmm might wanna take a look at the Russian 'Sunburn'. I read somewhere that these cuties can bring down any aircraft carrier and the Bears have it now in Syria and china has them too. |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-13 2:41:45 PM |
| #2 BH -- exactly. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-1-13 1:31:01 PM |
| #1 "In Jakarta, an opposition lawmaker in the Indonesian parliament insisted Tuesday that Indonesia was a clear target of any proposed Australian missile defense system." Umm... doesn't this sound like an admission that Indonesia intends to lob missiles at Australia? |
| Posted by: BH 2004-1-13 1:20:37 PM |