Jissy, first off, I am not trying to address you in a condescending manner and if you think so, I will simply stop responding to your posts as I'm not a fan of getting into flame wars.
Secondly, I don't quite share the same assumptions that you do, hence, I have to try to be clear about why I disagree. No disrespect is intended but you have not contributed any significant information in the discussion on DU ammo alternatives. And I am a fan of using then right tool (or ammo) for the right job.
It's an objective statement in the sense you are clearly pro-banning DU ammo. Please list the tactical cons of doing so for Australia/US and then list the alternatives and their performance characteristics. When you do so, you would have done your research. Only at that time can you claim to have weighed the pros and the cons. You have thus far looked at the cons. What are the pros?
I'm not even suggesting that you are 'anti-military'. If I thought you were 'anti-military', I would not have even responded to your post. Further, I find that you are using a strawman argument to enter into a debate (let us talk about how we feel honestly and openly).
You are however not fully articulating in a balanced manner the other side of the coin.
Yes, I actually believe that the defense industry is seeking some alternatives but the alternatives are not as yet as powerful. BTW, can you do some research in this area and inform your fellow forum member?
Are you seeking donations to sent up a fund so as to develop a more effective tank round that does not use DU?
Do you know that in another military forum, the forum members are actually banding together to buy medical supplies for their own country's soldiers, as they have discovered that their medics are not well equipped. And that Asian country is facing an active and current insurgency. Do you know which country I am talking about? The members of that forum are working towards becoming responsible stakeholders. Likewise, Singapore based military forums are working on being responsible stakeholders too and there is active debate on what constitutes responsible stakeholder-ship.
What can you as an individual do (if you don't like DU ammo)?
How would you employ an EMP weapon? Is it available and deployed by the ADF?
If any country has the will or the ability to challenge Australia in open armoured warfare, it must be a capable opponent. Such potential capable armoured opponents could include China, India or Pakistan (though conflict with any of them is very, very unlikely at the moment). What about a war between N. Korea and S. Korea? If it happens, would Australian troops and tanks be involved? What about China and Taiwan? If war happens, would Australian troops and tanks be involved?
We have to recognize that the US is in graceful decline and that other countries that are pro-US countries (like Australia) have to step-up to fill the void emerging in the global commons. In particular, the security environment in Asia is dynamic and changing.
I for one am actually worried about the decline of the US.
At times, soldiers do need to operate beside them and I am worried about ERA tiles.
When you put it that way. No. But for the tank crew to have off spring, the tank crew must get through the initial shooting war alive. I am aware of my own country's defensive strengths and weaknesses, but I suspect you may be less aware of your own country's vulnerabilities.
Please don't tell me you know tank crewmen. It's pointless statement. I can also tell you that my family has former tank commanders, armoured recce senior leadership and armoured infantry troopers... Does this listing enrich the the discussion?
I encourage you to do even more research. Kindly inform us of the alternatives rather than just rant. You can start by having links in your posts to show that you have done more research than watch a documentary. I have shown you enough respect by including 2 links in my prior post. Care to show me that you care to do the same.
Hi there OPSSG,
I don't like petty banter either, so let's not fall into that trap.
My poser was trying to get others here, with far more knowledge and experience than I will ever have, to firstly contemplate the vexing issue of DU and hopefully come up with some ideas.
And yes, I quite clearly do not like DU ammo, because of its potentially dangerous long term side effects for the handler and environment it is used in. Also, it is an OH&S issue for the employer, soldiers have enough dangers without adding potential side effects of handling DU.
You ask that I present a more balanced view, giving both sides of the coin, like the pros of using DU, (besides its one shot tank killer properties, excellent as that is) I cannot see any others frankly. I stated what I saw as an alternative (attack method) in my previous answer, using aircraft and satellite etc.
I will admit this, if we ended up in a fight where the enemy was known to have DU ammo, we would have to be prepared to use it too, if air support could not take all the threats out first. But then, post hostilites, we should clean it up.
The reason I mentioned I knew tank crewmen was to illustrate that I was aware of their concerns, and only did so after your response with a 'what if' it was your son in a tank.
I am not a military expert on munitions and the terminology, like some on this site, so it is of no use for me to try to appear that I 'know stuff'. I am waiting for those more knowledgeable to enlighten me, and others here, on the pros and cons, and the possibilities of alternatives.
The 'pros', I have already stated, I put this forth in my opening statement, it kills heavily armoured targets effectively. At the moment, I just see the cons outweighing. I just wish we had an alternative in operation.
You list what others are doing, in a pro-active way, for their defense forces and personnel. Excellent, I am glad there are positive, pro-active members here,
that gives the community a very high worth in my mind and I applaud those involved.
There is more than one country in SE Asia that has insurgency problems, and other potential security threats. We are well aware of all that, "down under", particularly as we live next door the world's largest (population) Muslim country, and of that, according to the Interior Minister some years back, "only 2% are radical" (ie: 2 million)...
EMP weaponry? It is publicly known it has been in development. I have read various (publicly available) articles on the subject over the years, and naturally, the area is full of conjecture as to how it is harnessed and potential deployment in a war setting, if at all. Beyond that, even if I did have anything more particular to say, I certainly would not do so. I am sure, when it is all worked out, we will all hear about it after it is used in a declared operation.
As for what am I going to do? Keep asking questions and, hopefully, gain some creative insights and suggestions that may prove constructively beneficial. I will then lobby appropriately, as I have done in the past.
I know we are not going to stop using DU ammo, not until we can swap it with something as effective, that isn't as dangerous to handle etc. The point is, if no one talks about it and opens up debate, then status quo will continue.
Our forces deserve better than a blind eye to an increasing problem.
As for Oz in a shoot out, I completely agree, it is highly unlikely (and extremely foolhardy) that we will be in a war with our second biggest trading partner, nor with any of our fellow Commonwealth members and cricketers to boot! However, our devotion to the States does lead us to make dubious choices, like entering Iraq, and ordering equipment like the heavy Abrams battle tanks. For our local region, according to the pundits, they are not a good choice. We need an effectively equipped deterrent force that can operate in local regions.
What I am sure of, until we, Australia, are strong enough to deal with potential security issues in our own local region, (and I am not talking about the regional superpower China here), so we can militarily take care of ourselves without outside assistance, (WW2 should have taught us that, but thank God for America!) we will remain silent as to the actions of others in our region, even when human rights abuses occur. East Timor being the exception, but then, oil lurks underwater there abouts... Papua and "Irian Jaya" (West Papua) are quite another matter.
Besides, we can also utilize our forces in many humanitarian ways, as we (partly) effectively did in the tsunami crisis. But we still could have done more, if we had more state of the art equpiment, instead of cutting corners that cost lives, like the chopper (mechanical failure) accident in Indonesia.
As for knowing our weaknesses, militarily, all that has been discussed openly in the press for years. My main point is, as we are an island continent, in my humble lay-person opinion, we need aircraft carriers, three is ideal, according to another discussion on this site. We also need other effective amphibious caft, some of which we are getting, according to the chat on the relevant site here. We do have some strengths too, of course, that mainly being the capability of our highly trained personnel, frontline and in support. I know our SAS are highly regarded by our Allies, for instance. We just need more of them!
To further illustrate our resourcefulness, we kept the F111 flying in an effective and active readiness sense longer than America, (due to budget constraints of course) and to do so, we developed a boron patch, to keep it together when stress fractures appeared. Aussies are resourceful and highly innovative, inventive and creative.
I look forward to our Defense White Paper, coming out very soon, but, in the press today, it appears the budget razor gang will cut back our military expenditure. That is to be
much lamented,
and quite possibly very short sighted.
and I take your criticism in tow; I will try to post relevant links in future, but time, as always, can be difficult to find, and not all I refer to is available online.
cheers
jissy
