NZDF General discussion thread

steve33

Member
Afganistan is a fight on the other side of the world that we should be involved in on a bigger scale than what we are, the excuse was used in 2001 one that we couldn,t commit a infantry battalion because they had just come back from Timor and there was truth in it but it has been 6 years.

I saw Ron Mark in parliment hitting out at the government that they simply wouldn,t commit our battalions full stop and it is true.

The attitude the government has taken is that if we keep our heads down hopefully the Islamic facists won,t target us imagine if we had taken that attitude in WW2.

The New Zealand army is becoming nothing more than an aid agency that carries guns i don,t know why anyone would join one of our infantry battalions because you are never going to be deployed except on operations doing things like cyclone relief,mine clearing.

If you are someone that joins up and trains to be an infantry man and you want to test your mettle you will have to go overseas you will not get the chance in the New Zealand army of the 21st century and there are soldiers who join up and want to test there mettle as reckless as that is.
 
Last edited:

Stuart Mackey

New Member
snip Rutherford

You are a bit gun ho, I have an uncle that retired as a full Colonel about 5 years ago, he was pretty happy that he never had to shoot anyone, killing hostages in the name of freedom (who's freedom are you talking about btw) is not the job of the military, saving hostages is.
And I have relitives who slogged through, Greece, Crete, Noth Africa, Italy, Battle of Britain so your Uncle could have that luxury, so that I have the luxury spouting opinion over the internet, that we all are free to enjoy the life that we do.

I'm one of those Kiwi's who believe we live in a very safe part of the world and the chances of anyone doing anything nasty to us are about as likely to happen as me becoming POTUS.
And I am that rare kind of Kiwi's who studies history and knows that there is no such thing as a safe part of the world, and my presence in this nation is testement to that fact.



An air combat force is not something we need, what is the point, I can see a need for the Macchis but nothing more than that. Quite simply I would rather see the government spend money on beneficial industry subsidies, putting money into NZ companies to create a stable economy and higher employment.
The question of an ACF depends entirly on one's world veiw, imo and to limit ones view of threat to the South Pacific when our standard of living and way of life is determined by events outsuide that area is self delusion.
As to subsidies, if a company needs subsidies to survive its questionable that such a company should exist in the first place, but thats another debate perhaps.

I think we need to defend our EEZ, with patrol boats and P3's, have 3/4 frigates to show the flag and be a good citizen in our backyard, fighting wars on the other side of the world isn't what we should get involved in,

And what happens if war comes to our backyard? remember a man by the name of von Spee? or a ship called Sea Eagle? or the ships that were sunk here within living memory? It maybe unpleasant for you, but sometimes defence of our nation, our interests and way of life may depend on action in other parts of the world, its happned in the past, to us and others, and may happen again.

especially pointless conflicts like Iraq, American screwed that one up they gotta clean up the mess they created we don't need to help.

cheers

Rob
No arguments from me on that one, an example of strategic tunnel vision and myopia if ever there was one. Perhaps Clark and Bush are two side of the same coin on seeing the trees and not the forest.
 

Bushwhacker NZ

New Member
I viewed the RNZAF web page & saw they are starting a "Step Up" recruiting page about career opportunities, new aircraft/choppers being procured & so forth. It'll be cool if they did something like that with the Army & Navy as well, if the Army could get an extra 400-500 personnel & Navy about 300-400 it would solve most manpower issues greatly
 

Ozzy Blizzard

New Member
The weapon is certainly raved about by it's users in the US SOCOMD I have read and it would neatly solve the commonality issue within Australian forces, special and otherwise...

Plus I too personally prefer the "conventional" layout in a rifle...
It does look like a good weapon, but if i was going to go down the "classic" rifle road i would probably choose the G36 family. They look cool, are light, accurate and relyable. Pluss you can hang all sorts of goodies off them. But i like the F88, the bullpup means you get more rifle for your length, you get built in optics and you can change out your barells. Fun for the whole family.
 

Stuart Mackey

New Member
snip

If someone studied history they would know how safe we are in this part of the world.
So why have vessels been sunk in NZ waters by vessels from the other side of the planet, at times when we have been protected by the most powerfull navies in the world?



I'm trying to think the last time a New Zealander died in military combat (or terrorism) within 5000 kms of NZ. (Darwin is more than 5000 kms from Auckland, NZ).
And this proves there is no threat to NZ how? You do realise that there is a world beyoned 500km's of our shores and most of our export income is from there?

I'm assuming the last time was WW11 and more than 60 years ago.
Yeah, and? There was 99 years between Waterloo and the outbreak of war in 1914 and no major threat to Britain in that time. Perhaps you think the British should have scrapped all their battleships just because there was no prospect of fleet action untill 1914, or that there was no viable threat to Britain between Waterloo and the building of High Seas Fleet?.


Maybe I missed some major conflict on our doorstep. It must be awful living with an irrational fear.
Must be nice to live in a world where reality never intrudes because you closed your eyes and stuck your finger's in your ears.

One thing that I find strange is how many people here seem to easily spend billions of dollars on wishlists and then criticise their politicions for not doing so.
What is strange? that individuals question government policy?

Even the National party understands this.
What about the National party?
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
It does look like a good weapon, but if i was going to go down the "classic" rifle road i would probably choose the G36 family. They look cool, are light, accurate and relyable. Pluss you can hang all sorts of goodies off them. But i like the F88, the bullpup means you get more rifle for your length, you get built in optics and you can change out your barells. Fun for the whole family.
But the downside of the bullpup outlay is the difficulty of employing the weapon during bayonet fighting, difficulties with attachments including grenade launchers and with in-built optics you cannot employ other sighting devices such as night vision or thermal sights.

In addition, if your built-in optical sight gets smashed and you can't return it to an armourer immediately... :shudder

I personally prefered the F-88 "S" model which now comes with an integral "picatinny" rail. This way multiple sight types could be employed on the same weapon.

Personal weapons preferences are "horses for courses" issues though. The G36 is a good weapon by all reports, however it looks rather bulky to my eye (I've never seen one in reality though) and if so, then it may prove somewhat awkward during CQB type operations.

The beauty in the H&K 416 in my opinion, like the FN-SCAR is it's ability to "re-chamber" for 7.62mm, something the G36 can't manage as far as I'm aware.

The ability to "hang" other systems on a weapon is primarily a matter of how many rails it mounts. I'd be surprised if the G36 mounted more than the H&K 416 however...

Anyways, we're getting rather off-topic here...
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
First, as the G36 has 2 optics you are not automatically screwed when one optic is broken.
You can also use night vision with the G36.
As for being bulky. I never had the feeling of it being bulky.
And if you think it is too long you can order a G36k. The same characteristics up to 400m but shorter and so better to use in close combat environments. Our light infantry is changing from G36 to G36k.

And you are right when stating that it is just a matter of how many rails you hang on a G36 or HK461. With enough rails both can be packed full of toys.

None of them should have a countable advantage of reliability over the other.
The HK461 is interesting for AR-15 users as one can go on using the handgrip section of the AR-15 and just has to order the rest of the weapon.
 

steve33

Member
I agree with you KiwiRob. Thankfully we are part of the majority in NZ and we rarely see NZ service people dying (or killing) needlessly so that some can "test their mettle".

If someone studied history they would know how safe we are in this part of the world. I'm trying to think the last time a New Zealander died in military combat (or terrorism) within 5000 kms of NZ. (Darwin is more than 5000 kms from Auckland, NZ). I'm assuming the last time was WW11 and more than 60 years ago. Maybe I missed some major conflict on our doorstep. It must be awful living with an irrational fear.

One thing that I find strange is how many people here seem to easily spend billions of dollars on wishlists and then criticise their politicions for not doing so. Even the National party understands this.
If a New Zealand soldier killed Taliban or Al Qaeda or was killed in Afganistan it would not be needless,the sep11 attacks were planned from Afganistan and it is our war as much as anyone else.

New Zealanders think it is not there war and they can tuck themselves away down in New Zealand it is not there problem well they are wrong we fly on the planes that Al qaeda want to blow up we go into buildings that they can blow up they don,t descriminate and are a danger to New Zealanders and we should stand up to them in Afganistan.

And some soldiers want to see action they don,t just want to be parade ground soldiers like our SAS who said in the documentry series that they want the most of all an overseas deployment if you are adverse to risk and danger you are in the wrong business being in the infantry.
 

steve33

Member
Stuart my grandfather was also on Greece, Crete and served in the desert from June 1941-Jan 43.

He was in 22nd Battalion Headquarters Company transport platoon.

What battalion was your relative in?.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
First, as the G36 has 2 optics you are not automatically screwed when one optic is broken.
You can also use night vision with the G36.
As for being bulky. I never had the feeling of it being bulky.
And if you think it is too long you can order a G36k. The same characteristics up to 400m but shorter and so better to use in close combat environments. Our light infantry is changing from G36 to G36k.

And you are right when stating that it is just a matter of how many rails you hang on a G36 or HK461. With enough rails both can be packed full of toys.

None of them should have a countable advantage of reliability over the other.
The HK461 is interesting for AR-15 users as one can go on using the handgrip section of the AR-15 and just has to order the rest of the weapon.
I was referring to the Steyr AUG with the comment about the broken optics. Even with that weapon you are not entirely screwed, because it has little "iron" sights on top of the scope, however they are tiny and virtually useless. You'd almost be better off firing "instinctively" with the weapon...

As I mentioned above, I claim no expertise whatsover in relation to the G36. Personally I think it's an excellent weapon from all I've read and H&K have demonstrated their expertise by creating BOTH these weapons...

Having handled M16A1 and M16/M203 variants, I personally preferred the "feel" of this weapon over the F-88 Steyr, like some people prefer BMW's over Audi's, despite there sometimes being little practical difference between the models of similar designation....
 

Stuart Mackey

New Member
Stuart my grandfather was also on Greece, Crete and served in the desert from June 1941-Jan 43.

He was in 22nd Battalion Headquarters Company transport platoon.

What battalion was your relative in?.
Had an uncle with the Waikato's and my Grandad was with the RAF as ground crew, I forget which other relative's were overseas unfortunatly, there were a number of them.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
I have relatives who have fought in just about all the conflicts NZ has ever been involved in from the Maori Land Wars, Boer War, WW1 & WW2, we missed Korea but made up for it in Malayia, Suez and Vietnam, my grandfather had the most action fighting in Greece, Crete, Africa and was a member of the Long Range Desert Group. So apart from having a family with a pretty good military background I still don't believe that NZ will ever be in any danger, we are not a threat to any terrorist groups (maybe some mad Maoris will have a go at blowing something up one day) and I strongly believe America brought 9/11 on themselves so we probably shouldn't have been a part of that, although I am pretty proud of what our guys have done over there.

I also can't see there ever being a global conflict like WW1 & WW2, we are a lot more sane now, besides what country would want to start a big war like that or even have the ability to do so.
 

Chino

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
I'm from Singapore and as you are all well aware that in our part of the world everyone is now arming themselves to the eyeballs.

There is not only more weapons being procured, but there are also many new weapon systems introduced to this region in the last ten years.

(Of course, Singapore is one of the prime culprit, but the others are not to be outdone.)

Not only are the tanks getting bigger and the aircrafts getting more sophisticated - we now have in our region submarines, MLRS (and possibly guided missiles), attack helicopters, stealth ships, possibly supersonic anti-ship missiles etc etc.

Thailand even got themselves an aircraft carrier.:confused:

...

But I think NZ is right in doing the exact opposite. The strain on the economy on maintaining war-footing equal to Asia will be immense.

Geographically, NZ is too far-flung for most people to want to attack/invade them.

And besides, there is no way they can protect their SLOC/shipping in times of war all the way to Asia in - where most of their shipping will have to pass through - in the event of war there.

To have that capability that far away from home would bankrupt them.

Better that they rely on their allies like Aust and US.

Wars usually happen between neighbours. And NZ does not have any neighbours other than Australia and the South Pole, so I think there is no need for them to waste money on big ticket war items.

They already have a formidable geographic isolation as a defence and failing which, they have formidable infantry troops.
 

stryker NZ

New Member
I also can't see there ever being a global conflict like WW1 & WW2, we are a lot more sane now, besides what country would want to start a big war like that or even have the ability to do so.
im pretty sure thats what people thought after world war 1. Just because there dosen't appear to be another big conflict brewing on the horizon dosen't mean there will never be one again and it would be naive to not take at least minimal precautions to defend ourselves. And im not going to go into who would start a conflict of that magnitude, anyone could it only takes one lunatic with a bit of support to get into a seat of power and start causing trouble
 

steve33

Member
I have relatives who have fought in just about all the conflicts NZ has ever been involved in from the Maori Land Wars, Boer War, WW1 & WW2, we missed Korea but made up for it in Malayia, Suez and Vietnam, my grandfather had the most action fighting in Greece, Crete, Africa and was a member of the Long Range Desert Group. So apart from having a family with a pretty good military background I still don't believe that NZ will ever be in any danger, we are not a threat to any terrorist groups (maybe some mad Maoris will have a go at blowing something up one day) and I strongly believe America brought 9/11 on themselves so we probably shouldn't have been a part of that, although I am pretty proud of what our guys have done over there.

I also can't see there ever being a global conflict like WW1 & WW2, we are a lot more sane now, besides what country would want to start a big war like that or even have the ability to do so.
America brought it on themselves is that because they back Israel preventing the muslims from going in and slaughtering them.

We are not a threat to muslim terror groups no but they are a threat to us they blow up planes that we fly on they bomb trains we ride on they bomb buildings we go into they don,t discriminate,we have been lucky up to this point as far as casulties that luck won,t last,this fight is ours as much as anyones.

By the way there is far more chance of a mad muslim in our country letting off a bomb than any Maori.
 

fob

New Member
America brought it on themselves is that because they back Israel preventing the muslims from going in and slaughtering them.

We are not a threat to muslim terror groups no but they are a threat to us they blow up planes that we fly on they bomb trains we ride on they bomb buildings we go into they don,t discriminate,we have been lucky up to this point as far as casulties that luck won,t last,this fight is ours as much as anyones.

By the way there is far more chance of a mad muslim in our country letting off a bomb than any Maori.
Excuse me if I digress a little of the topic of the thread,

America did not bring it all on themselves, this is simple rhetoric that may suit the public at large. The British train and bus bombings, the Bali bombings etc are all focused on western nations, its called Jihad it is religious extremists who are hell bent on destroying our way of life and what it stands for, now note not all muslims hold this view and I know the majority want religious tolerance.

Israel has gone to war and defeated its neighbors mainly Jordan, Syria and Egypt backed by the US of course but then again Jordan, Syria and Egypt were backed by the Russians in both wars 1967 & 1973, Egypt and Syria had the upper hand in military numbers and equipment, Israel won because of better tactics and ingenuity in fact the war was also a show case of USA vs Russian weapons being trialled out. The British and French supported Israel over the conflict of the Suez Canal against Egypt in 1956 which it also won.

Israel mainly fights its own wars it has US backing sometimes but not all the times, note that the US may front up and declare non involvement and get the CIA to run the war for them it has been known to happen! Russia sort of did the same thing too hence the distrust of super powers.. The US always has a vested interest in its allies that buy their weapons and are pro democratic, its capitalism through and through but so are our countries it's what made the cold war, capitalism vs communism. Now that Russia has succumbed to capitalism it only leaves dictatorships and terrorist groups, China I guess is a little different though (another topic for another time). Israel even buys some of its weapons from the French, British and South Africans, to name a few, so indirect military support and advice and all the political perks go with it.

( Now back to the point) The British were predominantly controlling Palestine as it was known at that time after WWI in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration it put forth the seeds for a Jewish state. In 1948 Israel was declared a state this came about by a UN vote which carved out the new territories for the state of Israel and a Palestinian state, the British had withdrawn from Palestine after WWII.

So who is to blame over Israel being a state in a neighborhood of Arab communities that have been against it from day one is not altogether an American problem, the British, French, UN and even Europe with strong sympathies towards the Jews because of the Nazi death camps all played a part that shaped Israel. I would hazard a guess and say that NZ and Australia also voted for a Jewish state as well, much to the dismay and protest of arabs and palestinians alike.

America being the most powerful western country became an ideal target by radical muslims with anti-western sentiments to make a big statement to the rest of us hence the aftermath of 9/11. NZ was not an important enough target to make that kind of statement, but should we beg indifference because it isn't our fault or problem? Given the history of western influence in the region, that is our oil comes from that region, we use the Suez Canal for trade routes, we are part of the UN that made decisions for Israel to become a state, we have had and still I think peace keeping commitments to the middle east, it is considered a religious pilgrimage destination for christians, etc. So we do have some interest in the region even though we are thousands of kms away.

Yes you are right, how does fighting in Afghanistan and not in Iraq get us off the hook as a non threatening ally? To Taliban fighters a NZ soldier shooting at them is a western soldier that is trying to kill them, can they differentiate? Conflicts quickly turn into us and them, and indiscriminate practices take place where suicide bombers dont ask which country your from! But we should stand up against this type of terrorist action we are part of the problem and should be part of the answer and not play the blame game or we're too far away its not our problem mentality.

We are part of a wider community in which we need to help with peace and security in the region and any growing unrest, and not look for easy options after all the Americans are one our greatest allies regardless of ANZUS.

cheers
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
...So who is to blame over Israel being a state in a neighborhood of Arab communities that have been against it from day one is not altogether an American problem, the British, French, USA, UN and even Europe with strong sympathies towards the Jews because of the Nazi death camps all played a part that shaped Israel. I would hazard a guess and say that NZ and Australia also voted for a Jewish state as well. ...
The USSR supported the partitioning of the British Mandate of Palestine, & formally recognised Israel 3 days after its declaration of independence - the 5th country to do so, & 1st European country.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
America brought it on themselves is that because they back Israel preventing the muslims from going in and slaughtering them.

We are not a threat to muslim terror groups no but they are a threat to us they blow up planes that we fly on they bomb trains we ride on they bomb buildings we go into they don,t discriminate,we have been lucky up to this point as far as casulties that luck won,t last,this fight is ours as much as anyones.

By the way there is far more chance of a mad muslim in our country letting off a bomb than any Maori.

I think you are wrong here, I see a Maori activist going off the deep end and blowing up some government building in NZ as a far bigger and more realistic threat to us than any Muslim.

As for another world war could anyone realistically see it happening, I can't see it. WW1 was brewing for a long time before Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, it was just the spark that ignited it, WW2 was a direct result of WW1. I sure as hell wouldn't want NZ to get involved in any fight for Israel's survival in the Middle East if that ever brewed up into something significant. I can't see any major conflict arising in Asia except china retaking Taiwan, I couldn't see us getting involved in that.

So all in all I really believe that NZ is probably one of the safest countries for anyone to live in the world today, we are not important enough for a terrorist to target, it wouldn't make enough column inches, our isolation is our greatest defence.
 
Top