New Zealand invasion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rayna

New Member
I would say the possibility of an invasion of NZ is increasing everyday...

Invade New Zealand

Now back to serious discussions... :)
LOL I knew that this video would come up here the moment i saw the title of this thread... Remember we sent you back on your ass after these games :p

Knew Black Sheep would come up as well that was one revolting movie...


Thanks Everyone, So far I have found this thread very interesting and informative and made me consider areas and aspects I never considered before (haven't finished it yet)

I don't know much our defense capabilities but i was considering One thing, driving through Auckland waterfront everyday you see one navy ship in the harbor and i have always thought. "One missile and it would be all over."

For us one or two big ships don't make much sense. We have massive coastline:landmass so wouldn't it make more sense to have lots more smaller, higher powered boats and ships (still of course armed) that could cover more of our coasts and be of more use? Remember I don't have any experience in such things i am just trying to think of an idea in a more logical way.


One thing about our defense force is that we are a peace keeping nation, we of course assist when needed and help out the neighboring islands but on a massive scale there is not much else we do.
 

Ozzy Blizzard

New Member
Wonder how long it will be before we see a chinese naval base in Fiji.
I don't think that is ever likely to happen. That would mean Fiji would fall under China's sphere of influence, accept Fiji is well out of Beijing's geographical reach. China simply can not be the regional security guarantor, it simply does not have the blue water capability (and don't mention the USN). Fiji would be awfully exposed and on the wrong side of the dominant regional power and the global superpower, and at the mercy of western economic aid and tourism. Without those two Fiji falls apart economically. Plus the last think Frank wants is western intelligence agencies actively funding and training internal opposition movements.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
I don't think that is ever likely to happen. That would mean Fiji would fall under China's sphere of influence, accept Fiji is well out of Beijing's geographical reach. China simply can not be the regional security guarantor, it simply does not have the blue water capability (and don't mention the USN). Fiji would be awfully exposed and on the wrong side of the dominant regional power and the global superpower, and at the mercy of western economic aid and tourism. Without those two Fiji falls apart economically. Plus the last think Frank wants is western intelligence agencies actively funding and training internal opposition movements.

Isn't that Chinese purpose on Pacific nations more on reducing Taiwan influences (or more preciese Taiwan's money influences). Seems it's more on reducing any potential supporter for Taiwan in International Diplomatic game.
 

Rayna

New Member
The USA is putting increased pressure on NZ in relation to future commitments to operations in Afghanistan;
LiveLeak.com - US (to NZ): Fight for us, you may need us (US' Vietnam mantra)

In fact the new US ambassador to NATO makes reference to potential future threats to NZ.
The logic is simple really. Making an appropriate contribution becomes the equivalent to paying an insurance premium.

I read this article today in the NZ herald, was going to post it here but you bet me to it. US: Fight for us, you may need us - National - NZ Herald News more there and videos.

I found this article quite fear mongering bordering on a threat. Those who read this article what did you think? The way most of it was worded and implied was one sided. So when reading the article you need to take that into account.

I have always supported Afghanistan and the efforts we are putting in with our SAS and other troops. More? I would say yes even if this article wasn't published but is there any people who are members of NZSAS here or others are currently there that have a better perspective of what is happening and what is needed?
 

Kip

New Member
The USA is putting increased pressure on NZ in relation to future commitments to operations in Afghanistan;
LiveLeak.com - US (to NZ): Fight for us, you may need us (US' Vietnam mantra)

In fact the new US ambassador to NATO makes reference to potential future threats to NZ.
The logic is simple really. Making an appropriate contribution becomes the equivalent to paying an insurance premium.
We have sent SAS there in the past and currently have a provincial reconstruction team - initially sent several years ago and continuing. Perhaps there is a "what have you done for me lately" mentality amongst Obama's military. We need to time our fighting deployments more carefully. Help out too early and it will be forgotten.
 

Ozzy Blizzard

New Member
Isn't that Chinese purpose on Pacific nations more on reducing Taiwan influences (or more preciese Taiwan's money influences). Seems it's more on reducing any potential supporter for Taiwan in International Diplomatic game.
In the south pacific, exactly. PROC has no intention or the capability to extend its reach into to the south pacific. Its all about Taiwan and the UN.
 

recce.k1

Well-Known Member
China simply can not be the regional security guarantor, it simply does not have the blue water capability (and don't mention the USN). Fiji would be awfully exposed and on the wrong side of the dominant regional power and the global superpower, and at the mercy of western economic aid and tourism. Without those two Fiji falls apart economically. Plus the last think Frank wants is western intelligence agencies actively funding and training internal opposition movements.
IMO I'd agree that Fiji is an unlikely place for a Chinese naval base (granted strange things can happen when bigger countries buy off Island politicians but I can't see something as huge an event as that happening ... surely even the Commodore doesn't seem anti-west in his ramblings, he stills stands behind the Fijian flag with the Union Jack in his RN-type naval uniform if that really means anything:D)?!

Mind you, a Chinese naval base in Fiji could have perverse consequences for NZ's political future for example the Greens (who are pro Tibet thus anti C...) would probably rush up to join the Army or Territorials to ward off their "enemy" and the anti nuclear movement would have to debate whether they protest a new major nuclear power being in "our" back yard or whether to invite US nuclear warships into "our" harbours again to preserve "their way of life" (eg better to be drinking latte's and going to film festivals or maybe plowing one's organic vegetable gardens than say, having to do real hard labour that's an absolute killer for disobeying the new authorities) Seeing the new kid major nuclear power doesn't care much for the environment/pollution/efficient technologies I'd say the Greens and the Anti-Nuc's would have to go for the latter and welcome the US back :D

BTW my recent rant on Fiji/(China) may have come across as pro-the Commodore, to be clear I'm not supporting his coup as such, simply saying that improved dialogue is needed as the guy ain't going away (even pre-coup the Govt of the day couldn't get rid of him!) plus NZ's part in establishing the contentious pro-indigenous Constitution in the late 80's also simply means NZ needs to face up and help sort out something more relevent to the 21st Century (seeing that ethnic Fijians are now the majority again) as otherwise elections will simply be years away so why posture (it's so H1) or be actively destroying the Fijian economy with sanctions?

Isn't that Chinese purpose on Pacific nations more on reducing Taiwan influences (or more preciese Taiwan's money influences). Seems it's more on reducing any potential supporter for Taiwan in International Diplomatic game.
This is the real worry and the unintended consequences in years to come.

China has been winning this battle in recent years over Taiwan.

Both countries though have plowed hundreds of millions in loans and aid into the region.

Some Pacific countries are finding it hard to pay back these loans.

I wonder what the small print said in the loan contracts when loans start defaulting?

Who will be bank rolling these island counties in future years (to help pay off the debt)? Will they be in China's pocket? Will more Chinese technical personnel establish spy bases in the Pacific? Throw in more crime and money laundering sydicates to keep the locals pre-occupied with surviving in amongst criminal elements and paramilitary police units on the other hand roughing up the locals etc. Maybe the PLA(N) will get that shiny Naval base in Fiji after-all!

Seriously the Waihopi spy base in NZ had its damaged aerial cover replaced just recently, and the anti-bases movement spouted their usual anti-stuff. If I were them I'd be a little bit more supportive of NZ's role in the western intelligence alliance, the world down here is changing in some long drawn out slow motion change to the "natural" order of things, which will evolve over time, but evolve it is. As above their way of life will not be as easy as it has been and maybe they should be thinking of the pros and cons rather just the cons of their world view.
 

recce.k1

Well-Known Member
I don't know much our defense capabilities but i was considering One thing, driving through Auckland waterfront everyday you see one navy ship in the harbor and i have always thought. "One missile and it would be all over."
Don't worry, naval ships the world over are exposed when in port. For them too, "One missile and it would be all over." more-or-less applies.

That's the beauty of living in a democratic nation, one doesn't have armed guards miles away from the facility pointing guns at the public if they happen to stop their car look towards said facility (let alone take a photo of it)!

However you do raise a couple of valid related points.
i). In this day and age of terrorism, easy air travel for tourism etc, some rogue operatives could do some damage (even on a minor scale it was reported last year that some taggers "tagged" a visiting RAAF C-17)! So improved security and monitoring systems at the very least (these are being actioned etc).

ii). IMO Too many of buildings on bases are still wooden WW2 type structures (some knocked up in a hurry but well enough made and maintained to still look the part and carry out its functions inside etc). However one would have thought ALL buildings should have been replaced post-WW2 with concrete structures (etc) and some partially/wholly underground. Anyway maybe something for the Govt to consider (it would also be a boon for the construction and supply industry).
 

swerve

Super Moderator
...
ii). IMO Too many of buildings on bases are still wooden WW2 type structures (some knocked up in a hurry but well enough made and maintained to still look the part and carry out its functions inside etc). However one would have thought ALL buildings should have been replaced post-WW2 with concrete structures (etc) and some partially/wholly underground. ...
In NZ, maybe, but we can't do that at Portsmouth. Some of the buildings are protected ancient monuments.

Note: this is not a joke. Anyone who has been inside Portsmouth naval base can confirm that many of the buildings in use today have plaques on them indicating their protected status. The RN has to preserve them. It's a price we pay for having a very old navy.
 

Rayna

New Member
In NZ, maybe, but we can't do that at Portsmouth. Some of the buildings are protected ancient monuments.

Note: this is not a joke. Anyone who has been inside Portsmouth naval base can confirm that many of the buildings in use today have plaques on them indicating their protected status. The RN has to preserve them. It's a price we pay for having a very old navy.
That would make sense actually, many bases and the buildings on it are protected now. They are a part of history. I remember when i was in San Francisco we went around to all the old bases. (The Presidio) They are land marked and protected. No longer used but they are still there.
I am sure, all the batteries along Tamaki drive (in Auckland) are protected as well, old, falling apart and most probably useless now but they are apart of history and we would be paying for upkeep of them.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
The difference here is that the old buildings I mentioned are in the heart of our main naval base, and are still used.
 

Rayna

New Member
The difference here is that the old buildings I mentioned are in the heart of our main naval base, and are still used.
True which is a joke. They really should discontinue using them, keep them as landmarks and start building some newer usable ones, In the long run it will be a benefit. Of course the old ones stay there it just becomes another Presidio.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Difficult, unless they move the base. Move out of all the old buildings, & you stop using a large part of the land area of the base. It can't expand on the same site (it's surrounded by a city, built right up to the perimeter wall), & it's pretty full. I don't know where they'd put the new buildings you propose. Also, buildings which the public can't visit, or even see from the outside, aren't much use as landmarks. Opening them up would mean withdrawing even more of the already restricted area of the base from military use. I've only seen them because I worked inside the base (as a civilian contractor) for a while.
 

Rayna

New Member
Don't worry, naval ships the world over are exposed when in port. For them too, "One missile and it would be all over." more-or-less applies.
Good points but what i was getting at is we have one, while many other countries have more than one. That's all we got, once that's gone ain't got much left.


Difficult, unless they move the base. Move out of all the old buildings, & you stop using a large part of the land area of the base. It can't expand on the same site (it's surrounded by a city, built right up to the perimeter wall), & it's pretty full. I don't know where they'd put the new buildings you propose. Also, buildings which the public can't visit, or even see from the outside, aren't much use as landmarks. Opening them up would mean withdrawing even more of the already restricted area of the base from military use. I've only seen them because I worked inside the base (as a civilian contractor) for a while.
Point taken, :/ No idea what to suggest. See in NZ we have lots of coastal line which we could end up using if it ever came to it but I guess its a lot more difficult in countries like the UK with a more dense population. Are they still in averaged shape there? Are they able to do the job that it still needs to do? If not, perhaps they do need to start looking at some reconstruction.
 

Ozzy Blizzard

New Member
IMO I'd agree that Fiji is an unlikely place for a Chinese naval base (granted strange things can happen when bigger countries buy off Island politicians but I can't see something as huge an event as that happening ... surely even the Commodore doesn't seem anti-west in his ramblings, he stills stands behind the Fijian flag with the Union Jack in his RN-type naval uniform if that really means anything:D)?!
In reality he has little choice. Again china can not be substituted for the US/AUS/NZ as regional security guarantor. Currently the US has not involved itself, do you think the commodore wants to cross Obama like that?

Mind you, a Chinese naval base in Fiji could have perverse consequences for NZ's political future for example the Greens (who are pro Tibet thus anti C...) would probably rush up to join the Army or Territorials to ward off their "enemy" and the anti nuclear movement would have to debate whether they protest a new major nuclear power being in "our" back yard or whether to invite US nuclear warships into "our" harbours again to preserve "their way of life" (eg better to be drinking latte's and going to film festivals or maybe plowing one's organic vegetable gardens than say, having to do real hard labour that's an absolute killer for disobeying the new authorities) Seeing the new kid major nuclear power doesn't care much for the environment/pollution/efficient technologies I'd say the Greens and the Anti-Nuc's would have to go for the latter and welcome the US back :D
There would all of a sudden be a whiff of a legitimate threat, and Wellington may start taking defense seriously once again.

BTW my recent rant on Fiji/(China) may have come across as pro-the Commodore, to be clear I'm not supporting his coup as such, simply saying that improved dialogue is needed as the guy ain't going away (even pre-coup the Govt of the day couldn't get rid of him!) plus NZ's part in establishing the contentious pro-indigenous Constitution in the late 80's also simply means NZ needs to face up and help sort out something more relevent to the 21st Century (seeing that ethnic Fijians are now the majority again) as otherwise elections will simply be years away so why posture (it's so H1) or be actively destroying the Fijian economy with sanctions?
Agreed. The Fijian political system is defiantly broke, and if the commodore is sincere this could actually be a better outcome, but I'm not convinced as yet.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Point taken, :/ No idea what to suggest. See in NZ we have lots of coastal line which we could end up using if it ever came to it but I guess its a lot more difficult in countries like the UK with a more dense population. Are they still in averaged shape there? Are they able to do the job that it still needs to do? If not, perhaps they do need to start looking at some reconstruction.
Weellll . . . . one option would be to reduce the size of Portsmouth navy base, & relocate a lot of stuff elsewhere. That would have been very easy not many years ago, & is still feasible, because the RN has shrunk so much that it doesn't use all its old bases. Some have been sold off, but there's still spare capacity out there. The favoured solution, though, is to concentrate in Portsmouth (the biggest), & withdraw from other bases, for financial reasons. Close down a base completely & you can sell it off.

The old buildings are still usable. Apart from some very nice houses (18th century?), which I think are occupied by senior officers, I remember seeing similarly old buildings which appeared to be used as storehouses, workshops & offices. I can't be sure, as my pass only allowed me inside one building: the (relatively) modern one I was working in. Trying to peek in others didn't seem a good idea. ;)
 

james chong

New Member
South Korea's airforce

The F16's would have been operable years ago had NZ accepted them, and the F18's don't enter service till next year. However 71 Hornets +24 SH's from the RAAF + 28 RNZAF F16's does, when combined, provide a larger force then any in the region outside of China and India. And in any defensive scenario for either Australia or New Zealand I cannot see the other nation being uninvolved.
Let us not forget South Korea's airforce. The South Koreans have 39 F-15K Strike Eagles with 20 more on order, 134 Block 52 F-16 C and Ds, 35 Block 32 F-16 C and Ds, 95 F4-E Phantoms, 135 F-E/Fs. This force is of course meant to deter North Korea but please do not be impressed with just China and India.

Its navy is equally impressive with one Aegis combat system capable destroyer (Sejong the Great class) in operation with another three more planned.
Next up, they have 6 Chungmugong Yi Sunshin class destroyers in operation. These have KDCOM-II combat management system which is derived from the Royal Navy's Type 23 frigate's SSCS combat management system.
This is followed by 3 Gwanggaeto the Great class destroyers and 9 Ulsan class frigates.
Its amphibious capability is also growing with the intoduction of the Dokdo class amphibious assault ship (14,300 tons, carrying 720 marines, 6 tanks, 7 amphibious assault vehicles and 10 helicopters). One is in operation and three are planned.
The ROK navy also has three submarines.
 

Mirza

New Member
New Zealand's military is not powerful enough to keep enemy forces out of the mainland for a long time. However, it depends on who the enemy is. New Zealand's location is in the middle of a sea, which means that the enemy has to use either aircraft or ships, or both. If New Zealand's government invests in maintaining a powerful artillery force, mainly coastal artillery to protect against ships (i.e. troop carriers), and anti-air systems to protect against aircrafts, then any attempt to invade the country would be crushed. It is not a problem financially, just look at North Korea, much poorer than New Zealand, of course, but they have the largest artillery force in the world, enough to be able to defend their country against any military power in the world for a very long time.

I don't think that there will be any attempt towards invading New Zealand (at least not in this state) by any regime, especially because the country is very peaceful politically, and because they would be supported by other nations, such as Australia, United States of America, and so forth.
 

jchan77

New Member
Rnzaf

The RNZAF doesn't have any fighter jets right now. The Aussies are going to buy 100 F-35s to replace all their hornets. The Aussies are more likely to defend us if we are going to be invaded.

If New Zealand wants to have fighter jets again, than second hand F-16s from America or F-18s from Australia would be sensible and better.

I have my own defence plan for the RNZAF

Air Force:


Combat :

20 to 30 Modern Western Fighter Aircraft ( JAS-39 NG Gripen or F-16E)
10 to 12 Light strike/training jets (BAE Hawk)


Maritime Patrol:

6 Maritime strike aircraft - P-3 Orion

AWACS:

3 SAAB Erieye planes (Can be in jet or turbo prop platform)


Cargo Transport:

10 eavy transportation aircraft (A400M or C-130J)


VIP Transport:

2 Boeing 757-200


Ground Radar:

5 Saab Giraffe AMB Radar Vehicles


Helicopter Transport:

12 Medium sized helicopters (NH90 )
16 light helicopters (A109)


Unmanned Aerial Vehicles:

6 remote controlled reconnaissance UAVs (MQ-1 Predator or MQ-9 Reaper)
10 SAAB Skelder VTOL UAV (Good for search and rescue and peacekeeping missions)

Other Branches of the defence force

Saab CEROS 200 / AESA radar is to be fitted on every warship in the Navy
Saab Trackfire RWS to be fitted on every armoured vehicles / tanks in the Army
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top