ADF General discussion thread

[old faithful]

Deleted because I can't be bothered. You keep believing the Journalists, they are right, because the ABC wouldn't do anything wrong now would they?
Like cherry pick which version of events to report.
So far no war criminals have been charged, there for why are medals and awards being removed?
My Vietnam comment is regarding blanketing all service personnel as war criminals, over 3000 awards are slated to be removed. 39 alleged murders, no convictions.

 

[Morgo]

If this was the way it was going to go then I think it would look something like:

8 Hunter ASW first
8 Hunter AWD second

8 GP frigates approximating the Mogami frigate (concurrent) - ~5000t so not a corvette

12 Mine warfare with full kit - operate 4 as fitted mine warfare and 8 as patrol with kit in storage.
6 OPV (or however many are currently under construction).

It's a lot of extra funds so would definitely require GoD commitment.

Regards,

Massive

I like your thinking, and I like the Mogami class, but there are significant inefficiencies (both in construction and operating) of having another type in service. And systems integration and other Australianisations will take time we don’t have.

I would prefer we get the additional Hobarts in the short term (once again if the offer is credible), then 9+9 of your Hunter variants, plus @hauritz ’s LHD + AOR. The Spanish will be delighted.

Economies of scale from a hot Hunter production line is a big part of how we afford the Navy we need. But all horribly expensive.

 

[Shanesworld]

I like your thinking, and I like the Mogami class, but there are significant inefficiencies (both in construction and operating) of having another type in service. And systems integration and other Australianisations will take time we don’t have.

I would prefer we get the additional Hobarts in the short term (once again if the offer is credible), then 9+9 of your Hunter variants, plus @hauritz ’s LHD + AOR. The Spanish will be delighted.

Economies of scale from a hot Hunter production line is a big part of how we afford the Navy we need. But all horribly expensive.

The Mogamis i believe have a strong mine warfare capability. Im sure i read the second ship was being arranged under the mine warfare force.
But could you expand the mogami buy as the multi role patrol frigate AND the 132metre mine warfare vessel?

If so NZ will take 9 thanks and a schooner of drambui.

 

[spoz]

The whole point is that nothing has been proven, as yet - all there are, are allegations; and the Brit experience with alleged war crimes in Iraq suggests how dangerous it is to rely on unproven allegations. Further, press reports suggests that very senior officers will not be affected, only those who ”led the troops“ (presumably something like Lt Cols and below). If those senior officers weren’t “leading the troops”, what were they doing?

And of course, a number of those who were Lt Cols and below at the time have been promoted, some a number of times, since.

 

[Volkodav]

Mechanised maybe. With the equivalent of 1 regiment of tanks in the entire army you simply cannot generate an armoured brigade.

Semantics perhaps but the ADF has very limited land power.

Regards,

Massive

Ps. Agreed on the taskforce and am not really disagreeing with you more broadly in the end. Would note that the taskforce would be comprised of Abrams (excellent), LAV-25 (vulnerable), M113 (obsolete), Motorised combat engineers (vulnerable - though not as vulnerable as the infantry in M113), towed artillery (obsolete), RBS-70 (near-obsolete).

The sexy and Gucci stuff always seems to be up to date but the everyday workman gear is just run on and on. It's a bit like the businesses that always have the latest blinged up wanking tractor (crew cab ute) for the sales rep and managers but the trucks and work vans are the same ones they have been using for decades.

Submarines are critical yet multiple, perfectly good enough options have been overlooked, rejected or cancelled over the last two decades, in search of the perfect unicorn.

AFVs are literally the difference between life and death yet Army is still operating equipment that, with the exception of Boxer, is decades old. Much of it, although updated, is worn out and not survivable.

All this, missiles blah blah blah, and drones blah blah blah does my head in. If the ADF doesn't have hardened, survivable and up to date land and sea platform systems you have nowhere to deploy or launch them from.

 

[Volkodav]

The whole point is that nothing has been proven, as yet - all there are, are allegations; and the Brit experience with alleged war crimes in Iraq suggests how dangerous it is to rely on unproven allegations. Further, press reports suggests that very senior officers will not be affected, only those who ”led the troops“ (presumably something like Lt Cols and below). If those senior officers weren’t “leading the troops”, what were they doing?

And of course, a number of those who were Lt Cols and below at the time have been promoted, some a number of times, since.

The issue is we know there are a minority of people in the adf who should never have gotten through the door.

We know there are rapists, thugs, bullies, and thieves in uniform. We know they hide behind the reflected glory of others. We know they frame any action on their personal crimes as attack on everyone in uniform, an attack on their comrades who have done nothing wrong.

We know what they do to their mates, their subordinates, even their superiors, yet we are expected to doubt they commit crimes against civilians in war zones.

Just reading the evidence from the defence suicide royal commission makes my blood boil. The minority of serving and ex uniform personnel I have encountered who I know are guilty of crimes that on paper should see them charged, discharged, sacked even imprisoned suggests there is an iceberg below.

These aren't hero's we are talking about, they are the equivalent of peodophile priests and the hierarchy who protect and enable them in defence of the reputation of the organisation. Nothing is more damaging to reputation and morale than the knowledge crime has been covered up and enabled.

 

[old faithful]

The issue is we know there are a minority of people in the adf who should never have gotten through the door.

We know there are rapists, thugs, bullies, and thieves in uniform. We know they hide behind the reflected glory of others. We know they frame any action on their personal crimes as attack on everyone in uniform, an attack on their comrades who have done nothing wrong.

We know what they do to their mates, their subordinates, even their superiors, yet we are expected to doubt they commit crimes against civilians in war zones.

Just reading the evidence from the defence suicide royal commission makes my blood boil. The minority of serving and ex uniform personnel I have encountered who I know are guilty of crimes that on paper should see them charged, discharged, sacked even imprisoned suggests there is an iceberg below.

These aren't hero's we are talking about, they are the equivalent of peodophile priests and the hierarchy who protect and enable them in defence of the reputation of the organisation. Nothing is more damaging to reputation and morale than the knowledge crime has been covered up and enabled.

Yep, but until its proven in a court, no action other than a suspension of duty should be made.

 

[Volkodav]

Yep, but until its proven in a court, no action other than a suspension of duty should be made.

Being a member of the ADF holds an individual to a higher standard yet there seems to be a belief from some quarters that a uniform should be a get out of gaol free card. The damaging part of this is, when defence is perceived to be covering up or defending bad behaviour, it reflects badly on everyone wearing a uniform.

 

[Massive]

The sexy and Gucci stuff always seems to be up to date but the everyday workman gear is just run on and on. It's a bit like the businesses that always have the latest blinged up wanking tractor (crew cab ute) for the sales rep and managers but the trucks and work vans are the same ones they have been using for decades.

My sense is that the problem comes from continually delaying a range of replacement projects to the point that you have to replace a whole heap of capabilities at once.

Then the cost becomes prohibitive.

An issue is that strategy is not clear, so force design is not clear, resulting in indecision around ordering equipment.

Bit hopeless really.

If you have a strategy that may see you deploy a brigade you need 3, and if you plan to deploy an effective brigade you need 3 mechanised brigades.

I feel that this means 3 heavy brigades are required, along with an additional light littoral brigade - both for shaping operations in war time and other requirements in peace time. This then requires IFV, SPG etc etc.

All of these things feel very expensive - GoD has to form strategy, force design needs to match, and then relevant capability acquired.

Regards,

Massive

 

[ngatimozart]

Being a member of the ADF holds an individual to a higher standard yet there seems to be a belief from some quarters that a uniform should be a get out of gaol free card. The damaging part of this is, when defence is perceived to be covering up or defending bad behaviour, it reflects badly on everyone wearing a uniform.

I agree and the same applies to NZDF as well. You are taught right from the start what is acceptable and what isn't. Some stuff you can let slide because it's quite minor, but the major, important stuff you can't let slide no matter what. It's about standards and discipline and they are the difference between a professional, honourable, reputable, defence force, and a rabble similar to the current Russian Army in Ukraine, or some band of irregulars or bandits. There are many, many ANZAC war veterans who fought in bitter battles and faced terrors, yet they didn't commit war crimes. Unfortunately a very small minority did and they should answer for their crimes.

 

[spoz]

Deleted

 

[old faithful]

Being a member of the ADF holds an individual to a higher standard yet there seems to be a belief from some quarters that a uniform should be a get out of gaol free card. The damaging part of this is, when defence is perceived to be covering up or defending bad behaviour, it reflects badly on everyone wearing a uniform.

A servicman/person in the ADF is an Australian citizen, and has ALL of the rights as an Australian citizen. The right to fair hearing in a court of law. War crimes are serious crimes and and if guilty, the person should feel the weight of the law.
Until the person is proven guilty, if there is sufficient evidence, that person can be remanded in custody until the case is heard.
If there is a case,with sufficient evidence, the accused criminals should be remanded or bailed. All other punishment must wait a verdict.
So I can only assume that because no service personnel have been remanded, or charged with war crimes, that there is insufficient evidence to do so, in which case any punishment is unlawful.
When people start making exceptions to what is lawful and what is not, then the legal system has failed.

 

[Volkodav]

A servicman/person in the ADF is an Australian citizen, and has ALL of the rights as an Australian citizen. The right to fair hearing in a court of law. War crimes are serious crimes and and if guilty, the person should feel the weight of the law.
Until the person is proven guilty, if there is sufficient evidence, that person can be remanded in custody until the case is heard.
If there is a case,with sufficient evidence, the accused criminals should be remanded or bailed. All other punishment must wait a verdict.
So I can only assume that because no service personnel have been remanded, or charged with war crimes, that there is insufficient evidence to do so, in which case any punishment is unlawful.
When people start making exceptions to what is lawful and what is not, then the legal system has failed.

It's a bit like police corruption.

A civilian is suspected of theft or assault they are arrested and remanded, everything is sorted out later, including the release of innocent people who probably never should have been detained.

A corrupt cop literally murders someone and the powers that be need to be able to prove they are guilty before they are allowed to arrest, let alone charge them.

Certain roles and memberships come with a level of privilege the average person never gets. There is a reason for this, without it they can't do what they need to do without it. But that's why transparency and being seen to do the right thing is so critical, they have this privilege so if they betray those who gave it to them they deserve the worst.

A cop acquaintance had a very simple rule, if a fellow cop wilfully commits a crime, they should face twice the punishment as they should be held to a higher standard and betraying that betrays all.

 

[Depot Dog]

The issue is we know there are a minority of people in the adf who should never have gotten through the door.

We know there are rapists, thugs, bullies, and thieves in uniform. We know they hide behind the reflected glory of others. We know they frame any action on their personal crimes as attack on everyone in uniform, an attack on their comrades who have done nothing wrong.

We know what they do to their mates, their subordinates, even their superiors, yet we are expected to doubt they commit crimes against civilians in war zones.

Just reading the evidence from the defence suicide royal commission makes my blood boil. The minority of serving and ex uniform personnel I have encountered who I know are guilty of crimes that on paper should see them charged, discharged, sacked even imprisoned suggests there is an iceberg below.

These aren't hero's we are talking about, they are the equivalent of peodophile priests and the hierarchy who protect and enable them in defence of the reputation of the organisation. Nothing is more damaging to reputation and morale than the knowledge crime has been covered up and enabled.

To change this you would have to change ADF culture. This was going on in the 1980's. The stories I heard about Bangkok were terrible. They transgressed many laws. I never went to Butterworth. The stories I heard were from several people. These tales were told in smoko rooms in Australia. People bragged and compared notes. Stories that would require manditory police reporting in today's society.

The sad thing is we all turned a blind eye. Society and the culture were different.

Regards
DD

 

[Redlands18]

Being a member of the ADF holds an individual to a higher standard yet there seems to be a belief from some quarters that a uniform should be a get out of gaol free card. The damaging part is this is, when defence is perceived to be covering up or defending bad behaviour, it reflects badly on everyone wearing a uniform.

When I first joined the Army in 1981, there were definitely people who had been told by Judges "Army or Jail".

 

[old faithful]

It's a bit like police corruption.

A civilian is suspected of theft or assault they are arrested and remanded, everything is sorted out later, including the release of innocent people who probably never should have been detained.

A corrupt cop literally murders someone and the powers that be need to be able to prove they are guilty before they are allowed to arrest, let alone charge them.

Certain roles and memberships come with a level of privilege the average person never gets. There is a reason for this, without it they can't do what they need to do without it. But that's why transparency and being seen to do the right thing is so critical, they have this privilege so if they betray those who gave it to them they deserve the worst.

A cop acquaintance had a very simple rule, if a fellow cop wilfully commits a crime, they should face twice the punishment as they should be held to a higher standard and betraying that betrays all.

No it's not, and no the shouldn't. There should be no "more innocent or less guilty than anyone else.
1st instance, guilt MUST be proven beyond doubt. You are sounding like a dictator that changes the rules to suit a situation.
If war crimes have been committed, they will be exposed.
I can't believe the attitude of "burn the witch" mentality you are showing.
There is a legal system that must be followed. You are not allowed to bypass steps to suit yourself, no matter if you are a cop, prime minister,soldier or engineer.
There are plenty of cops, prison officers,soldiers, sailors and airmen in custody as we speak, as well as Lord Mayors, ex Police Commisioners, politicians, celebrities, football players etc etc etc, I know this 1st hand.
Maybe they,(Military Leaders) should start by laying charges of war crimes on the (already media trialled) guilty bastards. If they don't have evidence , then they can't can they?

 

[Volkodav]

No it's not, and no the shouldn't. There should be no "more innocent or less guilty than anyone else.
1st instance, guilt MUST be proven beyond doubt. You are sounding like a dictator that changes the rules to suit a situation.
If war crimes have been committed, they will be exposed.
I can't believe the attitude of "burn the witch" mentality you are showing.
There is a legal system that must be followed. You are not allowed to bypass steps to suit yourself, no matter if you are a cop, prime minister,soldier or engineer.
There are plenty of cops, prison officers,soldiers, sailors and airmen in custody as we speak, as well as Lord Mayors, ex Police Commisioners, politicians, celebrities, football players etc etc etc, I know this 1st hand.
Maybe they,(Military Leaders) should start by laying charges of war crimes on the (already media trialled) guilty bastards. If they don't have evidence , then they can't can they?

So you are saying the suspects who are subject of the accusations have been arrested and questioned? No they haven't, not one of them.

To my knowledge, the people accused of executing unarmed civilians have not been arrested or detained at any point to date. In fact there are some suggesting they shouldn't even be investigated. That is not a good look.

There is a perception that some people are above the law, they are seen as so important, so privileged that it should be a crime to even question their actions. This bothers me.

 

[Volkodav]

When I first joined the Army in 1981, there were definitely people who had been told by Judges "Army or Jail".

I worked with some of them and for the most part army worked for them and turned their lives around. I think, sometimes, it's a case of nature, verses nurture, given the chance some people exceed all expectations.

Sadly, others get broken and a few are irredeemable, i.e. doesn't matter where or when, they will always find a way to harm others. They will be the ones breaking others by forcing them to do things no one should do, it's often as much about the joy they get breaking others as doing the killing themselves.

If the allegations are true it raises serious questions over psyc testing on entry.

 

[old faithful]

So you are saying the suspects who are subject of the accusations have been arrested and questioned? No they haven't, not one of them.

To my knowledge, the people accused of executing unarmed civilians have not been arrested or detained at any point to date. In fact there are some suggesting they shouldn't even be investigated. That is not a good look.

There is a perception that some people are above the law, they are seen as so important, so privileged that it should be a crime to even question their actions. This bothers me.

If there was sufficient evidence to lay charges, then charges would have been laid.
They still might, but at the moment, it's either hear say, or very sloppy handling by ADF chiefs. I have been accused of using excessive force in the past and also presently, however, I work within our guidelines, and if it goes to court, I don't believe I have anything to worry about. A layman viewing footage, however, may not see it that way, but when evidence is introduced, it dies not matter about a layman's opinion, its about working within guidelines, legislation. That's how law works, not on emotions and part of a story.
If charges are laid, then the truth will come out, until then, removal of awards, or any other summery justice is just plain illegal.

 

[Depot Dog]

To be honest I feel the Brereton enquiry was a witchhunt sensationalised by the media. It lumped good people with bad. It turned others into scapegoats without trial. I believe we have an Royal Commision. Get to the truth of what really happened. Find out who at the top knew and what they did. Then with the royal commision findings charge who needs to be charged. Clean out the top who knew but did nothing. Legislate to change things so it can't happen again.

Then I believe in the court system to do its job

Regards
DD