Stuart M
Well-Known Member
It wasn't a comment on their ambitions, it was a comment on western self delusion. It was also a roundabout comment on NZ's delusion that we are somehow immune from bad shit happening cuz we are Kiwis.. and everyone's BFF.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
We got into their firing line because we declared war on them, via our UK connection, you didn't think they would just ignore that did you? Bit of a difference between declaring war and merely democratically existing.
Again, what "bad shit"? Maybe China? Maybe China what?? I don't think we're everyones BFF, not sure where you are getting that assumption from, much like I dont think we are everyones enemy as well...weird huh?
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
Right, so with that history, why would you think that with NZ's modern day connections, culture and attitudes that NZ will magically not be in in the line of sight for the worlds pre-eminent dictatorship? Is your reasoning just equating to 'We're harmless Kiwis, nuclear free hobbits and far away so the rest of the worlds events isn't applicable'? Because if that all you've got I'm not seeing how further discussion can take place here.
Are we living in the same country? You still have failed to give me clear/any examples of all this alleged Chinese aggression towards NZ other than, maybe. I like how you are trying to get ME to prove how we are not in China's "line of sight" (whatever that entails) when China has literally done nothing to/at/or with NZ in any kind of military context, ever. Are you serious?
You're correct on that, I have nothing, other than, maybe China. That's the point.
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
Bad shit; China invades Taiwan and NZ is told in no uncertain terms that;
If NZ follows its historical attitudes and acts on its statements that a threat to Australia is a threat to NZ, or it acts on commitments to Australia under the ANZUS treaty 1951, then unspecified targets will be subject to attack.
NZ is further informed that future trade relations with China is conditional on its recantation of the Defence Assessment 2021,
Unfriendly reports in media and social media poisoning the well of normal bi-lateral relations will result in trade sanctions,
Anti-China academic reports in universities must cease or trade sanctions will be applied
Unfriendly restrictions on Chinese telecommunication companies must stop or trade sanctions will be applied.
An end to outrageous anti-China statements and criticisms of Chinese governing party by NZ MP's or trade sanctions will apply
I am of course drawing inspiration from China's 14 point missive to Australia in 2021 and adding in some extras that I don't think are out of the realms of probability for China.
Jonathan Kearsley on Twitter: "This is the list of 14 grievances China has with Australia. From banning Huawei from 5G, to calling for COVID inquiry and speaking out on Xinjiang and Hong Kong. @9NewsAUS https://t.co/GPJZrtSzzt" / Twitter
Is that bad shit enough for you?
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
Are you living on the same planet? I have said to you, above, that its not what they have done to NZ, its what this totalitarian power can do, that's the point.
Unless you have a been very selective with your historical reading, you should have noticed that totalitarian powers are not benign and they don't long tolerate ideals that conflict with their own unless they have to.
Not really, soured trade relations and sanctions? I be surprised if they didnt do that if/when we sided with Taiwan during any invasion, maybe. Not exactly my idea of outright Chinese aggression aimed at NZ warranting some great expansion of the NZ military.
So Russia should be raining down missiles on NZ any time now due to our public support of Ukraine?
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
I think you missed what I wrote there, those 14 points included an expectation that the Australian government prevent MP's and media criticizing China, giving effect to that would be an abrogation of both the principle of freedom of speech, freedom of the fourth estate and the soverignty of Parliament, ive just put that in a NZ context.
Naturally Australia told them to bugger off.
Why couldn't Russia rain down missiles on NZ if they don't like our foreign policies? they've done the worse to Ukraine and they can defend themselves.
it’s an interesting question.
its abit akin to saying ‘i don’t recall having had a car accident, so what’s the value of seatbelts’.
you’ve loaded the question because I think you reflect on the peace dividend post WW2, and in that post period NZDF maintained a Defence capability commensurate with its capacity, which has declined, to my mind at least since SEATO obligations ceased.
The environment wasnt that volatile then, we all had big mates and we all participated collectively.
Back then there was a tyranny of distance, not really so much now, and now that notion of safety in distance is just a dismissal of the realities of being at the end of a loooooooong tenuous supply chain.
Instead, perhaps the question should be:
*What capacity does NZ need to project its influence of goodness, and protect ITSELF when/if adversarial pressure is exerted on it, you know, that long supply chain?
*What level of adversary is NZ able to deal with, by itself? Is it a hostile paramilitary fishing boat, or a menacing frigate?
*Is NZ able to project its support to its allies, or is it aspirational only, after all, it’s the thought that counts?
Personally I don’t blame the NZ GOTD for this, I blame the arrogant ineptitude of its allies for diplomatically perpetuating the atrophy of NZs very skilled and professional military.
So in the end of the day, NZ is not a regional power. Instead it’s a regional influencer that once ignored or pushed, it is to a great degree impotent.
- rant over.
If the Kreigsmarine and Imperial Japanese Navy were able to operate in our waters, during wartime, back then why can't the PLAN do it today? We look to history for precedents and learnings.
I suggest that read the recent DWP & Defence Policy Statements. It is firmly stated in them that if Australia is attacked we WILL go to their aid. End of story.
The Bougaineville Peace Initiative. It started off as a NZ led operation, but NZ ran out of money and Australia took the lead. That had, and still does, region wide significance.
Alright people calm the farm.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, allies should be pressing NZ to get its shit together wrt defense but it is government and the ignorant electorates that put them into office that are most responsible. Same problem in Canada albeit slightly less along with our dysfunctional military procurement system.
RegR
I know some wonderful League guys. I had not realised how similar it is to US Grid Iron until recently.
Man, you have been flaming your key board. Thanks Buddy for your passion.. I apologies for not communicating my position clearly. My fault.
I understand that from your perspective:
1. we don't need new equipment because we haven't got the necessary man-power to run our existing Order of Battle (cough you still think that we have a fighting capability!) and because it's just bling really
2. NZ was not had to worry about foreign aggression before so why worry now (despite ZZ Germans, Te Rauparaha , "Colonialism", Imperial Japan, etc and now CCP)
3. We can just do our own thing, at the end of the world b/c no one will ever notice us (how many times have you understood the term "Sea Blindness")
You don't happen to work for the media or our Foreign Affairs guys do you? To be honest, it is b/c of this woolly thinking that I do worry for NZ. We have dissolved the NZDF since Vietnam and any capability takes an age to regenerate; a sweet 15ish years for jets, or just COVID is 3 years. Again, we are acting like used car salesmen bludgers off Australia and Uncle Sam because of this isolationist and ignorant attitude.
I know some wonderful League guys. I had not realised how similar it is to US Grid Iron until recently.
Man, you have been flaming your key board. Thanks Buddy for your passion.. I apologies for not communicating my position clearly. My fault.
I understand that from your perspective:
1. we don't need new equipment because we haven't got the necessary man-power to run our existing Order of Battle (cough you still think that we have a fighting capability!) and because it's just bling really
2. NZ was not had to worry about foreign aggression before so why worry now (despite ZZ Germans, Te Rauparaha , "Colonialism", Imperial Japan, etc and now CCP)
3. We can just do our own thing, at the end of the world b/c no one will ever notice us (how many times have you understood the term "Sea Blindness")
You don't happen to work for the media or our Foreign Affairs guys do you? To be honest, it is b/c of this woolly thinking that I do worry for NZ. We have dissolved the NZDF since Vietnam and any capability takes an age to regenerate; a sweet 15ish years for jets, or just COVID is 3 years. Again, we are acting like used car salesmen bludgers off Australia and Uncle Sam because of this isolationist and ignorant attitude.
It is an interesting question, so do we have an actual answer or are we still formulating clever takes on rudimentary theories? I actually asked a simple question to what I thought was quite a bold claim.
Yes they can sail the seas, who says they can't? Bit of a step from there though then saying China will attack/invade/otherwise care about NZ just because don't you think?
When have I ever said we will not go to Australia's aid?? Bit of a stretch from that statement. In fact I've said we WILL do that many times, as if, again big if, China was to go on a sailing invasion around the globe then why would they sail past the golden goose and go for the chicken on the other side? They wouldn't, if you are going to do it then it obviously has to pay off and be worth the overall effort. Like I've said before Australia would be invaded before us, why wouldn't it? And that is just as unlikely as well.
Re Bougainville, ahhh not quite. TMG and PMG were actually 2 different missions. In all honesty Australia should have led/ran both as the whole PNG/Bougainville situation was literally their bag as they had their hands in both cookie jars. The reason NZ led the TMG was because as part of the Burnham agreement one of the requirements was that the lead nation be neutral, which Australia was not seen as due to its connection with the PNGDF which it was supplying at the time and the fact the catalyst Panguna mine was Australian owned, literally the 2 biggest bugs on Bougainville, to say there was a distrust of Australia at that time was and understatement and there still was after they "took over". The TMG was mandated to only run until 21 Jan 98 (1 year) by which time all forces involved were to leave the island, that was always the missions timeframe from the start. The PMG was a different mission again, hence the name change and had slightly different parameters with more civilian focus (Au version of MFAT taking more of a lead), one initiated and instilled the peace process the other monitored and maintained the outcomes. Nothing to do with money in fact probably one of the most basic missions out (purposely so) in terms of manpower, requirement and infrastructure and only a year later NZ would then send half it's army to ET. TBH Aus could have easily ran the entire missions but, by their own admission, needed the kiwis, Fijians and Nivans to win over the locals as we generally gel better with the region's island population better, nothing against the Aussies it's just a cultural thing.
Again, no seems to be answering my questions just spouting theories of days gone by.
What are we doing with this squadron of jets in NZ? This extra frigate? These MBTs? (Was that on the wishlist?). I'm actually not the one quoting fighting capablity, you are, I'm the one asking what for remember? And all I've gotten so far is, China Bad.
So literally none of that is NZ being invaded, we were pressed into the WWs, we went to Vietnam, we followed in Afghan etc etc. So you are saying we need jets, more frigates, more equipment etc etc for US (as in we not the country) to invade/attack?? Get on the invasion bandwagon ya reckon? Attack or be attacked?? Or to defend NZ from a country that has literally never left the country yet apparently is building up to skip the queue straight to NZ?
Ahh and the classic, "bludging off Australia and Uncle Sam", bludging what?? This is going to be like how Australia came to NZs aid regionally right? Cryptic and full of maybes??
The reality is that we don't know what the future is going to bring and to base our thinking on what has or has not happened in the past is foolhardy. The primary reason for any defence force in any country is to protect the freedom and sovereignty of that country and the government needs to come up with a strategy to achieve this and then ensure that the armed forces are trained and equipped to enable them to achieve this. Currently this is not happening and the NZDF is woefully short of having the capability to defend NZ, let alone any regional responsibilities, either contractional or moral.
Whether there will be a direct threat to NZ and by who is unknown and what the future will bring is a mystery for us to find out in the yeas to come. So the question is do we want to gamble on our future sovereignty by doing nothing and hope nothing happens or do we wish to take steps to protect that sovereignty?
Going up to the Naki today were the is no internet or cell phone coverage so see ya next week
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
History does provide some insight as to what might happen. Predicting with 100% accuracy, very low probability but some of the current predictions wrt Asia, certainly not zero probability.The reality is that we don't know what the future is going to bring and to base our thinking on what has or has not happened in the past is foolhardy. The primary reason for any defence force in any country is to protect the freedom and sovereignty of that country and the government needs to come up with a strategy to achieve this and then ensure that the armed forces are trained and equipped to enable them to achieve this. Currently this is not happening and the NZDF is woefully short of having the capability to defend NZ, let alone any regional responsibilities, either contractional or moral.
Whether there will be a direct threat to NZ and by who is unknown and what the future will bring is a mystery for us to find out in the yeas to come. So the question is do we want to gamble on our future sovereignty by doing nothing and hope nothing happens or do we wish to take steps to protect that sovereignty?
Going up to the Naki today were the is no internet or cell phone coverage so see ya next week
Crikey it's becoming a very circular discussion eh!
Yes agreed, only a fool doesn't look back & learn something from history... of course you also have to throw a modern lens over that historical story to gain the modern day perspective. And boy is that modern day perspective clearly showing the world is anything but stable.