 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| 0 user currently in World Affairs / Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - If the World Went to War Who Would Win? |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
See poll title.| Current Music: Buddy Richard & Maynard Ferguson- Caravan | Russia |
9.1%, 1 vote | China |
9.1%, 1 vote | European Union and Allies (Including Britain and Canada) |
18.2%, 2 votes | United States of America |
63.6%, 7 votes | Multi-voting is disabled.
| |
| User | Post | ||
Arwon Zora Level: 35  Posts: 259/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziffski Can you expand on this a bit further? Are you saying that Indonesia, Malaysia, the Phillipines, Thailand etc would attack us, or that they'd form a shield against the rest of the world? There is occasional talk of Indonesia as a military threat to Australia, but I don't buy it. As for the rest of the region... the countries are small and the region is very peaceful compared to the rest of the world. This goes double or triple for the Pacific island nations. Plus we have reasonable relations with all these countries... East Timor did a lot of damage to our relatonship with Indonesia but they're getting over it, and Malaysia's old PM was a constant critic of ours (he constantly mouthed off at everyone though), but yeah, decent relations. People feel vulnerable, I guess, due to Australia's isolation and the foreignness of its neighbours. The "Yellow Peril" fears of the past 150 years still linger. Also, our military isn't huge, but we are well armed. I think it's about 60 000 between the 3 branches. We have a sizable technological edge over Indonesia and the rest of the region, probably much better training and administration, and there's geographical defences as well - 3000 km of open sparsely populated country between our major cities and Asia. (edited by Arwon on 02-17-05 05:00 AM) |
|||
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99  Posts: 3031/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Think of them as an aggressive buffer zone. Any attacks against a more mighty nation (Australia) could be repelled with relative ease, but they are hornet nest when it comes to soverignity. So, say China got nutty and wanted Australia, they'd have to pull some way powerful diplomacy, or fight their way to Australia. Or if the relations between that part of the world were to improve, Aussielandia could easily have an excellent repelling point against many armies. | |||
Grey the Stampede Don't mess with powers you don't understand. And yes. That means donuts. Level: 82  Posts: 1747/3770 EXP: 5192909 For next: 16318 Since: 06-17-04 From: Kingston, RI, USA, Earth Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| The world IS a sphere... Why not just attack Australia at points where the islands surrounding it can't retailate fast enough to, like from Antarctica or something? Also, I've been meaning to ask this for a while... Does naval power mean anything at all in modern warfare? |
|||
neotransotaku Baby Mario 戻れたら、 誰も気が付く Level: 87 Posts: 2272/4016 EXP: 6220548 For next: 172226 Since: 03-15-04 From: Outside of Time/Space Since last post: 11 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| It still means something because you still need aircraft carriers and the ability to launch troops into hostile areas. Aircraft isn't always the best way to transport goods. In short, it just depends on the situation... | |||
|
Arwon Zora Level: 35 Posts: 261/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| When you're an enormous island it's still considered kinda useful... | |||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 3034/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Grey Yes, it is still the most powerful force. |
|||
|
Grey the Stampede Don't mess with powers you don't understand. And yes. That means donuts. Level: 82 Posts: 1750/3770 EXP: 5192909 For next: 16318 Since: 06-17-04 From: Kingston, RI, USA, Earth Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| How so though? I mean, we have aircraft that can fire tactical missiles from several hundred miles or more away with excellent accuracy, and yet we still have commissioned battleships capable of more or less lobbing an explosive a few miles away from shore. That's an obvious exaggeration, but the point is as far as destroying stuff power goes, how is naval power still the most powerful force? |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 3035/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Because it is the most mobile thing. You can carry planes on boats. You can fire cruise missiles. You have things beneath the surface that can launch cruise missiles. You have dedicated anti-air ships. It can travel around the world. It can carry troops to where they need to go (you need an airstrip to properly land a large contingent of troops in modern warfare). With a boat, you can launch amphibious assault. | |||
MathOnNapkins Math n' Hacks Level: 67  Posts: 1421/2189 EXP: 2495887 For next: 96985 Since: 03-18-04 From: Base Tourian Since last post: 1 hour Last activity: 32 min. |
| ||
| All I know about modern warfare I learned from Civ2 :\ | |||
|
Grey the Stampede Don't mess with powers you don't understand. And yes. That means donuts. Level: 82 Posts: 1760/3770 EXP: 5192909 For next: 16318 Since: 06-17-04 From: Kingston, RI, USA, Earth Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| Wasn't the majority of the Gulf War fought with long range missiles, though? The point is, there's got to be a time when technology will make naval power obsolete. | |||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 3044/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| You need mobile platforms for said guided cruise missiles. It is too hard to have them strike from mainland USA. So, the US Navy has them mounted on destroyers, etc. | |||
|
neotransotaku Baby Mario 戻れたら、 誰も気が付く Level: 87 Posts: 2348/4016 EXP: 6220548 For next: 172226 Since: 03-15-04 From: Outside of Time/Space Since last post: 11 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| yeah, when firing from far away, you have to factor in wind, weather, and time--by having a strong navy, you can get more immediate results when firing from long range in the sea than from land. It gives less time for the people being attacked to respond. |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - If the World Went to War Who Would Win? |
| | |
