I think the key will be what it's relationship to TB is, if it can call TB on certain things, then it will be good. I suspect that agencies like PW will be subordinate to it, so hopefully things like base housing get sorted sooner.
More like fixing the damage done by a decade of political pantomime by JT and crowd. What we are seeing is what a fairly normal government looks like, but he is still beholden to the people that let JT run the show for all those years.
Bring a parka it might get icy.
The impression I get is that the effectiveness will all come back to the top, and Cabinet/PMO desire to want to have things accomplished.
He was referring to the US.
It's more than that. HIMARS is also important for coastal defence to Australia. We don't have the same issue in Canada. Or the same solution. Also, people need to stop getting worked up over initial purchases. Once a system is inducted, it's much easier to convince the government to buy more. Especially in an environment where money is flowing. Getting over the first buy is the biggest hurdle for the staff.
Just read something the other day on this. The writer explained that many from their home country would come to Canada for the 10 years, start collecting the OAS/GIS and anything else they can then go back home to live like royalty as it is a fortune there.
Canada or Ukraine? Sorry can't help wonder every time Canada buys army toys how many are going there.
Hmmm. I tend to think it is not realizing but fearmongering. I don't think for one minute the USA would allow another country to invade and take over Canada so that they have a hostile sitting on their border. More likely they would come in to save the day and then stay like that party guest you just can't get rid of.And like us, is realizing how unreliable the US is becoming.
'Glaring mismatch': Why Australia has few good defence options without the US
The unpredictability of US President Donald Trump has raised questions about America's commitment to the Indo-Pacific region and whether Australia should be seeking new allies.www.sbs.com.au
You realize it’s the world the US had an interest in perpetuating until now,
Doubtful. The only country to ever existentially threaten Canada was the US.
All for us, the LRPS project has been years in the making
years in the making doesn't mean items can't be rerouted to another location as the government decides. I will not be surprised if some of this does get sent there just like so much others have.
Wait - was he a Freedom Fighter or a Terrorist?
Not with DLR but was a project director for three years on a computer/information management project and the last three years worked hand in hand with a guy who was at DLR.
We do. It's slightly different but it's definitely an issue that we've ignored with the delusion that our coastlines are too far away from hostile actors, that they are of little importance, and too long and costly to defend.
I don't think there is a plan for more because the open tap for additional spending is only a very recent thing while the LRPR project (in its various iterations) has been a line item in army procurement for almost five decades (two decades seriously) that's been kicked down the road repeatedly. It's only ever been in the range of two batteries worth during all that time mostly because in the army there have been competition for capital spending dollars which generally means try to keep costs reasonable regardless of actual needs. Two batteries of HIMARS are reasonable when the army's vision was we'll only ever need to deploy a single brigade in low level conflict.
I expect their strategic plan calls for a widely spread deployment on numerous islands. That's more feasible for them considering their climate zone. I'm still pondering how to do that in the north.
I think the key questions are: How many divs can/should the army be forming? How many does it deploy at one time? What are the needs for the homeland? I'm still pondering this but I'm pretty sure we need four divisions of 10,000 each rather than two of 20,000 each. The main difference between the way that I think and the way that the army thinks is that I consider these divisions as tactical force employment elements rather than as mere force generators. That means that I want a division that can be picked up and used as is rather than one where you cobble together a grouping from building block pieces.
Good lord, yes. For every nature of ammo we use.
And HEMTT.
