| |
bingo629
|
So I read with intererst that US Marines are now in Aus and the fleet is moving to or already in the Asai Pacific and now a US Navy banging the gong in Vietnam.
Quote BBC: "The US has been, is, and will continue to be a Pacific power. That was the fundamental message the US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta brought to this year's Asian security summit in Singapore.
Mr Panetta then headed off to Vietnam and India - two stops that highlight, in their different ways, two aspects of Washington's new security relationships in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Obama Administration having announced the so-called "pivot" back to Asia at the start of the year, it was left to Mr Panetta to fill in some of the blanks and to try to convince Washington's friends and allies that at a time of severe financial austerity the US has the means to fund its Asia-Pacific ambitions."
Will it service a new influx of P4P market?
|
Thai Girls : Meet Sexy Thai Girls
Posted on: 8:43 am on June 3, 2012
|
|
dirty guru
|
What are they going to do..?
China is wiping the floor with them economically.....
The 20th century these sort of announcements cut..
Now they just look like clowns in 16 trillion debt and not learning why?
Passé.....so passé.....
This evil empire shit mighta worked back then......
Now Asia is Booming and on every star bucks corner in America you will find broken dreams...
Yawns....
( insert stars and stripes )
Who cares?
|
Bangkok Women : Meet Sensual Bangkok Women
Posted on: 9:26 am on June 3, 2012
|
|
koolbreez
|
The US Navy has alway controlled the Pacific, this is nothing new.
China is in the process of taking on territorial disputes with Japan, Taiwan, The Philippians, and Vietnam all at the same time, with its largest military spending ever.
No one wants Australia so they have nothing to worry about, even though China is on a huge land purchase project there.....lolololol. They have to be able to move their excess people someplace.
Their jails are getting full again. Australia's history just might repeat itself. England sure isn't in any position to help, and Australia is hardly in any position to take care of themselves if China decides they want all the mining interests, at bargain prices.
It is interesting to see a country that developed its military capabilities off the principle that no one wanted them.
|
Thai Girls : Meet Sexy Thai Girls
Posted on: 11:04 am on June 3, 2012
|
|
magnum
|
... I think I read in the last days that Panetta stated the majority of the US fleet will be re-deployed to the Pacific by 2020... as mentioned above: the straights off of Taiwan, the Spratleys, offshore fields proximate to VN.
... the Godless Chinese have for the first time a fleet capable of projecting military power into the deep water anywhere in the world, and they are expected to flex their soulless Commie muscles, as they are doing now on the Mekong and the Spratleys.
... the Aussies agreed to sell them their natural resources... DG, I know you think you can do business with the Chinese... there might be a day when you will regret that... they are not to be trusted, especially when they grow increasingly full of themselves and their 'historical place as dominant power.'
... the PRC's ludicrous claim to the Spratley's, and much deeper into the South China Sea, is a barometer of their ambitions... not good, men, not good.
|
Bangkok Girls : Meet Sexy Bangkok Girls
Posted on: 3:20 pm on June 3, 2012
|
|
dirty guru
|
Regards Australia"s position....here is a transcript of an interview just aired of our defence Minister....
Australian residents should also be able to view the interview if they choose at this posts base link.
BARRIE CASSIDY, PRESENTER: We'll go to our program guest now, the Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, who has just returned from the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore. And he joins us from our Perth studios.
Good morning Minister.
STEPHEN SMITH, DEFENCE MINISTER: Good morning, Barrie.
BARRIE CASSIDY: US defence secretary Leon Panetta yesterday further explained what he calls a rebalancing of American presence in the Pacific. Why will this not further disturb China about America's intentions?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, the United States presence in the Asia Pacific has been a force for peace and stability and prosperity since the end of World War II. And we welcome very much the fact that not only will be the United States continue that engagement, it will enhance it. And that was reflected and reinforced by the speech, the presentation that secretary of defence Panetta gave to the Shangri La dialogue in Singapore yesterday.
One of the most important things we can see in the course of the first half of this century is a positive and constructive bilateral relationship between the United States and China. That point was made not just by secretary Panetta but by others including Australia. And that's the most important part of the nub of that relationship, and the United States is working very hard at that.
The essential point is that none of this is done for reasons of trying to maximise or influence concern or threat; it's all done for purposes of stability to continue peace, to continue prosperity.
BARRIE CASSIDY: And when you've got a situation anyway where the US, like Australia, is cutting back on defence spending at a time when there is, I think you call it the new distribution of power to Asia, clearly in those circumstances the United States can't maintain its strategic dominance forever?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, again, secretary Panetta made a number of points yesterday about what he describes as we have to meet national security challenges but at the same time we've got to meet fiscal security challenges. We're going through a tough fiscal time. The United States is taking out $487 billion out of its defence program over the next 10 years and we've taken $5.5 billion out of the forward estimate years in the current budget. And we're not the only ones; UK, Canada and the like. But what the United States is doing is making sure that doesn't adversely impact upon its capacity in the Asia-Pacific.
So the rebalance includes not just the rebalance strategically after a draw down from the Middle East but also a rebalance of capacity from the Atlantic to the Pacific. And also making sure that defence forces are efficient, using smart technology and the like.
But fiscal circumstances will change; we're going through a tough one at the moment. But despite what some commentators have said it's not the end of the world. We continue to see the United States with a very effective defence force and we continue to see Australia making its contribution with an effective defence force.
BARRIE CASSIDY: I'll come back to Australian defence spending. But in a speech last night you said that the United States will not be rapidly eclipsed overnight, but it will be reduced, won't it? Its significance both economically and in a strategic sense will be reduced over time?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, that's the point that's effectively made in the speech that I gave, in the speech that president Yudhoyono from Indonesia gave, and also effectively acknowledged by the United States. We're seeing the rise of China, we're also seeing the rise of India, which continues to be under appreciated.
It's not just the Asia-Pacific, it's the India and Indian Ocean rim and also a substantial increase in the size of the ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) economies combined, let alone the ongoing economic and strategic importance of Japan and the Republican Korea. Indonesia, of course, emerging as a global influence not just a regional influence.
So these changes of strategic influence, the changes in economic, political and military weight do require adjustments and the United States, Australia, China and India and our region are adjusting to that. It's how we manage that adjustment and manage that for good stability and prosperity reasons; that's the most important objective we have and the central challenge that we have in the coming decades.
BARRIE CASSIDY: You're going to China tomorrow, as I understand it, the rotation of US Marines through Darwin will clearly be an issue. Foreign Minister Bob Carr has just got back from China; has he given you a sense of what you can expect when you get there?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, Bob and I have obviously spoken about that. But the point I'll make to Chinese friends is that Australia has had a growing relationship with China since we were one of the countries to recognise China very early back in 1972; we've had a growing relationship for 40 years. We now have a comprehensive relationship, very strong economically, we conduct a strategic dialogue with China. And we also have a growing military-to-military and defence-to-defence relationship which we continue to enhance. And none of that has been adversely affected by our over 60 year alliance with the United States.
So this is... it can be win-win, and that's what we want it to be. It's not a zero-sum game. We can have a positive, constructive and comprehensive relationship with China, and at the same time continue an alliance with the United States which has served Australia well for over 60 years and continues to be the bedrock of our strategic and security fundamentals and underpinning.
BARRIE CASSIDY: There was a report at the weekend - in the weekend media of a secret chapter in the 2009 Defence White Paper and it seemed a war game, a scenario that had Australia alongside the United States fighting an air and sea battle with China. Does that exist?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well it's not the first time I've seen that suggestion. It was a nonsense when it was made previously and it's a nonsense now.
Of course with the preparation and the finalisation of any white paper, in 2009 when that white paper was finalised there was a public version that was published, there were also some classified sections. But the essential point is that the White Paper 2009 was not aimed at any one country. It wasn't aimed at China. It was aimed at those changing strategic circumstances that I've referred to.
And the 2013 White Paper which we'll publish before or in the first half of next year won't be aimed at any one country either. It will deal with the changing strategic circumstances, it will deal with our draw down from the Middle East, from Afghanistan, our draw down from stabilisation forces in the Solomon Islands and East Timor. It will deal with the force posture that we need to look at for our northern approaches. So it's not aimed at any one country. What it's aimed at is maximising the protection and the defence of Australia's national security interests.
BARRIE CASSIDY: But do these secret chapters, and you've conceded there are secret material, do they deal with these sorts of hypotheticals?
STEPHEN SMITH: It's not a matter of conceding, it's on the public record for a long period of time, including on the publication of the 2009 White Paper, that there was a public white paper which was published for all to see but there were classified sections. The point I make...
BARRIE CASSIDY: Do the classified sections deal with hypotheticals such as war gaming with China?
STEPHEN SMITH: The classified sections don't deal with the sort of subject matter or the sort of content that is asserted in the book or the article that you're referring to.
BARRIE CASSIDY: OK, when you mentioned Defence spending before you talked about commentators, but one of the commentators is retired Major-General John Cantwell. He told the ABC this week that the budget was a shocker for Defence and puts the defence capabilities at risk.
STEPHEN SMITH: I don't share that analysis, just as I don't share the analysis from one commentator who said it was the worst day for Defence since the fall of Saigon. Nor do I share the analysis from another commentator who said that literally as we speak people would be planning the invasion for 2028, 2030. Nor do I share the analysis that somehow the budget is a threat to United States alliance. And dealing with some of those in reverse order, if it was a threat to the United States alliance secretary Panetta might have said something to me over the weekend. He didn't do any of those things. In fact he congratulated us for the contribution that we make.
We're going through a tough fiscal period and what we've done in the budget is make sure we ring fence and protect essential elements of our Defence contribution at the moment; so no adverse impact on our contribution in Afghanistan or East Timor or the Solomon Islands. No adverse impact on the kit given to our forces who are deploying, no adverse impact on what we're doing with the United States in terms of their global force posture review in the Northern Territory, and a protection of our capability. So the core capability will continue to arrive: landing helicopter docks, air war fare destroyers, planning for the submarines, planning for the Joint Strike Fighter.
So to assert that somehow a reduction of $5 billion out of a four-year forward estimates program of over $103 billion is a complete nonsense.
BARRIE CASSIDY: One of those commentators said that you're known around the Defence headquarters as the 'Minister for Disarmament?'
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, I don't know what basis, if any, there is to that comment. Frankly I don't worry about that. My focus is on doing things which are in our national security interests to do.
We've brought forward the white paper and we've brought that forward for the strategic reasons that I've referred to earlier. We are going through a tough fiscal time. But in 2009 for the first occasion the four year forward estimate Defence budget spend went over $100 billion. It was $100 billion, over $100 billion before the budget in May, it's still over $100 billion. We remain in the top 15 defence spenders.
So to assert that somehow the alliance is in tatters, that the Black Hawks are leaving the roof of Russell Defence headquarters in Canberra as we speak is a nonsense. We're going through a tough time but we're managing that. And we're not alone. The United States, the United Kingdom, other countries are facing the same difficulty, effectively as a result of the global financial crisis and its aftermath.
BARRIE CASSIDY: What do you know about the asylum seekers' boat that went missing in 2009? Is it possible that Australian authorities delayed alerting Indonesia for four hours?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well, as you said in your intro, Barrie, I've been back in the country for an hour, so I'm not pretending to be on top of all the details. What I can say is that the information I've got is that this matter was considered exhaustively at Senate estimates, that the relevant authorities have published a chronology, that the published story today doesn't accurately reflect any of those facts or the assessment.
What I'm told is that when the information came through in the first instance there were two possible suggested locations. Assets were deployed to those two possible locations and an assessment was made as to what was a better location or the definitive location. As soon as that was ascertained that was relayed to the Indonesian authorities. And so in my experience, our relevant authorities when they're faced with a rescue at sea do everything they can.
And the more general underlying point is that just reinforces what we've been saying for some time is that we don't want people smugglers putting people on boats so they put themselves at risk. We saw the Christmas Island tragedy at the end of last year, this is another potential tragedy. We don't know in the end whether the boat was actually there but there's been no further trace of it, so your heart sinks at the prospect of that.
But we want to stop these boats coming, we want to stop people smugglers putting them at risk that's why we want offshore processing. But in my experience authorities do everything they can in the face for a need of a rescue at sea.
BARRIE CASSIDY: I just want to ask you finally as a West Australian about the overseas workers issue. Your colleague, Gary Gray, is under attack from various trade unions who have put out an advertisement, a poster advertisement in Perth attacking. Is this not understood even in Western Australia that there is a need for overseas workers?
STEPHEN SMITH: Well I think that attack on Gary is both unfair, unjustified and not soundly based. One of the unions who have put their name to that is the Maritime Union of Australia. They might just want to dwell upon Gary's strong support for the shipping industry legislation that went through for the week - that's the most important thing for their industry.
But I think when people dwell on the challenge of making sure we continue to get capital investment in our resources industry, not just in the west but generally, what the minerals industry says to me at the moment is one of their biggest challenges is getting the necessary skilled workers to get projects up and running. And without the skilled workers they can't get the investment from the investment industry to get the projects up and running.
So here we've got a policy that the Government adopted not in this year's budget but last year's budget. It essentially says that we will make these special arrangements to bring the skilled workers but will only do that after we've exhausted every possible last effort so far as Australians skills, Australian workers and Australian jobs are concerned.
But essentially we've got a project here which is bringing a massive capital investment to Australia; 8,000 jobs, some of those jobs are necessarily overseas workers because we can't find the Western Australian or the Australian workers with the skills. And Gary has strongly supported that outcome and that's to his credit.
BARRIE CASSIDY: And now you've got this caucus oversight. Is there not a risk that this will slow down the process and perhaps even become a rallying point for those opposed to the policy?
STEPHEN SMITH: No, I don't think that's right. It was a very good discussion in caucus. People in caucus, my parliamentary colleagues, are very conscious of the need to continue to create employment, the need to make sure that young Australians get the chance at those jobs first, but also the realisation that there will be some big minerals resources or petroleum resources projects where the skills set are simply not available in Australia. Once we exhaust the Australian skills supply, once we make sure that there's no Australian with the necessary skills still looking for that job, then we can move to the enterprise management arrangements that we have outlined.
But what we want to continue is to continue to get the investment coming to Australia, the capital investment; that has been an unambiguously good thing for Australia since federation. That's what creates economic growth and it's what creates the jobs and that's what we want to continue to see. Our priority since coming to Government has been to keep unemployment low and to maximise employment and on any measure we can hold up our heads very high, not just in Australia but internationally, as a result of the work we've done on that front.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Minister, thanks for your time this morning.
STEPHEN SMITH: Thanks, Barrie, thanks very much.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-03/smith-discusses-asia-pacific-relationships/4049276
|
Thai Women : Meet Matured Thai Women
Posted on: 6:29 pm on June 3, 2012
|
|
DaffyDuck
|
Quote: from magnum on 3:20 am on June 4, 2012
... the Godless Chinese have for the first time a fleet capable of projecting military power into the deep water anywhere in the world...
They do? When did that happen?
They don't even have aircraft for their "aircraft carrier".
|
Bangkok Women : Meet Beautiful Thai Girls
Posted on: 10:09 pm on June 3, 2012
|
|
magnum
|
Quote: from DaffyDuck on 10:09 am on June 4, 2012
... they are pursuing an entirely new naval construct, eschewing traditional technologies for next-generation modes... they are developing around submarines, rather than surface platforms... they are developing around unmanned drones and missles, rather than manned aircraft... smart stuff.
... the Washington DC-based National Defense University published a seminal study on the Godless Commie's blue water strategy... Google "ndu+chinese+navy" and look for a report about their evolving naval strategy.
... they are coming, Duck, with romantic delusions of re-capturing their former glory, and they are not as civilized as we might hope.
|
Bangkok Girls : Meet Attractive Thai Girls
Posted on: 12:07 am on June 4, 2012
|
|
dirty guru
|
Quote: from magnum on 7:20 am on June 4, 2012
... the Aussies agreed to sell them their natural resources... DG, I know you think you can do business with the Chinese... there might be a day when you will regret that
Sometimes we "" don't do business with them....example
http://news.yahoo.com/australia-blocks-chinas-huawei-broadband-tender-114622505.html
But back to your Quote Magnum
The structure of that suggestion raises a few questions.
Are you aware for instance Australia initially and decades ago courted China.?
As far back as early 70s.
They haven't deceived a naive country...we sold them our terms and conditions, and continue to raise Iron ore prices.
Dispite the silly association the Americans still place on some 2000 year old religious teachings and deity
most the world don't attach it to international affairs.....( god...or faith in its existence)
I mean America may even be run by a Mormon which to most is of some Amusement.
Chinese non Christian beliefs is refreshing in politics I feel.
Certainly irrelevant to the trade with us.
The processes that are occurring in China is exciting..
We as a nation are not conditioned to hate other nations.
The media in the Unitied States shows clearly how gulliables it is by Australian standards. ( fox)
The silly Obama attacks..........
I remember seeing the O'Riely Factor on fox waitng for the sketch to end thinking it had to be comedy.
Fear and war mongering......ruined your whole country......
9/11 effectively was a massive victory to the Arabs
Only because, you got obsessed with waging expensive wars while the economy suffered.
The Arabs knew a war mongering military brain washed nation would lure itself onto a path of doom economically
Meanwhile we send over rag tag forces and wave the Aussie flag and agree with American Sam.
While we flog our wares to the "" godless communists"" ( read capitalist model) and make friends and prosper....whose the real dummies Magnum?
Not us.
The data as result of our trade with China is huge.
We are well placed as a result.
Few Australians regret such numbers or trade.
Currently while a Greek exit is about to commence and markets struggle, Australia will sail on.
Why ?
Mining?
Your pacific events are amusing consider the American debts to China.
Anyhow are you not just taking the bait?
What if China behaves and you waste Billions making sure it does?
Meanwhile we comfortably sell our shit ( with you guys keeping it all straight)
And the Chinese people prosper, and growth fair and square.
Peacefully.
Look, we Australians haven't been conned into selling them anything.
We are willingly whoring our goods....to give a blunt clear analogy.
We are just one Asian country trading well with another.
But go ahead with the paranoia....remember we are your best ally.
But you say that to everyone you sell bullshit too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erYpXzE9Pxs
As for selling our minerals
We started it and actively up the ante.......it's massive and worth wild.....
We also told the Americans we ain't gonna stop
Unlike the Americans we just keep it friendly.
Not a bad move considering that Military might is passé now.
It won't feed you.
Speaking of feeding the Chinese....
Look at a map of Australia.....
It's massive...
So we let them buy up a lot of land and place enormous taxes on them.
We make billions out of it.
But it's controlled and a good deal.
We are happy to help our friends eat.
Remember you will always get red neck Australians calling the Chinese.
But the general mood is they are lovely people.
We allow thousands of students In a year to study.
Settle here.
It's actually none of Americas business....and we have made that clear.
Our trade with China is just getting bigger and bigger.
Money is in the bank.
Nil regrets.
We are good friends.
Something a dying empire should have considered a decade or two ago.
This military posturing will just make you worse off ( not better) in the future.
Luck
Ps
Our business leaders here prefer to deal with a Chinese vice premier than a US president.
Ask yourselfs why?
|
Thai Girls : Meet Active Thai Girls
Posted on: 7:09 pm on June 4, 2012
|
|
DaffyDuck
|
Quote: from magnum on 12:07 pm on June 4, 2012
... they are coming, Duck, with romantic delusions of re-capturing their former glory, and they are not as civilized as we might hope.
Anyone stupid enough to actually believe they are civilized?
|
Thai Women : Meet Matured Thai Women
Posted on: 11:42 pm on June 4, 2012
|
|
|
|
| |
|
