"JD" wrote in message
om...
(Defender in Tas) wrote in message
. com...
Let
me guess, ex-army?

No, but hardly relevant.

It is actually. Seeing as you take a pro-army/tanks stance at the
expense of
strategic common-sense.

My pro-army, pro-tanks stance is not at the expense of strategic
commonsense (no hyphen), nor is at the expense of the RAAF or RAN. I
would like it to be at the expense of the enormous, and growing,
social welfare budget, but that's another issue. I believe the defence
budget should be dramatically increased. And I also believe a balance
in capabilities must be maintained, with due regard to the likely
threats and contingencies that our forces must face. It's incredibly
misleading for you to suggest that my support for the probable
retirement of the F-111 around 2006 is linked to my support for
acquiring new tanks. I apologised for giving the false impression that
I favoured using the $300 million (a conservative estimate as some are
now reporting it to be $500m) to be saved from retiring the Pigs on
raising two new infantry battalions. Personally, I believe the number
of infantry battalions at present is adequate. I was quite clear in
stating my views on what we should be doing regarding our air combat
capabilities.

My two cents;

Spend more on the Navy and Air Force. Cut back the army. **** off the
idea of tanks, bushmasters, APCs. Remove 1 Armd, 5/7 RAR, 8/12 Mdm
Regt and associated support elements from the ORBAT. Move 3 RAR up to
Enoggera. Buy ASLAVs, More choppers. Make all reservists infantry.

Or accept that our army really isn't going to do anything, so just
**** it off and let the Yanks have their base here.

Hmmmmm -- you missed your vocation :-)
but idea has merit and will help the balance of payments ;-)