Defence plan to scrap F-111s

"Brash" wrote in message
...
"Defender in Tas" wrote in message
om...
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.



I don't claim to know a whole lot.

Then you should try asking questions instead of making statements.

Oh, so you're the local expert?

Some might say that.



Only you believe that gate guard, only you.

'Defender in Tas' may not know much on the subject,but at least he isn't a
gate guard (in a service only slightly less military than Telstra) with
delusions of grandeur.

To you 'Defender in Tas', 'Brash' is an Airfield Defence Guard in the RAAF,
the lowest of the low, they can't hack the hard yards in the Army and aren't
smart enough to find a better job in the RAAF - but he is a laugh with his
self important nonsense.

Only you believe that gate guard, only you.

'Defender in Tas' may not know much on the subject,but at least he isn't a
gate guard (in a service only slightly less military than Telstra) with
delusions of grandeur.

To you 'Defender in Tas', 'Brash' is an Airfield Defence Guard in the RAAF,
the lowest of the low, they can't hack the hard yards in the Army and aren't
smart enough to find a better job in the RAAF - but he is a laugh with his
self important nonsense.

That was harsh Mr Acrobat, very harsh. Although you did I "may" not
know much on the subject, which at least tones down your comment.

As for your comments Brash, it might be worth remembering that at
some point in time if you were an infantry soldier you may be grateful
for that gate guard and his campaign to save the F-111. I'm thinking
that, say, in 2008, you might be sitting there in a comfortable
fortified position on the East Timor border pleasantly interacting
with hundreds of Indonesian soldiers who have come to holiday, and you
will thank your lucky stars to know that thousands of kilometres away
at RAAF Amberley gate guards are keeping the militant media at bay
while venerable F-111s launch a steady and impressive rate of 8, or
even maybe twice that many, sorties a day, carrying a couple of guided
bombs, external fuel tanks and maybe an AAM or two, to drop on pretty
buildings in Jakarta. And the worst of it is that those dedicated gate
guards will have to keep the increasingly pestilent media away from
the surviving F-111s until you and your army friends - helped out by
some Hornets flying out of Tindal, the navy, and probably a USN
carrier group - have been able to convince East Timor's uninvited
guests to leave or until you leave. Now aren't you glad we have him
here to tell us how to wage war with the F-111?

"Defender in Tas" wrote in message
om...
Only you believe that gate guard, only you.

'Defender in Tas' may not know much on the subject,but at least he isn't
a
gate guard (in a service only slightly less military than Telstra) with
delusions of grandeur.

To you 'Defender in Tas', 'Brash' is an Airfield Defence Guard in the
RAAF,
the lowest of the low, they can't hack the hard yards in the Army and
aren't
smart enough to find a better job in the RAAF - but he is a laugh with
his
self important nonsense.

That was harsh Mr Acrobat, very harsh. Although you did I "may" not
know much on the subject, which at least tones down your comment.

You have demonstrated a serious lack of subject knowledge.


As for your comments Brash, it might be worth remembering that at
some point in time if you were an infantry soldier you may be grateful
for that gate guard and his campaign to save the F-111.


I was in the infantry and the gate guard is an amusement, nothing more.

The F-111 has a strategic role, not a CAS role.

I'm thinking
that, say, in 2008, you might be sitting there in a comfortable
fortified position on the East Timor border pleasantly interacting
with hundreds of Indonesian soldiers who have come to holiday,

I'm ex Army - the Indons in question have a lot further to go before they
find me.

and you
will thank your lucky stars to know that thousands of kilometres away
at RAAF Amberley gate guards are keeping the militant media at bay
while venerable F-111s launch a steady and impressive rate of 8, or
even maybe twice that many, sorties a day, carrying a couple of guided
bombs, external fuel tanks and maybe an AAM or two, to drop on pretty
buildings in Jakarta. And the worst of it is that those dedicated gate
guards will have to keep the increasingly pestilent media away from
the surviving F-111s until you and your army friends - helped out by
some Hornets flying out of Tindal, the navy, and probably a USN
carrier group - have been able to convince East Timor's uninvited
guests to leave or until you leave. Now aren't you glad we have him
here to tell us how to wage war with the F-111?

Nope.

He is largely a waste of space in regards the RAAF role.

If you want directions as to where to park on a RAAF base, gate guard is
your man, otherwise don't bother.

"Defender in Tas" wrote in message
om...
Only you believe that gate guard, only you.

'Defender in Tas' may not know much on the subject,but at least he isn't
a
gate guard (in a service only slightly less military than Telstra) with
delusions of grandeur.

To you 'Defender in Tas', 'Brash' is an Airfield Defence Guard in the
RAAF,
the lowest of the low, they can't hack the hard yards in the Army and
aren't
smart enough to find a better job in the RAAF - but he is a laugh with
his
self important nonsense.

That was harsh Mr Acrobat, very harsh. Although you did I "may" not
know much on the subject, which at least tones down your comment.

As for your comments Brash, it might be worth remembering that at
some point in time if you were an infantry soldier you may be grateful
for that gate guard and his campaign to save the F-111. I'm thinking
that, say, in 2008, you might be sitting there in a comfortable
fortified position on the East Timor border pleasantly interacting
with hundreds of Indonesian soldiers who have come to holiday, and you
will thank your lucky stars to know that thousands of kilometres away
at RAAF Amberley gate guards are keeping the militant media at bay
while venerable F-111s launch a steady and impressive rate of 8, or
even maybe twice that many, sorties a day, carrying a couple of guided
bombs, external fuel tanks and maybe an AAM or two, to drop on pretty
buildings in Jakarta. And the worst of it is that those dedicated gate
guards will have to keep the increasingly pestilent media away from
the surviving F-111s until you and your army friends - helped out by
some Hornets flying out of Tindal, the navy, and probably a USN
carrier group - have been able to convince East Timor's uninvited
guests to leave or until you leave. Now aren't you glad we have him
here to tell us how to wage war with the F-111?

FYI, ADGs don't do "gates" ( and "guard" is a historic term dating back to
WW2). That's the role of the RAAF Security Police.

"Acrobat" is just jealous that ADGs are better-trained, better-equipped, and
better-paid, than grunts.

--
De Oppresso Liber.