Australia biting the hand that feeds it? (Secret Chapter revealed to 2009 Defence White paper)

US-Australia Plans for war with China

A newly published book by journalist David Uren has revealed that the Australian government’s 2009 Defence White Paper contained a “secret chapter” that assessed “Australia’s ability to fight an air-sea battle alongside the United States against China.”

The chapter was omitted from the public version as it contained references to Australian forces assisting the US military to impose a naval blockade of China’s trade routes, and likely Chinese retaliation against targets on Australian soil.

This news story was broken last saturday in the Australian newspaper -

Secret War with China Uncovered

What we are basically dealing with is the true extent of the 2009 Defence White Paper, which many commentators stated at the time what a huge military buildup it was in comparison to Australias previous military history with emphasis on strengthening Naval Power.....and now we know why?

The Secret Chapter deals with Australia's Navy working alongside the US Navy in "blockading" vital sea trade routes for the Chinese....in effect an act of war by itself.

It also covers the topic of China's retaliatory options, of particular concern the mining of Australian Ports and attacking Pine Gap itself which is vital to US miltary communications in the Asia-pacific Theatre.

could lead to direct Chinese attack on Australia with missiles, mining of ports and cyber-attacks. The capability of China to reach out 5,000 kilometres and touch Australia was a new element of the strategic environment.”

Yes, Darwin and a couple other towns in WW2 got bombed by the Japanese but I beleive what we are dealing with here is the the first retaliatory strike in any conflict between China and USA being Pine Gap.....and the only way they could do this is with a volley of ICBM's aimed at Australia's Centre to ensure destruction of this base.

Journalist, David Uren in his book also touches upon the Primeminister Kevin Rud dismissal...which kind of make sense in the whole scheme of things going on behind closed doors -

Significantly, Uren notes that while then Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had aggressively supported the White Paper—against opposition from his military intelligence advisors—the Obama administration did not support his diplomatic initiatives in the Asian region. Uren cites the diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks that revealed Washington opposed Rudd’s advocacy of a so-called “Asia-Pacific Community” which would seek to mediate tensions between the US and China.

That last sentence clearly (in my opinion) is motive for the knifing of Rudd....even thou he supported the build up of Australias military, his close relationship with China could be a thorn in the US defence's side with their plans to further antagonise China and ratchet up the fear factor and war footing.

A final quote from The Australian Newspaper report depicts the reaction fo the Chinese when the original "sanitized" public version was released.....no doubt they would be fuming now with the releae of this secret chapter.

According to American diplomatic notes on the WikiLeaks website, the most difficult discussions were with the Chinese Defence Department's Jai Xiaoning, who Mr Pezzullo described as "the bruiser". Mr Pezzullo said a "look of cold fury" washed over Major General Jai's face as he heard the references to China.

Even the sanitised public version of the white paper was enough to upset the Chinese. They asked Mr Pezzullo to revise the description of the regional security environment and, in particular, the references to China's military modernisation.

"Pezzullo replied that the document would not be changed and he had not come to negotiate it," Uren's book says.

The stationing of a small number of US troops here recently is just the tip of an ever growing iceberg, so as not to be seen as positioning a massive invasion force all at once, the troops will "trickle" in over time as Australias ports are upgraded to accomadate 60% of the US Navy's power -

the small scale of the initial US deployments to Australia—just several hundred marines training for six months near the northern city of Darwin—was intended as “a way of mollifying regional reaction.” The announcement over the weekend by US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta that the US Navy will base 60 percent of its fleet in the Asia-Pacific underscores the strategic importance of access to Australian naval bases. Ports in Perth, Darwin and Brisbane will service the US aircraft carrier battle groups and nuclear submarines that threaten China’s access to crucial maritime trading routes.

To conclude, and Im sorry this has stretched longer than I had planned.....where does Australia best intentions lie?

To support its long time friend (USA) at the risk of detsroying its economy and loosing its number one Trading Partner, or to remain nuetral and keep strong economic ties alive for out future?

Australia has already chosen which side it will be on, and we have not only bitten the hand that feeds us, we have gotten our big brother to cut that hand right off!

Germanicus in 3....2....1....

Originally posted by olliemc84
Germanicus in 3....2....1....

Ha!

Now we have to ask ourselves why on earth we would be doing this stuff? Why would we risk our economic future? Because of political pressure from the United States maybe?

The United States are putting us in a very difficult position.

reply to post by Melbourne_Militia


The chinese got no chance with that Roo (your avatar) waiting for them

Just to clarify Australia didn't choose SweetFA it was chosen for us by some over paid wanna be in Canberra.
60% of the US navy? god I hope not.
Why isn't our entire coast line riddled with missile silos, if we played the game right we wouldn't need anyone's help and if some one wanted ours they could ask politely & bring something to the table.

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan
Just to clarify Australia didn't choose SweetFA it was chosen for us by some over paid wanna be in Canberra.
60% of the US navy? god I hope not.
Why isn't our entire coast line riddled with missile silos, if we played the game right we wouldn't need anyone's help and if some one wanted ours they could ask politely & bring something to the table.

edit on 4-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)

I continually ask myself this same question.

I did come across one very interesting thread recently that investigates some of the prime suspects behind 9/11 www.abovetopsecret.com... . Murdoch was already a clear candidate in my books with his media manipulation, but with Frank Lowy of Westfield and Reserve Bank member also sympathetic to the Zionist war agenda I am really starting to question just how far has Australia been infiltrated, compliant and promoting of this injustice. When seeing how Australia sticks like glue to America at the UN, with all this money circling in the background it is starting to make some sense.

China has a long history in Australia and has always been a part of the mining and other communities, as a multicultural country I do not see this situation changing. As this axis of evil plan gets played out, Russia and China are both deservedly getting #ed off.

If the world finacial system goes caput then china won't have mutch reason
not to grab as mutch of the local resources as it wants. you wouldn't need
all of Australia, Just QLD and WA the aliance with the US gives us some breathing space

Nato Enlargment: From the North Atlantic to the South pacific

Rasmussen’s visit to Australia will be the latest, and most pronounced, step in the solidification of military ties between NATO and Canberra that began with Rasmussen’s predecessor, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, paying the first-ever visit by a NATO chief to the country in 2005. Rasmussen’s trip will also follow President Barack Obama’s visit to Australia last November during which he announced the deployment of 2,500 U.S. Marines to the north of the nation, as NATO’s new partnership with New Zealand follows the recent renewal of military relations between that country and the U.S. after a 25-year hiatus.

Not only will stationing American Troops here pi$$ China off but it looks like we are going to become full on members of NATO aswell.....

I guess Australians can now prepare to see an influx of both US and NATO troops in the coming years as this nation and New Zealand become their new Forward Fortresses/Bases for the upcoming war with China.

This goes hand in hand with the other current thread regarding China's reaction to the shift in US Military planning -

Chinese Media Issue Warning on US Military Shift

Despite their differences, China & Russia need to stand together to combat this excess pressure from NATO aimed towards them......Russia will be fighting a European/Mid East battle, China will be fighting a South East Asian battle.

The pawns are in place....its almost time for Check-Mate!

reply to post by Melbourne_Militia


crap. i live in australia. at one of the stated port cities. i was hoping no one would be able to find us on a map but apparantly we're ground zero....

great.

we need more saltwater crocodiles and dangerous animals here. they need to bus them in incase we get invaded or something...first line of defence

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan
Just to clarify Australia didn't choose SweetFA it was chosen for us by some over paid wanna be in Canberra.
60% of the US navy? god I hope not.
Why isn't our entire coast line riddled with missile silos, if we played the game right we wouldn't need anyone's help and if some one wanted ours they could ask politely & bring something to the table.

edit on 4-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)

well it had occurred to me that given our close proximity to china (and previous conflict with japan), a few nukes wouldn't go astray... but we dont seem to have any....despite i gather spending billions on defence?

reply to post by Melbourne_Militia


Did NATO change its charter at some point in the past or did I miss that? While NATO has many non member nations they work with the NATO charter does not extend to nations outside of North America or Europe. What that means is if China attacks New Zealand NATO is not obligated to defend since the charter restricts the attack on one is an attack on all section to Europe and North America.

As for the other comments about the US NAavy and US Troops the bulk of our troops are currently stationed in S. Korea and Japan, with the presence on Okinowa being reduced and shuffeled around. As far as the stationing of Military Naval Assets Australia will not see the bulk of that. West Coast Ports and Hawaii will and we have been in discussion with several Asian countries, including the Phillipines again as well as Vietnam, to station / have closer ties with increased port calls with those nations.

The Phillipines had been internally discussing the possibility of approaching the US about stationing a naval base back in their territory.

To clarify something people seem to be missing... This is not just about China... Russia is a player in this as well. Russia has been shifting its focus to its Eastern province because of the resource potential there. The Russians have already stated they were increasing their military strength in their far east region, which includes the Pacific Ocean.

The othe reason for that increase by Russia is to counter China. While they appear all buddy buddy it is simply not the case. They are distrustful of each other and consider each other rivals.