Australian taxpayers to fork out millions for US troops

[Slybacon]

Australian taxpayers to fork out millions for US troops

The Australian government will begin a multimillion-dollar construction project this month at two military facilities to accommodate future rotations of up to 2,500 U.S. Marines.

Australia’s defense department announced Friday that it awarded $11 million for new facilities at the Australian army’s Robertson Barracks and the Royal Australian Air Force Base in Darwin, according to a news release. The project will ensure “appropriate living and working accommodation is available for the U.S. Marine Corps.”

The Corps’ presence in Australia’s Northern Territory is expected to increase dramatically next year when, starting in the spring, about 1,200 Marines arrive for six months of training in the region. The last two rotations comprised about 200 Marines. By 2016, the U.S. expects to deploy a full Marine air-ground task force numbering 2,500 personnel, officials have said.

To date, the company-size units rotating through Darwin have stayed at Robertson Barracks. But with aviation support in tow next year, about 130 Marines — along with four heavy-lift helicopters — will be stationed at the air force base, the news release says.

The construction projects are expected to begin in coming weeks and will be completed by the end of February.

About 200 Marines and sailors with Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marines, recently returned home to Hawaii, having spent six months Down Under as Marine Rotational Force-Darwin. It’s unclear which unit will deploy next.

Before leaving in September, U.S. and Australian forces conducted a battalion-level training event at Bradshaw Field Training Area, located in the remote Australian outback. About 750 Marines and sailors from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit joined 150 Marines with MRF-Darwin and 100 Australian troops.

The exercise helped commanders identify the advantages and limitations of the training field, said Col. John Merna, the 31st MEU’s commanding officer. They found that its location, about 200 miles inland from the shallow waters of the Coral Sea coastline, presented some logistical challenges.

“It’s very austere,” Merna told Marine Corps Times. “Any time you can go into a training area that’s an established training area, it’ll be more useful and effective. So more facilities, harder structures, communications — things that are more permanent — [would be] helpful.”

[Francois le Danque]

War is Peace

[Auxin]

Great, a more permanent US military presence in Oz.

So when we attack iran or bangledesh, or whatnot you'll be a legitimate military target for retaliation due to your complicity, thus slightly softening their blow against us.

A bit like a sacrificial electrode.

Why you guys agree to it is beyond me, we wont protect you. You must really love our cheeseburgers or something.

[Slybacon]

^^^ I think USA is flexing its muscles over china, and saying "look at us, AUS is our Ally, where is your base China?"

[space cadet swami]

"The construction projects are expected to begin in coming weeks and will be completed by the end of February."

Yeah good luck with getting that one done by February....someone forgot to let the dickheads know about the wet season (monsoon).

[Distracted]

^^^ I think USA is flexing its muscles over china, and saying "look at us, AUS is our Ally, where is your base China?"

Imagine the outcry not just by Australian citizens but by the western media if China was going to deploy 2500 troops in Australia.

But if America wants to do it and you cry out you're a peace loving hippy that's living in a fantasy world.

[DiscoStu]

The US Military Presence in Australia: Asymmetrical Alliance Cooperation and its Alternatives

Richard Tanter1

Through the ANZUS alliance, Australia, like Japan and South Korea, has been a key part of the United States “hub-and-spokes” Asia-Pacific alliance structure for more than sixty years, dating back to the earliest years of the Cold War and the conclusion of post-war peace with Japan. An historical chameleon, the shape of the alliance has continually shifted – from its original purpose for the Menzies government as a US guarantee against post-war Japanese remilitarisation, to an imagined southern bastion of the Free World in the global division of the Cold War, on to a niche commitment in the Global War On Terror, to its current role in the imaginings of a faux containment revenant against rising China. As one hinge in the Obama administration’s Pacific pivot, Australia is now more deeply embedded strategically and militarily into US global military planning, especially in Asia, than ever before. As in Japan and Korea, this involves Australia governments identifying Australian national interests with those of its American ally, the integration of Australian military forces organizationally and technologically with US forces, and a rapid and extensive expansion of an American military presence in Australia itself. This alliance pattern of asymmetrical cooperation, especially in the context of US policy towards China, raises the urgent question of what alternative policy an Australian government concerned to maintain an autonomous path towards securing both its genuine national interests and the global human interest should be following.

http://japanfocus.org/-Richard-Tanter/4025?utm_source=November+11%2C+2013&utm_campaign=China%27s+Connectivity+Revolution&utm_medium=email#sthash.7I34x2fo.dpuf

[Subaeruginosin]

Why you guys agree to it is beyond me, we wont protect you. You must really love our cheeseburgers or something.

We do it because Australia has relied on America as it’s main form of defence ever since World War II, when England left us defenseless and captain America flew in and saved us from the japs.

Also, logic would have to assume if shit ever did hit the fan that they would protect us. I mean, why would the US allow their enemies to get there hands on our abundant natural resources? Iron ore, uranium and now there saying there could be more oil deposits near Coober Pedy than Saudi Arabia. Seems like it would be in there best interest to me.

[DiscoStu]

In explaining the build-up to the Darwin deployments, The Australian newspaper suggested, with some understatement, that “Australia might have been encouraging the US to increase its military presence”, citing the US Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, conceding that “It’s fair to say that we will always take an interest in what the Australians are doing and want to do.”

you have to wonder just how paranoid the australian security forces/government are of actual armed conflict with china. it certainly looks at face value like they're preparing for it.

[Slybacon]

War is Peace

Freedom Is Slavery

https://soundcloud.com/thetasonic/thetasonic-1984

Edited November 13, 2013 by Slybacon

[DiscoStu]

A lengthy report released last week by the US-based think tank, the Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), provides a detailed assessment of Australia’s central strategic role in the Pentagon’s preparations for war with China. The report’s title itself—“Gateway to the Indo-Pacific: Australian Defense Strategy and the Future of the Australia-US Alliance”—highlights the critical geographical importance of the Australian continent for US naval and air operations in Indian and Pacific oceans in any war against China.

The CBSA bills itself as independent and non-partisan, but is closely connected to the American military establishment, receiving the bulk of its funds through Department of Defense research projects. It was prominently involved in drawing up the Pentagon’s AirSea Battle strategy for war against China—a devastating missile and air attack on the Chinese mainland aimed at destroying its communications and military infrastructure, supplemented by an economic blockade to cut off vital Chinese imports of energy and raw materials from Africa and the Middle East.

The US military build-up in the Indo-Pacific region is an integral component of the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia”—an all-sided diplomatic, economic and strategic offensive aimed at undermining Chinese influence throughout the region and encircling China militarily. Australia’s importance was underscored when Obama chose to formally announce the “pivot” or “rebalance” in the Australian parliament in November 2011, and signed an agreement to station US Marines in the northern city of Darwin and open up Australian naval and air bases to American forces.

While the Australian and US governments speak of the American build-up in Asia in benign terms and deny any targeting of China, the CBSA report explicitly identifies China as the chief potential enemy. Other US think tanks have laid out the general strategy behind Obama’s “pivot”, but the CBSA report is the first to focus exclusively on Australia’s military importance. As it explains, “Australia has moved from ‘down under’ to ‘top centre’ in terms of geopolitical import. For the first time since World War II, Australian and American areas of strategic priority overlap. The strength of this rekindled convergence suggests that the US-Australia relationship may well prove to be the most special relationship of the 21st century.”

The CBSA later states: “The United States’ decision to rebalance towards Asia has had a sizeable impact on the Australia-US alliance… Australia’s strategic geography, well-trained armed forces, and highly regarded intelligence complex renders it an increasingly invaluable partner to the United States. Much as Washington’s close alliance with London provided the United States with a strategic vantage point over Europe throughout the troubled 20th century, America’s strong ties with Australia provide it with the means to preserve US influence and military reach across the Indo-Pacific.”

The report pinpoints the vital functions that US imperialism will require of Australia and its military forces in any conflict with China, including specific details of bases, infrastructure, and complementary Australian weaponry needed to support American operations in the Indo-Pacific. These are grouped under four headings:

* Supportive sanctuary: “As American forward bases in the western Pacific become increasingly vulnerable to Chinese missile threats, the Australian continent, with its solid infrastructure and local technical expertise, could fulfil an important role as logistical hub and bastion for the alliance,” the report states.

The CBSA notes the lack of regional US bases other than Guam in the western Pacific and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Australia, it states, represents “something of a geographic ‘sweet spot’”—outside the reach of Chinese missile forces but relatively close to potential theatres of action in the South China Sea and “choke points” through the Indonesian archipelago: the Malacca, Sunda and Lombok straits. The report identifies air bases in northern Australia and the Stirling naval base near Perth in Western Australia as critical for US air and nuclear submarine operations. Such bases, however, would need to be significantly upgraded to support “high tempo” use in times of war.

* Indo-Pacific Watch Tower: The report notes the very close collaboration of the US and Australia in intelligence/surveillance throughout the Indo-Pacific. This includes the use of long-range, over the horizon radar “allowing Australia to monitor key maritime chokepoints and sea lanes to its north,” and electronic spying from bases such as Pine Gap, as well as agreement to establish a space surveillance radar in Western Australia. The CBSA writes approvingly of “Australia’s signals intelligence expertise,” which, as Edward Snowden has exposed, is a vital component of the NSA’s vast global spying operations, and adds that it could become “the foundation of a first-class cyber warfare capability.” The previous Labor government established an Australian Cyber Security Centre earlier this year.

* Green Water Warden: “Australia’s relative proximity to the southern Indonesian archipelago, when combined with the diversity and high level of jointness of its armed forces, mean it could play a vital role policing the Lombok and Sunda Straits,” the report states. It discusses in detail the types of warplanes, warships and weaponry needed to defeat China’s forces and effectively cut off its essential imports of energy and raw materials from Africa and the Middle East. It speaks openly of the military advantages of deploying “forces on Indonesian soil or within Indonesian waters” and points to the need to overcome “Indonesia’s history of non-alignment and continued attachment to neutrality.”

* Peripheral Launchpad: In the event that a war with China extends into the Indian Ocean, the CBSA suggests that the Australian military “could make a useful contribution by leading or participating in operations against isolated Chinese naval task forces in the Eastern and Southern parts of the Indian Ocean.” The report makes a complaint, which runs like a thread through the document, that Australian air and naval forces lack the range necessary to carry out long-distance missions. It again raises the call made repeatedly by US officials, including the former US ambassador to Canberra Jeffrey Bleich, for Australia to purchase American nuclear submarines, rather than construct its own diesel-powered vessels.

Far from being simply a military document, the CBSA report deals with the differences that have emerged in the Australian political and strategic circles over commitment to the Obama administration’s “pivot.” It points obliquely to the fundamental dilemma facing Australian imperialism, which relies heavily on trade with China, but depends on the US military alliance to prosecute its own neo-colonial interests in the Asia-Pacific.

All the various tendencies identified by the CBSA in “Australia’s ongoing strategic debate” support the US alliance. What the report terms “alliance minimalists,” such as strategic analyst Hugh White, have emphasised the dangers of war and economic retribution by China if Australia too closely associates with the “pivot.” The “alliance maximalists” are personified by Ross Babbage of the Kokoda Foundation, who advocates an Australian military that can “rip an arm off any major Asian power that seeks to attack Australia.” The “incrementalists”—most commentators and politicians—lie somewhere in between. While the classifications employed are rather artificial and misleading, the CBSA report is further evidence that Washington is following, and intervening in, the political debate in Canberra very closely.

The CBSA’s attitude is made abundantly clear by its critical attitude to both the “alliance minimalists” and “incrementalists.” Moreover, the report regards the “debate” as all but over. “Australia has already crossed this strategic Rubicon [of aligning against China], providing the US Marine Corps access to Darwin and sharing intelligence, communications and space surveillance facilities at Pine Gap and Exmouth,” it states. The fact that “Washington’s prime area of strategic concern is [now] located on Australia’s very doorstep” means shared security concerns and “a strategic consensus in Australia” that it must “emerge as more of a maritime power.” This necessitates additional defence spending. The report concludes by outlining the need for “a greater budgetary effort” to purchase long-range warplanes and submarines and vastly expand military infrastructure.

The CBSA report makes for chilling reading. Its detailed analysis of basing arrangements, missile ranges, submarine transit times, aircraft types and infrastructure requirements, as well as the tactics and strategy of battle, underlines the advanced character of the US preparations for conflict with China. The Pentagon is drawing up war plans not for decades into the future, but for the years immediately ahead. Moreover, while the report deals only with a conventional war with China, the authors are well aware of the danger that it will expand into nuclear war.

The report’s candid discussion of US war with China stands in stark contrast to the virtual silence in the Australian media and political establishment, which serves a definite purpose: to chloroform workers and youth about the dangers that they face and prevent the emergence of a powerful anti-war movement in Australia, Asia and internationally, which these war preparations will sooner or later produce.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/obamas-pivot-to-asia-australia-central-to-american-war-plans-against-china/5357793

[Auxin]

Also, logic would have to assume if shit ever did hit the fan that they would protect us. I mean, why would the US allow their enemies to get there hands on our abundant natural resources? Iron ore, uranium and now there saying there could be more oil deposits near Coober Pedy than Saudi Arabia. Seems like it would be in there best interest to me.

Your spot on equating the american will to get involved with your resources. Glitch is, as you said, they will do whats in their best interest.

In WW2 the americans wanted to become a global power and to establish or maintain lucrative trading ties. The japs were a rival global power and were less profitable/reliable trading partners. And supporting them was politically incorrect.

Give the US good long term deals on oil and uranium and yes, they'll be allies for as long as your profitable. Start demanding competitive prices, human rights accountability, and respect for your sovereignty and you better hope no more cooperative entity tries to take you over.

Venezuela has great natural resources, but they want fair trade and equal rights, the US has called them enemy for how long?

Saudi Arabia has great natural resources, and they are willing to bend over for more than just prayer, the US calls them an ally despite their horrible record on human rights.

Isreal was founded on genoside but theyre economically 'cooperative' ...ally

Iran has not aggressively attacked another nation in over 400 years, but they insist on a fair deal for their minerals and they demand respect for their culture... enemy

So yes, as long as oz is the inferior to america and smiles and serves like a good little house ni**er the master will be magnanimous.

But if you want to see the limits just ban GM, legalize a slew of drugs, mandate that food megacorps supply only healthy fair trade food, and charge 5% above average for your minerals- you'll be the next iran.