Air power trumps sea power. Mitchell proved that some time ago. Just take a look at Taiwan's defensive strategy. Missile defense and air superiority fighters. Monty's spot on on this one.

It's pretty much where everyone is going. Almost every country in the world puts Air Force above Navy.
A strong Navy is usually a power projection tool rather than a defensive tool.

Well said Marine. Guess that means NZ is planning on invading Vanuatu or maybe Darwin.

Well, just how would someone attack New Zealand without a Navy? Nuke them with an ICBM? Fighters would be of little defense against such.

Australia is close, but as Monty has pointed out the people in New Zealand do not seem worried about such things.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

It's pretty much where everyone is going. Almost every country in the world puts Air Force above Navy.
A strong Navy is usually a power projection tool rather than a defensive tool.

Well it seems everyone but Middle Eastern countries who still seem fixated on armour.

awesome to see just how off topic this has got. (maybe one of our mods could split it off into a seperate topic???)

i think in our (new zealands) position, military spending is a gamble, you can think about a worst case scenario, which will work just fine if you have the funds, or clear threat to justify it, or you can spend your money on things you will actually use.

we have an extremely large coastline to patrol, and a truely massive exclusive economic fisheries area to police. when you add that to our comitments to our pacific island nieghbours, then in my belief at least, our naval vessels were well outdated.

the new ANZAC class frigates, and inshore patrol vessels are a valid purchase. not only that but the army has been recieving new comms gear, AT missiles, LAV's and Pinzguar vehicles.

i think if it ever got to a situation where we had to defend against a fleet bent on taking on NZ, 30 or so fighters would hardly bother them


it's a game of long odds, but bar indonesia and i dont think NZ even HAS a credible threat to it's soviegnty (unless a cricket or rugby match against Australia goes particularly badly)


***bulldog, i'll appologise, i obviously have taken your initial comment not in the way it was meant.

Originally Posted by Gator

Well, you do live longer than we do in the United States of America......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ife_expectancy

A lot longer.

Move there! or even go to Cuba. It's number 37...

Originally Posted by MontyB

Well it seems everyone but Middle Eastern countries who still seem fixated on armour.

Not really!

Check recent arms purchases by UAE, Oman, Kuwait, Egypt, Israel, Syria and Saudis... And what you see is that they are ONLY buying new aircrafts or airplane ordnance.

Lockheed Unveils Shuttle Replacement - A PM Exclusive

Space Shuttle Replacement

Aeronautics - X-33 Shuttle Replacement

SPACE.com -- NASA to Accelerate Plans for Shuttle's Replacement

well, never thought i'd have to say this....


but thanks for bringing this back on topic P80

No problem... I don't hate you. I just disagree with your ignorant opinion about the history of Iran.... LOL

I'm ambivalent about the space programme. Originally it was how we developed our nuclear delivery packages but today I have no idea wtf they are on about. Space tourists, ceramic tile durability tests, commercial satellite launching? So much of it is classified that I am forced to trust that my government is not simply doing this to be able to say they are doing it and that it is serving some useful purpose, what that is fukifiknow. Too many star wars movies when these people were young and impressionable. I personally know one astronaut, a doctor from Indiana, David Wolf. He is(was?) a fighter pilot with the INARNG (public knowledge no PERSEC issues here) and I've flown with him in my ex-father-in-law's Super Decathlon. He's a great pilot and a brilliant doctor and when I pressed him about this very question, wtf are we doing up there and he said "All I know is what I did, check on the human body's responses to weightlessness." Ok, great, so are we planning to send people en masse to outer space? Not feasible. Are we developing a weapon which will remove our enemy's gravity? Someone needs to try decaf if that's what they're thinking.

Bottom line I can't say whether or not this expenditure on NASA and space flight is justified since I don't know what they are doing up there. And that ignorance leads me to believe tackling homelessness in veterans or improving teacher education would be a better use for my tax dollars, but not with any real conviction.

And Inferno spot on and I accept your apology.