So you never heard any news, for God knows how many decades, regarding the Israeli forces killing journalist, or civilian, or........ children?
Any embargo?
We did the mistake here, and accepted the punishment. How come they did a lot worse and nothing happened?
Or maybe you are trying to say that killing civilians are immoral here, but it's completely okay elsewhere as long as it's done by their so called close "allies"?
Is this the norm to be "aligned with them"? If so then I'm not fond of it to say the least.
Don't go about using whataboutisms as arguments, since you're essentially comparing apples to oranges here. And I'm not going to debate about that since we all know how far off topic that is going to be.
I told you already, the most ideal solution for china problem is "to blow them to pieces and wiped them off the world map".
Do you really think it'll be us who do it?
Do you think it'll be our F-16 who do it? Or perhaps our Sukhoi?
Really?
Dude, the most that we can contribute is exactly what you guys were talking about several pages above, providing area for refueling for the big guns.
Our air forces hold not so much relevance with china problem.
It's strange that you're optimistic as hell for us to get all the U.S. support but totally pessimistic in the U.S. chance to destroy China.
I'm the opposite. I believe 100% that even with just their Pacific fleet, they can beat china. Never mind with full QUAD support plus UK.
And after they got rid of china problem, what do we have left? Obviously our usual business, means our regional challenge.
Not difficult to grasp.
At no point have I ever mentioned that I don't believe the US can't do anything. You are the one who is putting words in my mouth.
And our usual business has never been about Singapore or Australia, if so then why is it the most numerous foreign attaches in Australia are people from the TNI? Why is it that we always send our Air Force instructors to instructor school in Singapore (along with the fact that the RSAF regularly helps and improves our own Air Force's playbook). This whole obsession certain Indonesians have over Singapore and Australia reeks of an inferiority complex.
If anything I support a stronger and more well armed TNI, but within the context of regional interoperability and support of each other.
Dude, the commonality is not the only thing that we should consider. If so then why the heck we wait for so many years, analyzing so many different aircrafts, and then came up with SU-35, and then after CAATSA we (probably) turn our attention to Rafale.
So you're saying our government is full of amateurs?
We can build the new infrastructure, albeit with much more investment. We should not be allergic to that.
If you have read up and talked to a few people on this thread, you would know that the reason the government picked the Su-35 has less to do with capability and more to do with "political" and "financial" reasons. And not good ones either.
Also, why build new infrastructure when you already have a well capable and established existing one? Why are you so adamant about bringing in jets that have a notorious reputation of being maintenance hogs and a financial drain, that the end user also do no want? I get it if you like Russian jets personally, but to force upon those ideals within the context of serious discussion
especially towards an end user that at the very least is ambivalent and at most against the jets that
you personally like is just cringe.
Again, if that means we have to buy 3 squadrons of F-16V first before get our hands on F-35 then it's a s**t offer.
Once we get our hand on F-35, china problem would probably have been resolved, and it'll be Martians who claim not just our EEZ in Natuna, but our fricking patio as well. And I'll probably be the one who say, "I told you to get that S-500!".
Again, stop with the whataboutisms, they are not good arguments. We have a real pressing threat right now and you're concerned over a notional threat 15 years from now.
And if you have read what
@Gundala have said, IADS is more then just buying the biggest missile. It's about integrating and networking together in order for you to have GBAD's that work in close conjunction with other assets such as fighters, AWACS, AAW vessels, and GCI radars; End goal being having a Cooperative Engagement Capability. This is why
DESPITE me personally thinking that the Patriot/MEADS is better then the Aster 30, the TNI would have more use, integration, and flexibility by procuring the SAMP/T.
Sure you can have S-500's, but what then? Iraq's KARI IADS has shown what happens when you essentially mix and match your sensors and missiles with French and Russian along with having a non-flexible command structure (sound familiar?). They were taken out relatively quickly by coalition Air Forces despite the coalition planners being very concerned over it during the initial invasion.
I said "better U.S. made fighter", so I was clearly talking about the upcoming F-35.
I said cmiiw because I was sure china got a copy of F-16, build their own (is it J-10 or J-16?) and then develop it further, but I was not sure how it fares against the original F-16. The point remains, F-16 is not something new for them. Different than Rafale.
Unless they also got a copy of Rafale and already built their version, then I stand corrected.
Again, where is the proof? We have provided proof that the Chinese have essentially cracked the code when it comes to the Su-35. What proof do you have that the Chinese already know how the AN/APG-83 works? Or an AMRAAM C-7/D? That is a very dangerous claim to make. If the Chinese supposedly already extensively studied the F-16, then why does the USAF still intends to make the V fly through 2048 to supplement the F-35?
www.prnewswire.com
