US Bombs to be tested in Australia: report (1 Viewer)

[malkin86]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National...ustralia-report/2004/11/05/1099547353757.html

Erk! The last time we let someone test their bombs in our country, the land is still radiation-filled and fenced off.

 

[digmahstigma]

lol people are such paranoid androids

 

[kelboo]

Correct me if i am mistaken.. I don't think that testing bombs is the only way to "strengthen these two country's relations"....
Let's all follow America

 

[santaslayer]

ahahaha...i reckon...

wtf? i wanna test sum on usa as well!...

 

[malkin86]

And you've gotta love how letting the US bomb Australia will "send a strong message to the region of US support for Australia."

 

[Generator]

From what I can gather they will be testing the weapons (as one part of a strengthened defence agreement) at facilities/locations that are currently used for military activities... To think that we will benefit from such acts, too.

 

[digmahstigma]

its just like france and the south pacific, except replace france with america and south pacific with ... oz.

yeah, that was redundant but im tiredddddddddd

 

[tWiStEdD]

why does it bother anyone?
to be honest... we're sparsely populated. If we can put our land to some use, why not?
they're not nuclear. they're bombs, like the ones used in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Remember how the killed innocents due to not only human error but due to error margins and technical problems.

I say, if they're gonna test them they'd best make them functional and closer to perfect. If refining these weapons means less civilian deaths in the future, why the hell not?

 

[LadyBec]

why does it bother anyone?
to be honest... we're sparsely populated. If we can put our land to some use, why not?
they're not nuclear. they're bombs, like the ones used in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Remember how the killed innocents due to not only human error but due to error margins and technical problems.

I say, if they're gonna test them they'd best make them functional and closer to perfect. If refining these weapons means less civilian deaths in the future, why the hell not?

then why the hell not test them in your own country?
Why use ours. I hate stuff like this... i don't believe that we should allow other nations to test their weapons on OUR soil. Aside from anything else it's the principle of the thing i don't like, it just rubs me thr wrong way.

 

[tWiStEdD]

coz they're shitheads?
if they're not going to test it on themselves, i'd rather the tested it here than not at all. get some perspective. you're talking about more civilian casualties in war, i'm talking about less.

 

[LadyBec]

Isaid nothing about more civilian casulties. Read what it says, I don't care if they test them, just as long as it's not here.
i agree that if they must devople new weapons that they should be tested. What i don't agree with is testing them here. I see no reason to allow them to test their weapons on our land.
Aside from that, i'm sure that America has enough weapons stockpiled to last them some time, without making new and more destructive ones.

 

[aim54x]

they should take their bombs and test them in their own deserts. they have a few too. better yet, just dismantle the damn things and forget the entire project. testin in a war situation is not a very good strategy, too much collateral damage. if it has to be tested, and not in the US, its better in the middle of the Aussie desert than on some poor bastard's house.

 

[~*~Karina~*~]

How does it benefit Australia in any way? If America feels that their bombs aren't doing the job (which i don't get....the bombs they have seem to have no trouble in blowing things up), then they should test them on their own soil. We're not going to benefit from it, and its bullshit that we should have to let them 'to strengthen relations' between the 2 countries.

 

[tWiStEdD]

i was under the impression that most people on here were left wing pinkos... clearly i was wrong.
right wing nationalists all the way.

who cares? desert is desert. land is land. they're obviously not keen on testing things over there, for whatevre reason. this indicates to me that if they dont test them here, then they may not test them at all or may not test them effectively.

if they WANT to test over there there would be a logical reason. environmentally, economically, whatever. seriously guys... if not here then somewhere else. essentially somewhere else will be someone else's country.

i dont see why you're bothered so much..... all i see is fervent nationalists dancing around their little cave-man campfire.

 

[tWiStEdD]

i'd suggest they're either paying us (which is good) or they're letting Australians learn too which would mean supplying us with technology and skills (which is also good) or a combination (which is excellent)

 

[aim54x]

paying us and letting us in on the technology is good. but do we really need to the tech form them???

look at Sweden, they've built a stealth navy and some of the hottest fighter jets in the world all by themselves. if they can do it why can't we??? if we had made the decision to be independent then the industries would have flourished. even old russia couldn't seriously believe they could invade sweden without losing a lot of hardware.

 

[Sabbo]

How much further can they redefine a weapon? All this war has shown is that it doesn't matter how modern the weaponary is, there is no 'perfect war'

Sure technology has improved since WW2 but it still doesn't change the fact that a lot of innocent people die.

Most of the errors were human; planning/tactical (i.e. targeting the wrong house). I'd really wish that they'd invest their money more wisely

You can't expect to fire a bomb/rocket into a town and just kill the 'baddies'

 

[aim54x]

All this war has shown is that it doesn't matter how perfect the weaponary is, there is no 'perfect war'

Most of the errors were human; planning/tactical (i.e. targeting the wrong house). I'd really wish that they'd invest their money more wisely

You can't expect to fire a bomb/rocket into a town and just kill the 'baddies'

that is very true. no matter how perfect the weapon, its human designed and there will b a fault, give it to a human to control and the error is aven larger. there will always be collateral damge unless war is waged by professionals in an isolated environment and there is no killin involved. but that is not really war is it???

 

[Generator]

Benefits = greater access to the technology, greater coordination between our forces and research organisations, the fact that the costs are shared, etc.

It isn't as though this is the first agreement of its kind between our two nation-states, too.

Edit: Military matters are a necessary evil, so why not be as effective as possible?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You guys won't allow these tests... which will allow the US, Australia to develop bombs that lower the civilian death rate, while you still whinge about the ammount of civilians that are killed from bombs...