Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> Thinking Globally >> Australia Says No to US?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1343981158

Message started by it_is_the_light on Aug 3rd, 2012 at 6:05pm

Title: Australia Says No to US?
Post by it_is_the_light on Aug 3rd, 2012 at 6:05pm
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/08/02/254126/australia-turns-away-us-nuclear-carrier/

Australia refuses to host US nuclear carrier strike group




Ohio-class guided missile submarine USS Michigan (SSGN 727) arrives at HMAS Stirling (file photo).

Australia has rejected a proposal to host a US nuclear aircraft carrier strike group on its west coast.


A Pentagon-commissioned report on repositioning US forces in the region had suggested relocating a carrier from the US East Coast to an Australian naval base south of Perth as part of a shift in the US military’s overseas deployment to the Asia-Pacific region. The report had been drafted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.

Australian Defense Minister Stephen Smith said on Thursday that Australia's Indian Ocean base, HMAS Stirling would never become a US military base, although, negotiations were underway to increase the US Navy’s access to the outpost.

"We have made it crystal clear from the first moment - we don't have United States military bases in Australia. We don't see the need for that," The Associated Press quoted Smith as saying on Australian Broadcasting Corp. television.

"It's a suggestion by an independent think tank. It's not one we're proposing to take up," he said.

Hugh White, the head of Australian National University's Strategic and Defense Studies Center, said Chinese objections were the major reason why Australia was unlikely to ever allow US bases on its territory.

KA/HN

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by pansi1951 on Aug 4th, 2012 at 6:32am
I'm surprised Stephen Smith said NO. That's the trouble with America, give them an inch and they want a mile (convert to metric if you want).

I wouldn't be surprised if they get their way in the end though. They have a lot of persuasion and we usually fold to their every whim.

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by Shackdweller on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am
nuclear reactors are awesome

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by FriYAY on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:15pm

JC Denton wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am:
nuclear reactors are awesome


They are hey.

I think that a sub can go decades (longer?) on a cricket ball sized piece of uranium.




Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by Saul Goodman on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:17pm

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

JC Denton wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am:
nuclear reactors are awesome


They are hey.

I think that a sub can go decades (longer?) on a cricket ball sized piece of uranium.

Too bad that isn't the only important aspect when choosing a fuel

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by FriYAY on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:31pm

bobbythefap1 wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:17pm:

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

JC Denton wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am:
nuclear reactors are awesome


They are hey.

I think that a sub can go decades (longer?) on a cricket ball sized piece of uranium.

Too bad that isn't the only important aspect when choosing a fuel


Did i write an essay on it Half Cocked?

Damn important if you are going to the war though. Better than refuelling that's for sure.


Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by Saul Goodman on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:32pm

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:31pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:17pm:

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

JC Denton wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am:
nuclear reactors are awesome


They are hey.

I think that a sub can go decades (longer?) on a cricket ball sized piece of uranium.

Too bad that isn't the only important aspect when choosing a fuel


Did i write an essay on it Half Cocked?

Damn important if you are going to the war though. Better than refuelling that's for sure.
So fight a war to save the world and then destroy the world with the fuel you used.. Why not just don't fight the war?

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by FriYAY on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:43pm

bobbythefap1 wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:32pm:

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:31pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:17pm:

FriYAY wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

JC Denton wrote on Aug 4th, 2012 at 7:39am:
nuclear reactors are awesome


They are hey.

I think that a sub can go decades (longer?) on a cricket ball sized piece of uranium.

Too bad that isn't the only important aspect when choosing a fuel


Did i write an essay on it Half Cocked?

Damn important if you are going to the war though. Better than refuelling that's for sure.
So fight a war to save the world and then destroy the world with the fuel you used.. Why not just don't fight the war?


What war?

You're going off Half Cocked...again.

:P

Title: Re: Australia Says No to US?
Post by Swagman on Aug 8th, 2012 at 2:12pm
He's an attorney at law...and they only have half a cock...

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.