Post by corsair67 on Sept 6, 2006 13:59:29 GMT 12
Well, I think you all know my feelings about the RNZAF Air Combat Force Abolishment, but I've been recently thinking about how this push by the current Labour Govt towards a more pacifist based defence force structure, aligned to Civil Defence and UN peacekeeping duties, ties in with the current thinking of other countries in the world?
The following doctrine makes for interesting reading - I have deleted the name of the country.
The four main tasks of the ###### Armed Forces
To defend ###### against armed attack:
The ###### Armed Forces are to prepare in peacetime to defend ###### in war against armed attacks that could threaten our freedom and independence. The Armed Forces are to be able to counter armed attacks regardless of their origin, and to defend the entire country.
To maintain ###### territorial integrity:
The presence of ###### forces near our borders and in surrounding waters reduces the risk of conflict. In maintaining our territorial integrity, the Armed Forces use principally air and naval forces.
To contribute to peace and security in the world:
Together with other countries, ###### is to take part in international peace-promoting and humanitarian operations. Since there is always a risk that military conflicts may spread, it is in ###### interests to play a part in resolving conflicts in the world around us.
To assist ###### society in times of severe peacetime difficulty:
The Armed Forces are to make the resources available to support ###### society in times of severe peacetime difficulty. Effective co-operation with other authorities for the utilisation of these resources is vital. Together with the Civil Defence organisation, the Armed Forces must also be able to prevent or assist in managing civilian disasters and crises, such as natural disasters, environmental accidents, acts of terrorism and large influxes of refugees.
The above doctrine is not from the US, not from Britain, not from Australia, but is in fact from Sweden!
Sweden has been a neutral country for many years now, but even they still maintain a highly capable frontline multi-role fighter/attack force of approx 200 SAAB Gripen aircraft for a population of only 9 million people.
I know it can be argued that Sweden is located closer to potential trouble spots than New Zealand is, but the last time Swedish forces were involved in combat was in 1808, just before Finland was ceaded to Russia.
Maybe Sweden should follow Helen Clark's logic and disband their air combat force too? Luckily for Sweden, their leaders haven't been blinded by mindless ideology and have continued to keep an open mind on world conflict and aggression.
The following doctrine makes for interesting reading - I have deleted the name of the country.
The four main tasks of the ###### Armed Forces
To defend ###### against armed attack:
The ###### Armed Forces are to prepare in peacetime to defend ###### in war against armed attacks that could threaten our freedom and independence. The Armed Forces are to be able to counter armed attacks regardless of their origin, and to defend the entire country.
To maintain ###### territorial integrity:
The presence of ###### forces near our borders and in surrounding waters reduces the risk of conflict. In maintaining our territorial integrity, the Armed Forces use principally air and naval forces.
To contribute to peace and security in the world:
Together with other countries, ###### is to take part in international peace-promoting and humanitarian operations. Since there is always a risk that military conflicts may spread, it is in ###### interests to play a part in resolving conflicts in the world around us.
To assist ###### society in times of severe peacetime difficulty:
The Armed Forces are to make the resources available to support ###### society in times of severe peacetime difficulty. Effective co-operation with other authorities for the utilisation of these resources is vital. Together with the Civil Defence organisation, the Armed Forces must also be able to prevent or assist in managing civilian disasters and crises, such as natural disasters, environmental accidents, acts of terrorism and large influxes of refugees.
The above doctrine is not from the US, not from Britain, not from Australia, but is in fact from Sweden!
Sweden has been a neutral country for many years now, but even they still maintain a highly capable frontline multi-role fighter/attack force of approx 200 SAAB Gripen aircraft for a population of only 9 million people.
I know it can be argued that Sweden is located closer to potential trouble spots than New Zealand is, but the last time Swedish forces were involved in combat was in 1808, just before Finland was ceaded to Russia.
Maybe Sweden should follow Helen Clark's logic and disband their air combat force too? Luckily for Sweden, their leaders haven't been blinded by mindless ideology and have continued to keep an open mind on world conflict and aggression.
