First off I did say they started it, second I said twenty years to conquer it, not about my population being bigger just takes longer. Also you may notice that Iraqs population vastly outnumbers the US army but we still occupy the country. Technological superiority could win you the war early on. Also if you read the rest of the post the army was design for urban and guerilla warfare because of the problems in occupying any country not matter its size or economic ability. Its also a politically unstable country therefore it would all be fighting at the same time. They might unify against an outside force but then again they might not. It might me majority muslim but that has its own problems as the minorities rise up in rebellion against the muslims and vice versa.
I'm going to number this to keep easier track of.
1) Why on
Earth would Indonesia start a war with Australia? They have nothing to win, and enough to lose to make it stupid. They have very little in the way of power projection, and can't possibly fight an effective war on Australia's mainland.
2) Twenty years really doesn't mean anything, unless you spend those twenty committing genocide (something I guarantee no Australian government would ever do). You still have over two hundred
million people wanting you to get out.
3) The United States has 300,000,000 people behind its military. This allows them to support 120,000 soldiers fairly effectively, and this is a pretty good size for controlling a half-hostile nation of 30,000,000. Australia, however, probably has the capability to support about one tenth of that, and if we add in Taiwan and New Zealand, we come up with a whopping total of about 20,000 soldiers stationed abroad without putting serious strain on the economy. 20,000 soldiers against 200,000,000. That's a ratio of 1:10,000, whereas the USA in Iraq is somewhere around 1:250. Even assuming much higher technology, 1:10,000 is simply not enough to keep an eye on everyone. Factor in the likely supplies coming in from China, Malaysia, possibly even India, plus dozens of terrorist organizations, and international pressure to withdraw... there's no way Australia can hold onto that.
4) I don't dispute that Australia could easily win the initial war. Their blue water navy even now could blow Indonesia's out of the water. However, no matter how highly trained your troops, and how awesome your powered armor, you're going to have a hellish time patrolling the island of Java, which has a population density of around 1,000 per square kilometer, and where even if you put your entire occupation force on that single isle, you'd have one soldier for every six square kilometers. Then you have the islands of Sumatra, Sulawesi, Borneo, etc., each of which has virtually uncharted jungle as the primary topography. You'd have soldiers slogging through rainforest conditions in search of phantom enemies: your soldiers would roast in their armor, and if you air-conditioned the suits, you'd have an even bigger logistical nightmare with power supply than you would with simply food and water -- which is already bad enough.
5) No, they would be united against you, period. 86% of the population are Muslim, and Australia is a Christian nation. The ethnicities are different, the living conditions are different... it would be the classic colonial domination, and most people don't like that.
6) The minorities are insignificant: 10% of the population, and most of those are on individual islands.
EDIT:
7) How in the heck is conquering Indonesia going to do
anything for you? On top of trying to hold down around 200-300 million people, you'd have to industrialize it to make it of any use, and that would take a huge investment in the infrastructure. Otherwise it's nothing more than a glorified colony, which at best will only supply you raw material. The soldiers you'd get out of it would be unmotivated and probably disloyal. There would be no
point to it.
