You are absolutely incredible. With so much users throwing to the bin their NH-90 (and loosing temporarily the expected capacity at a time of great stress on defense), including plenty of European services, you are still pushing for this weird narrative.
OK, let's step back and try to use our brains.
1st: what are they burrying: airframe only (all system removed)
2ndly: what's specifics with these airframe? They are all CFRP
3rdly: what are the alternatives to burrying: store them under the sun or inside a hangar
4th: what are the specifics of Australia remote storage sites: often in desert area with high temperatures
5th: CFRP airframe fires are hard to estinghish and generate a lot of hazardous chemicals. Would require a lot of on-site personnels.
So what would be the rational outcome of such combinations: store the NH airframe inside a regulated temperature hangar (costly) or dig a hole and burry them deep that there is no hazard of fire.
Was it that hard?
Edit:
Alternatively, giant spiders migration and countering Cats & Koala world domination would be also a valid alternative argument.
Notice also that I haven't read yet any French man pointing the finger... AUKUS. But, probably...
