DownwardDog
Riding a Brompton with a power meter.
Dunno. We'll see. The Greens do get wins by putting pressure on Labor's left flank. They recently stopped all native logging in WA and VIC.
Australia buys nuclear subs au us uk pact
- Thread starter likesfish
- Start date
Dunno. We'll see. The Greens do get wins by putting pressure on Labor's left flank. They recently stopped all native logging in WA and VIC.
China and Australia have been in a bitter trade war for at least eighteen months. The only commodity China is currently accepting from Australia that doesn’t incur massive tariffs is iron ore. But apparently that deal may not continue for long as China attempts to source this from elsewhere.
Thaw
Aye like, so it is.
Theres a guy at work who used to be a US submarine officer in the 80s (the USS Ohio according to LinkedIn). He always seems a bit mad and claims to be the only US Naval Academy graduate to have renounced his US citizenship (it was for tax reasons rather than anything high-minded). I've never looked at his LinkedIn properly before.
not-bono-ever
meh
Jimmy Carter
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
Sounds like you're still bitter.
Idris2002
cavalcade of hubris
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
I've sometimes wondered why people bother with diesel subs - surely they're dead easy to track, you just need to follow the trail of bubbles?
Idris2002
cavalcade of hubris
And given what happened to the last Labor PM who tried to flick the Vs at DC, it may be resistible pressure.
Last edited:
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
They're much cheaper/easier to build and operate, and don't require much in the way of infrastructure.
They are effective at operating in the littoral environment, the sea is really noisy in costal areas with lots of radar returns, so it's possible to hide while doing the charging cycle - they are also much smaller than nuke boats so can hide is shallower water - what they find more difficult is prolonged open water operations.
If you want something to sit 20 miles off your coast, stay still, and torpedo/missile attack an invading fleet, they're great.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I was surprised to learn that most military sub's maximum operating depth is about 300 meters. Considering the average ocean depth is 3000 meters it's really not a lot. They're not as far below the surface as I'd have thought.
WouldBe
Dislicksick
Not sure about the name. Should have called it Sub-way.BBC News - Aukus: UK, US and Australia launch pact to counter China
Aukus: UK, US and Australia launch pact to counter China
Beijing says the deal, involving nuclear-powered submarines, undermines regional peace.www.bbc.co.uk
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
Not sure about the name. Should have called it Sub-way.
I'm told that 'Damn yer Froggy eyes' did well in focus groups...
Humberto
Take me up to Monto
I don't think Biden is stupid (much less 'senile') but it would take a remarkable effort to make a difference to American society and the heading it is on in terms of e.g. lunatics in the GOP becoming even more rabid. And in terms of the challenges presented by global climate change. I don't even mean he is 'shirking' what needs to be done, if it is even possible from his position and resources. I just think this pact doesn't address the real problems, and I don't like our rulers putting us in a confrontational position. In fact the US/UK establishment often behave so shortsightedly (that's one description) it doesn't give me a good feeling. What's the logical next step: China gives in, 'gets the message' and backs away? If not, then what?
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
Leaving a radiation scorched cursed Earth? can we be sure this didn't happen?
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
There's probably a joke in there about a ruined, shattered city with a deformed, barely recognisable-as-human population eeking out a terrible, apocalyptic existence - but I can't think of one....
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Four years since I left Aus but surely this would be an issue where the ALP (assuming they get in) could use LNP votes to get the subs through?
As with a minority Labour government relaying on SNP votes - where the SNP oppose something the Tories will probably support it. OK the Greens or SNP could bring down the Lab gov but that is a big risk.
VLF transmitter at Pine Gap , Pearl Harbour , Diego Garcia even the spy sites associated with Deep Freeze, McMurdo sound itself all in constant communication. I was at Weedons when a power cut while the standby generator was undergoing planned maintenance caused the shit to hit the fan some US military types were slung back to stateside pronto. The yanks have been using Pine Gap to communicate with their subs for decades, China knows this.
Humberto
Take me up to Monto
Fuck you
It's a reactive measure, not a proactive measure.
There was little reaction to China claiming the South China Sea and militarising Islands there back in the Obama era. This was seen by the Chinese Communist Party as evidence that the balance of power had shifted and that the US order was in decline. Hong Kong's autonomy being cut short should be seen in this light.
China is also very serious about invading Taiwan and there are good reasons to believe Xi wants it to be his legacy - which means he could try within the next decade. The risk here is that a lot of the more hawkish elements of the PLA and CCP believe that American society is weak and will not stomach casualties or a war over Taiwan, and that a sudden devastating attack on US navy in the region accompanying an invasion of Taiwan would see the US retreat and give the PLA Navy total hegemony over the Pacific and South China Sea.
This is one example of the sort of rhetoric which is thrown around:
China’s plot to force US ‘surrender’
They’re the pride of the US fleet: enormous 100,000 tonne, 333m long nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. But Beijing thinks they’re Washington’s achilles heel.
www.news.com.au
It is also worth pointing out that, while China's navy is untested, it isn't unimaginable that they could be capable of driving the US navy out of the region.
US military changing strategy after losing simulated war with China
‘They knew exactly what we’re going to do before we did it,’ a US general revealed
www.independent.co.uk
Biden is no fool by doing this as failing to make a clear signal that the US would react to an invasion of Taiwan makes such an eventuality significantly more likely.
Australia has discovered that the Chinese state will attempt to weaponise every tiny bit of economic leverage they have in order to make what they see as lesser states submit to them.
Also significant is that China considers the entire South China Sea and the coastal areas around them as their territory - they do not recognise them to be international waters in accordance with UN rulings.
What Australia has correctly inferred from this (and so has Japan) is that Chinese naval supremacy in the Pacific is extremely likely to lead to a scenario where naval blockades are routinely used to coerce countries in the region to submit to Chinese demands. A successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan, which would almost certainly also imply Chinese naval dominance in the region, could also make Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Australia, Philippines, New Zealand defenseless against Chinese economic coercion, transforming them into tributary states.
It isn't just the US which has rabid nationalistic lunatics. The rabid nationalistic lunatics in China are basically the only voices permitted to speak in China now - more moderate voices are frequently deleted from social media or otherwise cajoled into silence if they deviate too much from the "patriotic" group think - and they are very serious about achieving the "Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Race" of which annexation of Taiwan is an absolutely essential component.
Humberto
Take me up to Monto
It's dead in the water if it's going to take years (decades?) to get up to speed. No one is going to stop China in Hong Kong or Taiwan anyway. NATO has been throwing it's weight around, now China will too. Short of war, all you are left with is an arms race and a worsening of relations and stability. America needs to sort out America.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
I am enjoying that series. Although disappointed there isn't more Martin Compston in it.
What are you saying will take decades to get up to speed?
And Taiwan is not Hong Kong.
Even if the US didn't get involved, it is far from guaranteed that China could pull off an incredibly complicated beachhead with very few suitable landing points, a narrow window of time when weather is suitable for a beachhead, and an enemy who has been preparing for this very scenario for the past 70 years.
And for reasons I outlined above, a successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan is an existential threat to Japan - even if China does not attack Guam and directly confront the US Navy as part of its war on Taiwan, the lack of any response by the US would effectively give the PLAN total hegemony in the region. Having the power to use naval blockades against Japan, if you know anything about China, is not something they will use fairly or reasonably. Japan has very good reasons to fear this.
Because of this, Japan would likely get involved if they invade Taiwan and have started saying as much publicly:
How far would Japan really go to defend Taiwan? - Asia Times
When Japanese Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso said on July 5 that Tokyo would come to Taiwan’s aid in the event of a Chinese invasion, Beijing’s sharp
asiatimes.com
And also because of the above, the US is almost certain to get involved because not doing so would effectively mark the end of them as a superpower. Additionally, 60% of the world's semiconductors are manufactured in Taiwan, so it is of huge importance to global supply chains. A war in Taiwan, aside from anything else, would cause global shortages of computers and phones. The disruption would be felt everywhere.
Also, nuclear deterrent might not be the issue you think it is, as it would be a naval war of limited scope rather than a total war. US goals would just be to destroy China's naval capabilities and no more. China's goals would be to destroy US naval capabilities within Asia-Pacific region and also to occupy Taiwan.
A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would not be a trivial affair and would not just be like what is happening in Hong Kong now. China already had control over Hong Kong, they would have to fight to get control over Taiwan. The stakes involved are extremely high and it could also be trigger for a number of other conflicts, e.g. North Korea and South Korea.
krtek a houby
Sail hatin'
Uneasy times this part of the world, what with Xi and Kim flexing their muscles.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
France is not happy
www.cnbc.com
France is so mad about the Australia submarine deal that it canceled a big party in D.C.
French officials in Washington canceled a gala at their compound over frustration with the new security partnership between the U.S., U.K. and Australia.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
It's the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere again.
Similar threads
