Jump to content

Nuclear Subs for Australia?


Recommended Posts

On 9/18/2021 at 9:21 PM, 00seven said:

You obviously have no experience in the Asian region. The Chinese are not liked or trusted throughout Asia.

But they do have money and brains. And just about everyone can be bought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 681
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Diesel subs are awesome for littoral waters, but suck balls for ocean crossings. I infer this as we have decided a close defence isn't what is needed anymore and we are moving to a forward projection

Gotta wonder why Australia wants subs at all but nuclear subs? They're scary expensive, like $2B, and loud whereas a diesel sub will only set you back $500M and can run dead silent on electric. Since

The internal politics of the US UK and Australia are each uniquely fucked up in their own ways. But… the 3 (and Canada) have always lined up together and kicked ass when the shit truly hit the fan.

Posted Images

11 hours ago, The Dark Knight said:

I have not agreed at all.

We already closely guard a military, we have plenty of space to store spent our own nuclear waste. I don't see any psych costs, except maybe for the French. No need for any extra paranoia, its no like we are also getting nukes. Moral costs? sounds like BS. 

The Bulletin article I linked to above agrees with most of my earlier points  . .  

You're going to need whole new industries to handle high level, weapons grade waste. 

But you will likely not read it - nor will @Fah Kiew Tu

You are both much less informed than you think you are. 

Glad your Greens have taken a strong stand on this . .  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BeSafe said:

Australia is an commodity exporter economy - top 3 exports being Oil/Precious metals/Iron in that order.

Oil and Precious metals aren't even in the top 5. The country lives on iron ore and coal exports.

About 1 million TONS of iron ore are exported every day. At ~$100/ton that adds up...

 

image.png.d5299d83692523a90e001d6261fe7523.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going down the bomb grade nuke fuel are ya ?? 

Fantastic !!  Someday this will all be yours !!  

https://spectrum.ieee.org/a-glass-nightmare-cleaning-up-the-cold-wars-nuclear-legacy-at-hanford

The US also has around ten other highly contaminated sites - Savannah River, Portsmouth, and lots more. 

You can have them too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanford is 50+ years of all sorts of waste including plutonium.

While the site is contaminated I think the lessons learned about what NOT to do as well as what to do with waste has been learned quite well by now. They're dealing with a legacy of all sorts of methods some of which were to ignore it.

Putting it on the banks of a major river would be one of the lessons NOT to do :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zonker said:

Oil and Precious metals aren't even in the top 5. The country lives on iron ore and coal exports.

About 1 million TONS of iron ore are exported every day. At ~$100/ton that adds up...

 

image.png.d5299d83692523a90e001d6261fe7523.png

Well, Fosters, as a beer, sucks dingo balls.  Awful stuff.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bstrdsonofbtl said:

"The Australians seem enamored at being members of the big boy (nuclear) club, but as with most ambitious social climbers they are paying a huge cost, one that has not yet dawned on them.

This is not going to end well for the Australians."

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/09/20/why-the-nuclear-sub-deal-will-end-badly-for-the-australians/

Thanks for the post - I'll read that. 

CounterPunch is such a dandy source that they even publish me once in a while. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aussies are in a tough place. How to stay independent with the expanding big guy scratching an itch not far away. 

Not sure what having some subs gives them, except the ability to help their nominal "protector" if it comes to a shooting match.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Aussies are in a tough place. How to stay independent with the expanding big guy scratching an itch not far away. 

Not sure what having some subs gives them, except the ability to help their nominal "protector" if it comes to a shooting match.

It's enough to make China think twice about putting a naval blockade on Australia, I guess. Can't imagine why they China would want to do that though. Perhaps it's all about messaging. Letting China know if they are thinking of steamrollering everybody in their sphere of influence it will be expensive and no cakewalk.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Thanks for the post - I'll read that. 

CounterPunch is such a dandy source that they even publish me once in a while. 

I read it. Like you do all the time, the author appears to be making a bunch of huge wild assed guesses. Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons? Do you have to replace rods every outing now do you?

What a muppet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, shaggybaxter said:

Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons? Do you have to replace rods every outing now do you?

Really, you do not get it in spite of a solid cite above (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists) that 

explains how US subs USE WEAPONS GRADE FUEL to POWER the vessels. 

Nuclear weapons are a sorta separate issue  . . 

Geeeez   

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Really, you do not get it in spite of a solid cite above (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists) that 

explains how US subs USE WEAPONS GRADE FUEL to POWER the vessels. 

Nuclear weapons are a sorta separate issue  . . 

Geeeez   

Some days it’s like talking to a child. Let’s try again shall we, why the fuck do you think Aus needs to have a nuclear production industry just for rods for a nuclear submarine?

Now I know why nobody here likes you. You’re like one of those evangelical fuckwits just gagging for relevance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@shaggybaxter  wrote . . . "Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons?" 

That comment shows you do not know what your are writing about . .  

I am merely trying to help you overcome your abject ignorance. 

Where is OZ going to get all that HER Weapons Grade fuel ?? 

Is your rudeness necessary ??  

I would have hoped that your Mum would have taught you better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

@shaggybaxter  wrote . . . "Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons?" 

That comment shows you do not know what your are writing about . .  

I am merely trying to help you overcome your abject ignorance. 

Where is OZ going to get all that HER Weapons Grade fuel ?? 

Is your rudeness necessary ??  

I would have hoped that your Mum would have taught you better. 

A comment that is perfectly valid to literate adults. 

All the best with your screeching from your soap box sport, you clearly aren't capable of a single thought outside your own myopic prejudices. 

    

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1st Lucas Heights reactor went into service in 1958 before being superseded by its offspring in 2007. 

According to the good druid AJ, we have been doing an Enron and magically powering it out of thin air for the last 60 years. Because according to AJ and his fellow pot smoking hippies, you must create a nuclear production capability to gasp...use nuclear stuff. 

Fuck we're so good we even amaze ourselves sometimes.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

@shaggybaxter  wrote . . . "Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons?" 

That comment shows you do not know what your are writing about . .  

I am merely trying to help you overcome your abject ignorance. 

Where is OZ going to get all that HER Weapons Grade fuel ?? 

Is your rudeness necessary ??  

I would have hoped that your Mum would have taught you better. 

The whole point of the deal and alliance is that the US and UK will provide the fuel. 
 

but your head is up your arse so far with your bias that you can’t see that.

if we had to build that industry we would be breaching the non-proliferation treaty and the opposition would be vehemently opposed to this sub deal. They are in full support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mark K said:

Well, Fosters, as a beer, sucks dingo balls.  Awful stuff.  

That's why we export it. You don't think any of us would drink it, do you?

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shaggybaxter said:

Now I know why nobody here likes you. You’re like one of those evangelical fuckwits just gagging for relevance.

Spot on. Except you forgot '4th rate professor from a 5th rate college in an irrelevant State of the USA'.

'Professor' there is equivalent to a junior lecturer here, and his college would rank alongside Tennant Creek Tech if the assessor was feeling generous.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another....lol...

"On September 16 the media carried the news that the US, Britain and Australia are banding together to increase pressure on China by arranging for Australia to buy and operate nuclear-powered submarines.  Strategically, this is of little significance, and it will take years for the vessels to enter service, but the video conference involving President Biden and Prime Ministers Johnson of the UK and Morrison of Australia sent a signal to China that confrontation is alive and thriving and the UK and Australia have hung their coats on the shaky rack of US hegemony."

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/09/17/railways-and-pipelines-are-preferable-to-nuclear-submarines/

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, AJ Oliver said:

@shaggybaxter  wrote . . . "Why the fuck would we build a nuclear enrichment industry when we’re clearly not using nuclear weapons?" 

That comment shows you do not know what your are writing about . .  

I am merely trying to help you overcome your abject ignorance. 

Where is OZ going to get all that HER Weapons Grade fuel ?? 

Is your rudeness necessary ??  

I would have hoped that your Mum would have taught you better. 

Same place they will buy the reactor from. Duh

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

Details?

AFAIK, China has never invaded those countries. 

Border disputes. Been going on for decades WRT India.

China has a *big* border dispute with Russia, just nobody is pushing it ATM. Look at how much land the old Imperial Russia carved off of China prior to 1900.

And then there's the encroachment on national waters in the South China Sea but undoubtedly you'd take China's position that it's all theirs anyway. That despite your beloved UN ruling against China.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

 

Same place they will buy the reactor from. Duh

Sometimes AJ is too stupid for words.

We buy nuke powered subs. The reactors have fuel for the life of the vessel.

Why on earth would we need to build a nuclear processing industry to refuel boats that don't ever need refueling?

Faaaark.... maybe AJ should just fuck off back to his wind powered protest vessel. Just possibly he'd understand how that works. Possibly.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bstrdsonofbtl said:

"The Australians seem enamored at being members of the big boy (nuclear) club, but as with most ambitious social climbers they are paying a huge cost, one that has not yet dawned on them.

This is not going to end well for the Australians."

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/09/20/why-the-nuclear-sub-deal-will-end-badly-for-the-australians/

Pretty sure Scotty from Marketing wasn't expecting quite this much interest and blowback

What's a broken contract and a few little nuclear subs between friends

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-21/scott-morrison-in-us-after-submarine-deal-un-general-assembly/100478454 

 

Morrison's really out of his depth now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

Pretty sure Scotty from Marketing wasn't expecting quite this much interest and blowback

What's a broken contract and a few little nuclear subs between friends

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-21/scott-morrison-in-us-after-submarine-deal-un-general-assembly/100478454 

 

Morrison's really out of his depth now.

The French sub deal wasn't working out. Better to break the contract, pay the penalties and move on.

Storm in a teacup. The French were always going to fuck us over, this way the length of it all has been reduced.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Border disputes. Been going on for decades WRT India.

China has a *big* border dispute with Russia, just nobody is pushing it ATM. Look at how much land the old Imperial Russia carved off of China prior to 1900.

And then there's the encroachment on national waters in the South China Sea but undoubtedly you'd take China's position that it's all theirs anyway. That despite your beloved UN ruling against China.

FKT

Sure, but I asked about invasions in modern times not border disputes or 19th c history..

Point I'm making is that it's not China's way to expand by invasion. As someone pointed out upthread, they prefer to do their expansionism with brains, money and (like Israel) pure cheek.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ShortForBob said:

Sure, but I asked about invasions in modern times not border disputes or 19th c history..

Point I'm making is that it's not China's way to expand by invasion. As someone pointed out upthread, they prefer to do their expansionism with brains, money and (like Israel) pure cheek.

 

For once, with the notable exception of the South China Sea which I note you fail to address, I agree with you.

China has no historical record of sending armies and invasion fleets to other countries.

However that's not necessarily relevant. You have to address a potential enemy's capabilities, not your impression of their current intentions.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-21/scott-morrison-in-us-after-submarine-deal-un-general-assembly/100478454

 

OK. This seems bigger than about who builds 8 subs

The world is in the grips of a deadly pandemic.

What better time to put military pressure on the "country that gave us the Rona and quash their expansionist ambitions.

What's worrying is this is seemingly being driven by idiots.

Morrison, Johnson and Biden.

The world is in their hands. Think about that.  

 

And use Australia as the fall guy.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has flown to the United States for a week of high-stakes diplomacy amid a row with France for scrapping a $90 billion submarine contract to instead invest in a nuclear-powered fleet.

Mr Morrison will spend 24 hours in New York, on the sidelines of the 76th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), where he will talk to representatives of several countries and hold a one-on-one with US President Joe Biden.

 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Special Envoy for Climate John Kerry and Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne will also join the meeting.

The submarine deal — which involves leveraging US technology to a build a fleet of nuclear-powered vessels — is expected to be discussed alongside China's rise, the next steps on countering global terrorism and climate change.

Mr Morrison will also meet with European leaders on Tuesday to discuss rising security threats in the Indo-Pacific. He will meet with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in Washington DC in the evening.

Mr Morrison will also meet with European leaders on Tuesday to discuss rising security threats in the Indo-Pacific. He will meet with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in Washington DC in the evening.Mr Biden will deliver his address to the UNGA with a heavy focus on strengthening US alliances, especially now the country has withdrawn from Afghanistan.

While Mr Morrison's address will be aired on Friday, the main purpose of his trip is the meeting of Quad nations which includes the US, Japan, India and Australia, in Washington on Friday.

The White House is positioning the power bloc of democracies as critical for pandemic and climate cooperation, as well as its counter force against China.

Last week's nuclear submarine deal — signed between Australia, the UK and the US under a trilateral security pact and which derailed relations with France — will heavily feature in discussions over the next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

For once, with the notable exception of the South China Sea which I note you fail to address, I agree with you.

China has no historical record of sending armies and invasion fleets to other countries.

However that's not necessarily relevant. You have to address a potential enemy's capabilities, not your impression of their current intentions.

FKT

I did address the south china sea with my reference to Israel and pure cheek.

It's still not an invasion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Sometimes AJ is too stupid for words.

We buy nuke powered subs. The reactors have fuel for the life of the vessel.

Why on earth would we need to build a nuclear processing industry to refuel boats that don't ever need refueling?

Faaaark.... maybe AJ should just fuck off back to his wind powered protest vessel. Just possibly he'd understand how that works. Possibly.

FKT

They may need refueling once depending on how long you sail them. Read an article that the procedure is to cut out the old reactor, install new.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

I did address the south china sea with my reference to Israel and pure cheek.

It's still not an invasion.

Depends on your definition there. I doubt the Philippines and other South China Sea border States would agree with you. Creeping annexation at minimum.

And then there's the Chinese blue water fishing fleet, though 'piracy' and 'theft' are probably more appropriate terms.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

Sure, but I asked about invasions in modern times not border disputes or 19th c history..

Point I'm making is that it's not China's way to expand by invasion. As someone pointed out upthread, they prefer to do their expansionism with brains, money and (like Israel) pure cheek.

 

19th century IS modern times from the Chinese POV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Raz'r said:

They may need refueling once depending on how long you sail them. Read an article that the procedure is to cut out the old reactor, install new.

Yep and I'd expect that would be done in a suitably equipped yard experienced in doing such work.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

The French sub deal wasn't working out. Better to break the contract, pay the penalties and move on.

I was reading a story about that. The French thought their 1+ hour lunch breaks were sacred. Timing of meetings was an issue as well. The French have a concept of "within 15 minutes is on time" but wouldn't mind if a meeting ran late. The Aussies wanted a 1 hour meeting to end in 1 hour. The culture clashes were big enough that they were sending French staff on workshops to learn Australian culture.

Also, the "90% work done in Australia" had shifted to 60% recently. On a multi billion dollars that's a lot not getting to Australia.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShortForBob said:
3 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

19th century IS modern times from the Chinese POV.

Huh?

Chinese civilization as a nation state is thousands of years old. Thus 19th century is relatively recent in their world view.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ShortForBob said:

Huh?

 

I think it's a reference to the historical Chinese opinion that they're the Middle Kingdom and the rest of us are just barbarians on the fringe of the Empire.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShortForBob said:

Huh?

 

Their country has been around 5000 years. Think about that. They had to plot and maneuver for 30 years to get back Hong Kong and Macau. They are still working Taiwan. Oh, and Tibet cost them a little indigestion, not much else. (Cost the tibetans quite a bit). Think they aren't still chuffed to get back to their expected borders? Why do you think ASEAN even exists? It's because China is expanding and taking resources from them. Don't be blinded by the fact that their current emporer looks like Pooh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I think it's a reference to the historical Chinese opinion that they're the Middle Kingdom and the rest of us are just barbarians on the fringe of the Empire.

FKT

Yep

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zonker said:

I was reading a story about that. The French thought their 1+ hour lunch breaks were sacred. Timing of meetings was an issue as well. The French have a concept of "within 15 minutes is on time" but wouldn't mind if a meeting ran late. The Aussies wanted a 1 hour meeting to end in 1 hour. The culture clashes were big enough that they were sending French staff on workshops to learn Australian culture.

Also, the "90% work done in Australia" had shifted to 60% recently. On a multi billion dollars that's a lot not getting to Australia.

Yeah that attitude would piss me off at meeting No 1. IMO it demonstrates a lack of concern for the value of other peoples' time. As for the 1+ hour lunch, maybe, if you're still putting in the full number of hours of work, not if you're slacking and getting others to carry the load.

And I'm pretty laid-back on the whole. Except for people who want to take an attitude that their time is more important than my time - then I get very hard-nosed, very fast.

And as an Aussie I don't think I'm alone in that attitude.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zonker said:

I was reading a story about that. The French thought their 1+ hour lunch breaks were sacred. Timing of meetings was an issue as well. The French have a concept of "within 15 minutes is on time" but wouldn't mind if a meeting ran late. The Aussies wanted a 1 hour meeting to end in 1 hour. The culture clashes were big enough that they were sending French staff on workshops to learn Australian culture.

Also, the "90% work done in Australia" had shifted to 60% recently. On a multi billion dollars that's a lot not getting to Australia.

Sounds like a match made in heaven :D

I read that also somewhere  Also sounds like something that's made up to suit the moment.

We love our long lunches and late starts just as much as the french do..

You make this sound like the joke about hell

A French designer, a German administrator and an Australian Engineer walk into a Shipyard?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My daughter is going to school in France right now.  1.5 hours for lunch is normal.

Registrar's hours

Office hours:

  • Monday to Thursday, 9.30am to 4pm
  • Friday, 9.30am - 12 noon

From November to April only: the office is closed from 12 noon to 1:30pm.

-----------------------------

Language Office

Office hours:

  • Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, 9.30am - 12.45pm and 2.15pm - 4.45pm
  • Wednesday and Friday, 9.30am - 12.45pm
    ---------------------------------

    Infirmary

    Opening hours: everyday, 9am – 1pm and 2pm – 4.45pm.

    Not sure what you are to do if you get sick outside of those hours...
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Chinese civilization as a nation state is thousands of years old. Thus 19th century is relatively recent in their world view.

Apart from the teeny little 20th Century revolution.

And what we know as Modern China did not exist thousands of years ago as a nation state and it certainly was never mono cultural.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

Apart from the teeny little 20th Century revolution.

And what we know as Modern China did not exist thousands of years ago as a nation state and it certainly was never mono cultural.

 

Umm, that little revolution was well in the tradition of regime change. The CCP is just the latest system of installing an Emporer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ShortForBob said:

Sounds like a match made in heaven :D

I read that also somewhere  Also sounds like something that's made up to suit the moment.

We love our long lunches and late starts just as much as the french do..

Some of us do, maybe. Not when it's going to fuck with other people's arrangements/waste their time. It's disrespectful.

Back in the day I'd get calls from a secretary saying 'Please hold for <Mr/Ms/Dr> X.

They'd get 30 seconds to get on the line, after that I'd hang up.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ShortForBob said:

A question.

Has China ever invaded another country in the last 80 years apart from Tibet and a brief spat or two with Vietnam in the early 90's

Do fist-fights with Indians in the Himalayas count?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ncik said:

Do fist-fights with Indians in the Himalayas count?

That's just an ongoing border dispute. Bit more than fists involved and an unknown but non-zero number of people on both sides ended up dead. Clubs et al are still effective weapons.

Meli's basically correct that China hasn't done any 'classic' type invasions for a hell of a long time if ever. They've been the recipient of a few though.

Nobody in the modern world would want to invade them again. Been there done that, trade is better than invasion and colonisation.

The problem now is the rapacious mercantilism and exploitation of WTO rules, UN rules et al without any willingness to deal fairly on a reciprocal basis. The military side is a bit of a sideshow except for the South China Sea and their use of 'Coastguard' to bully neighbouring countries.

Well I can say that because I don't live in Taiwan. I'd have a different opinion then I expect.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Sometimes AJ is too stupid for words.

We buy nuke powered subs. The reactors have fuel for the life of the vessel.

Why on earth would we need to build a nuclear processing industry to refuel boats that don't ever need refueling?

Faaaark.... maybe AJ should just fuck off back to his wind powered protest vessel. Just possibly he'd understand how that works. Possibly.

FKT

The control rods need replacing during the life of the reactor and they are radioactive, hence a big source of waste. Well, that's what I've heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

That's just an ongoing border dispute. Bit more than fists involved and an unknown but non-zero number of people on both sides ended up dead. Clubs et al are still effective weapons.

Meli's basically correct that China hasn't done any 'classic' type invasions for a hell of a long time if ever. They've been the recipient of a few though.

Nobody in the modern world would want to invade them again. Been there done that, trade is better than invasion and colonisation.

The problem now is the rapacious mercantilism and exploitation of WTO rules, UN rules et al without any willingness to deal fairly on a reciprocal basis. The military side is a bit of a sideshow except for the South China Sea and their use of 'Coastguard' to bully neighbouring countries.

Well I can say that because I don't live in Taiwan. I'd have a different opinion then I expect.

FKT

That's fine, until we add up all the world's grievances being borne by the Chinese.

A US military base within 700km of mainland China since the end of WWI that definitely had nukes in the near past, and could easily install them again if need be.

Blame for Covid in many flavours from deliberate creation to letting it free from their borders.

A Trump trade war.

Now the US and UK are giving a very capable weapon to a 2-bit country who's leaders have been a bit mouthy towards China recently, despite a very healthy export industry (in the middle of a pandemic) being substantially supported by China and keeping the mouthy ones in jobs. Albeit in 12+ years.

Is it any wonder their leaders are pissed off and pushing the boundaries.

The best path forward is trade and friendly diplomacy. The televised 3 ring circus was a backwards step.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ncik said:

That's fine, until we add up all the world's grievances being borne by the Chinese.

A US military base within 700km of mainland China that definitely had nukes in the near past.

Blame for Covid in many flavours from deliberate creation to letting it free from their borders.

A Trump trade war.

Now the US and UK are giving a very capable weapon to a 2-bit country who's leaders have been a bit mouthy towards China recently, despite a very healthy export industry (in the middle of a pandemic) being substantially supported by China and keeping the mouthy ones in jobs.

Is it any wonder their leaders are pissed off and pushing the boundaries.

Well, we'll have to differ on a number of those.

The US military base. Tough shit. I assume you're referring to Guam. Been a US possession since 1898, Spanish before that dating back to the 1500's. And never a Chinese possession. You'd have a really hard time claiming that the USA has no right to have a military base on an island that's been a colonial possession for over 500 years.

Blame for covid. Not touching that one. It originated in China but that's a 'so what' from my POV. Insufficient information to say more.

A Trump trade war. Give me a break. Trump was an idiot who did more damage than anything else. The CHINESE have been waging a mercantilist trade war against all of us for well over a decade, abusing WTO rules, 'developing nation' benefits and stealing IP whenever and wherever possible. Any pushback they got, they earned.

As for Australia, China has been trying to fuck with our economy and politics for years now. They've been engaging in frankly illegal under WTO rules tariffs, quotas and similar activities. They want to have unfettered investment rights here. They want to be free to donate any amount of money to political causes. They want to have their electronics embedded into out telecoms & IT systems.

Yet they point blank refuse any reciprocity on these issues and threaten us if we don't bend to their wishes.

As for their generosity & magnanimity in buying iron ore off of Australia, they do that for one reason only. They can't get the quantity & quality they want anywhere else at anything like the price, if at all. If they could stop buying from us they would. They're not doing it as a favour.

So basically, fuck them. I'd rather Australia took the pain of disengaging with China now than later, or become a puppet economy of the Chinese as NZ has done.

If us getting nuke powered subs so that the South China Sea shipping is in reach in a way it wasn't going to be for diesel subs, good. If they don't like it, tough shit. I don't care.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zonker said:

My daughter is going to school in France right now.  1.5 hours for lunch is normal.

Registrar's hours

Office hours:

  • Monday to Thursday, 9.30am to 4pm
  • Friday, 9.30am - 12 noon

From November to April only: the office is closed from 12 noon to 1:30pm.

-----------------------------

Language Office

Office hours:

  • Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, 9.30am - 12.45pm and 2.15pm - 4.45pm
  • Wednesday and Friday, 9.30am - 12.45pm
    ---------------------------------

    Infirmary

    Opening hours: everyday, 9am – 1pm and 2pm – 4.45pm.

    Not sure what you are to do if you get sick outside of those hours...

I thought Australia was too union centric till I worked with the French, they took it to another level. It was hard to dislike them for it because they were actually right in principle, if you get paid for a 40 hour week they would work the 40 hours, no more.

It did result in a few tense moments though, once I was on a ship powering up a undersea cable and the French at the neighbouring cable station just fucked off because it was Friday afternoon knock off time. I was left stranded on a ship in the middle of butt fuck nowhere tethered to a cable with no way to drop it and run. It was at the end of a long 2 month trip and the crew almost mutinied over it and were blaming us for the delay. We had to lock the door to make sure we didn't get knifed and dumped overboard. 

Once we did get a hold of them there was no apologies as they had done nothing wrong. Hard to argue with that, even though it did set my teeth on edge a few times.  

Regardless of this, I can't help but love the French, still bought my boat from them. 

 

   

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I assume you're referring to Guam.

Okinawa, 700km from Chinese mainland...much much closer than Guam.

The yanks didn't like USSR nukes on Cuba, why would China feel any differently?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Blame for covid. Not touching that one. It originated in China but that's a 'so what' from my POV. Insufficient information to say more.

Exactly my position, yet some of our dear leaders are rattling sabres over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

A Trump trade war. Give me a break. Trump was an idiot who did more damage than anything else.

Exactly, a loose canon on deck that has harmed trade relations with China. Probably hurting their economy as well as US and Aus. Caused by the nincompoop President of USA, gleefully acknowledged by him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Well, we'll have to differ on a number of those.

The US military base. Tough shit. I assume you're referring to Guam. Been a US possession since 1898, Spanish before that dating back to the 1500's. And never a Chinese possession. You'd have a really hard time claiming that the USA has no right to have a military base on an island that's been a colonial possession for over 500 years.

Blame for covid. Not touching that one. It originated in China but that's a 'so what' from my POV. Insufficient information to say more.

A Trump trade war. Give me a break. Trump was an idiot who did more damage than anything else. The CHINESE have been waging a mercantilist trade war against all of us for well over a decade, abusing WTO rules, 'developing nation' benefits and stealing IP whenever and wherever possible. Any pushback they got, they earned.

As for Australia, China has been trying to fuck with our economy and politics for years now. They've been engaging in frankly illegal under WTO rules tariffs, quotas and similar activities. They want to have unfettered investment rights here. They want to be free to donate any amount of money to political causes. They want to have their electronics embedded into out telecoms & IT systems.

Yet they point blank refuse any reciprocity on these issues and threaten us if we don't bend to their wishes.

As for their generosity & magnanimity in buying iron ore off of Australia, they do that for one reason only. They can't get the quantity & quality they want anywhere else at anything like the price, if at all. If they could stop buying from us they would. They're not doing it as a favour.

So basically, fuck them. I'd rather Australia took the pain of disengaging with China now than later, or become a puppet economy of the Chinese as NZ has done.

If us getting nuke powered subs so that the South China Sea shipping is in reach in a way it wasn't going to be for diesel subs, good. If they don't like it, tough shit. I don't care.

FKT

My point is that there's plenty of hypocrisy and blame to share around, not all of it is initiated by China, but they're sure as shit copping it now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ncik said:

The control rods need replacing during the life of the reactor and they are radioactive, hence a big source of waste. Well, that's what I've heard.

The subs are fueled for life. The hull wears out - it has a cycle limit like a pressurized airplane - before the fuel does. If you do refuel a sub, the used fuel is quite dangerous and needs to be handled carefully.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

The subs are fueled for life. The hull wears out - it has a cycle limit like a pressurized airplane - before the fuel does. If you do refuel a sub, the used fuel is quite dangerous and needs to be handled carefully.

Control rods are not fuel. Control rods absorb neutrons to control the nuclear reaction depending on power requireemnts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ncik said:

Control rods are not fuel. Control rods absorb neutrons to control the nuclear reaction depending on power requireemnts.

My bad - not sure about them but I will ask a nuke boat buddy if they are a routine replacement item. Probably wouldn't want to hold them in your bare hands either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zonkerwrote   "Chinese civilization as a nation state is thousands of years old." 

Get a grip man - It's called the Warring States Period for a reason . .  

"states" is plural, as in lots of them  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

@Zonkerwrote   "Chinese civilization as a nation state is thousands of years old." 

Get a grip man - It's called the Warring States Period for a reason . .  

"states" is plural, as in lots of them  

What a fucking nit picking clown. Whether it is State or States has little relevance to Zonkers point. 

I don't know him from a bar of soap, but from Anarchy alone I'd bet my left nut that in the intelligence stakes, Zonker would wipe the table with you on his worst day. 

    

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

What a fucking nit picking clown.

It was not until about 1300 AD that China was a single nation-state. 

You ignorant slut 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AJ Oliver said:

It was not until about 1300 AD that China was a single nation-state. 

You ignorant slut 

So even an ignorant slut can make you look like a clown. 

Hang on a tick, wasn't it you wailing and caterwauling to the Ed about abuse and bullying on the forums?  

And I repeat, fuck all relevance to Zonkers point. 

Regards,

Ignorant slut. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

So even an ignorant slut can make you look like a clown. 

Hang on a tick, wasn't it you wailing and caterwauling to the Ed about abuse and bullying on the forums?  

And I repeat, fuck all relevance to Zonkers point. 

Regards,

Ignorant slut. 

 

Well, gee, Shaggy, 1300 to now is really no time at all.

After all, that's only nearly 500 years longer than the USA has even existed.

AJ can't help himself. He suffers, as Gareth Evans once said, from relevance deprivation syndrome. Except, in AJ's case, he never *was* relevant, he just had the ability to fuck up his students' grades if they weren't sycophants and that gave him delusions.

Now he can't even do that. He's reduced to bitching to the editor of an obscure sailing forum about how unfaaaair it is that people are nasty to him.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoo boy, Le French are in a snit....

At issue here isn’t so much the breach of a weapons contract – even if this harms France – but the breach in confidence between allies,...This calls for serious reflection among Europeans on the very concept that we have of alliances and partnerships.

 

https://www.rt.com/news/535370-france-aukus-rethink-alliances/

Even teh EU... https://www.rt.com/news/535358-aukus-treated-france-unacceptable-eu/

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bstrdsonofbtl said:

Hoo boy, Le French are in a snit....

At issue here isn’t so much the breach of a weapons contract – even if this harms France – but the breach in confidence between allies,...This calls for serious reflection among Europeans on the very concept that we have of alliances and partnerships.

 

https://www.rt.com/news/535370-france-aukus-rethink-alliances/

Even teh EU... https://www.rt.com/news/535358-aukus-treated-france-unacceptable-eu/

It's unfortunate that they feel that way. But life goes on.

Seemed like the French were doing their best to manage down the expectation of Australian content that they'd originally agreed to. Now I'm pretty sure there were strong grounds for doing so, but the project was running late and showed no sign of improving.

They're going to fuck up the free trade agreement with the EU that there was no guarantee we were ever going to get on terms acceptable to Australia anyway. I can't see a lot of downside there quite frankly.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

It's unfortunate that they feel that way. But life goes on.

Seemed like the French were doing their best to manage down the expectation of Australian content that they'd originally agreed to. Now I'm pretty sure there were strong grounds for doing so, but the project was running late and showed no sign of improving.

They're going to fuck up the free trade agreement with the EU that there was no guarantee we were ever going to get on terms acceptable to Australia anyway. I can't see a lot of downside there quite frankly.

FKT

The new world order really is changing - Welcome to regional alliances. 

The French (with German backing) are expected to be the primary leader of the European block.  Personally, I think this statement is France paving the way for those negotiations. It's an announcement to the rest of the NATO block in particular that they are gong to be approached to form new deals to 'augment' the old agreements.  The US will signal its agreement by basically saying nothing.

That doesn't mean there is going to be some grand Franco/American war - In means the US is going to go on looking after its own interests and expects the Europeans to look after theirs.  This is the American hegemony is withdrawing.  Not disappearing - that'll not happen - but pulling back.

There will be a American Block, a French Block, a Chinese Block, and then the rest of the world will self-sort accordingly.  The Turks are actively trying to form a Middle Eastern/Muslim block  - we'll see what happens.

The Australians have been asked - and appear to have accepted - to join the American block.

<EDIT> One minor addition - it's not about 'nuclear missiles' in these subs that matter - They won't have them.  It's sea based cruise missiles with their 1500 mile range that are the point.  We don't send nukes to take out command and control targets - but we do send cruise missiles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we will get 8 submarines in 25 years,

Meanwhile the Yanks a building these.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, random. said:

Underwater Drones Could Be the End of Submarines

2019-10-01T063047Z_1826277882_SP1EFA10I3

Swarming systems are small, lightweight, cheap, numerous—and networked together to cooperate like bees from the same hive.

 

Well, there is always the option of nuclear torpedoes to sort that lot out. The Russian Poseidon torp is allegedly:

  • 20mtrs long and 2 mtrs wide;
  • has a range of 6000 odd miles;
  • a speed of 50 knots;
  • is stealthy; and
  • carries a payload of 100 megatons. That's twice the payload of the infamous Tsar bomb. 

Ru_Poseidon-updatedFeb2019_2100x1100.thumb.jpg.39ef63f3ee0e1fb865557950d1a2e233.jpg

Cheerful thought isn't it? I reckon WWIII will be a short one. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

Well, there is always the option of nuclear torpedoes to sort that lot out. The Russian Poseidon torp is allegedly:

  • 20mtrs long and 2 mtrs wide;
  • has a range of 6000 odd miles;
  • a speed of 50 knots;
  • is stealthy; and
  • carries a payload of 100 megatons. That's twice the payload of the infamous Tsar bomb. 

Ru_Poseidon-updatedFeb2019_2100x1100.thumb.jpg.39ef63f3ee0e1fb865557950d1a2e233.jpg

Cheerful thought isn't it? I reckon WWIII will be a short one. 

 

Yeah well the payload is irrelevant.

100 Mt or not, it doesn't take much to take out a submarine.  Swarmed drones are pretty cheap by comparison to something you wait 25 years for and most of the cost is to keep humans alive while submerged.

WTF are these people on?  I don't want any of it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why countries are REALLY upset:

France: Money that was Australian workers thought they were going to get and French workers actually were getting is now going back to Australia and the USA. France thought they had the all time record change-order golden goose that was going to keep laying eggs and now it flew off.

China: Decades from now the subs may an issue, but in September 2021 the far bigger issue is Australia is not behaving as a subservient client of China the way they should be and this idea could spread.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random. said:

Yeah well the payload is irrelevant.

100 Mt or not, it doesn't take much to take out a submarine.  Swarmed drones are pretty cheap by comparison to something you wait 25 years for and most of the cost is to keep humans alive while submerged.

WTF are these people on?  I don't want any of it.

Apparently it never occurred to you that manned submarines make an excellent forward base for drones and are almost certainly to be protected by their own swarms.

You skipped the math lesson on range vs payload, didn't you?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

It's unfortunate that they feel that way. But life goes on.

Seemed like the French were doing their best to manage down the expectation of Australian content that they'd originally agreed to. Now I'm pretty sure there were strong grounds for doing so, but the project was running late and showed no sign of improving.

They're going to fuck up the free trade agreement with the EU that there was no guarantee we were ever going to get on terms acceptable to Australia anyway. I can't see a lot of downside there quite frankly.

FKT

Fuckers need to be reminded that Aussie accents are infinitely nicer than German accents....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ShortForBob said:

Sure, but I asked about invasions in modern times not border disputes or 19th c history..

Point I'm making is that it's not China's way to expand by invasion. As someone pointed out upthread, they prefer to do their expansionism with brains, money and (like Israel) pure cheek.

 

China has no evident interest in outright military conquest landing-ship style far away from their borders. They have discovered it is vastly cheaper and easier to slowly convert various countries to vassal states by mostly financial means.

What they will do is eat away at all their neighbor's territorial waters and international waters until you only fish and trade with China's blessing.

Note that China regards Taiwan as PART OF THEIR INTERNAL TERRITORY. They have no qualms whatsoever about using their army against internal opponents or nearby neighbors. They would not consider attacking Taiwan an "invasion" anymore so than Australians would think of Australian troops going to Melbourne as an invasion. They would consider it very much an internal matter not subject to debate by outsiders. Of course this would be like the UK invading New England because they still think it is part of the UK :rolleyes:

* the USA has been doing a balancing act, trying to let China know we won't stand for them invading Taiwan while at the same time letting Taiwan think we don't have their back if they do too much to annoy China. The idea is they would all collectively get over their issues one day and live happily ever after. Hong Kong put a stake through the heart of that idea :(

Link to post
Share on other sites