Do You Support Australia's Submarine Policy?

I won't bother posting any links to media reports about the Australian governments recent announcement regarding its submarine policy and related purchase agreements, so as to not taint the discussion with one media slant vs another.

My view - I with Paul Keating on this and think that this is a really bad decision on any number of fronts.

  • The costs are huge. I know we are talking decades away, but that just means we are only really guessing what the actual costs will be. As well as somehow finding the money for this, it likely means that funding for other things is likely to be detrimentally impacted (e.g. social housing, health, education, environment, etc.)

  • Do we actually need submarines? Most dialogue is around the "threat" from China, but I can't really think of any reason why China would engage in a war with Australia, or with our closest neighbours. I've seen reports that suggest China probably won't even push to take over Taiwan, given the perceived global effects of doing that.

  • As we wait decades for the submarines to be built and delivered, we are apparently to host US nuclear submarines as a stop-gap measure. I'm pretty sure that is against our nuclear-free Pacific treaty obligations and, if you believe China would be aggressive in the future, make us a nuclear target.

  • We will apparently need to deal with nuclear waste in the future.

Poll Options

  • 412
    I'm all for it
  • 701
    I'm against it
  • 55
    I don't care

Comments

  • Fact of the matter is if people are thinking there is no country / government out there that may not be tempted to invade another country, they would be wrong. Just because a lot of countries are starting to get along better or at least realise that War and invasion is not the answer, that doesnt mean there arent governments out there that are still run like dictatorships and Egos out there that want to set a legacy before they lose their position of power. People for the longest time thought Russia would never invade another country and yet…

    After the whole mess with HK and the big exodus of people from there to countries like Singapore after China started throwing its power around HK. I think China will definitely have its eyes set on other countries sometime in the future. Especially if they are unable to gain control through corruption of the government and buying out ports / lands etc then they may have to resort to other methods. Sometimes having something even if it cant win an all out war, at the very least can act as a deterrent and ideally will make the invading country think twice.

    While we all worry about gender identity and offensive jokes and pronouns, there are countries out there watching us and laughing at where our priorities sit.

    • +2

      I doubt there's many people who don't think there's countries out there who invade others. Humans are capable of anything. America made a feast of it, they just never hang around to clean up the mess. We can't keep judging one outdated version and ignore the 70 years hence.
      There are many ways to invade a country. AUKUS is yet another.
      I wonder why the Yanks didn't invite Indonesia into the tent?

      https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/aukus-created-for-fighting…

  • +1

    Isn't he the bloke that said something along the lines of the best way to see Australia was from 35000ft was on a flight to Paris? And that if you do't live in Sydney you're just camping out?

    He's an ex-PM (a quite successful one) who's opinions should be listened but he's just another Champagne socialist - aka socialism for everyone else but themselves.

    I'm all for these subs. Expensive but our government is far too big and has plenty that can be cut to help pay for them. The fact that the CCP hates AUKUS shows that it's the right thing to do. Albanese is, overall, a poor PM but on this he's got it right - so well done for continuing what Morrison and Dutton came up with.

    Hopefully, we'll get a real China hawk elected into the White House next year. Someone who will challenge the CCP on every move that they make. Get up into their face on everything that they do. They'll squeal but that means it'll be right.

    • How about we have Armageddon, that sound so ridiculous but with your ideology it probably isn't that ridiculous anymore.

      • +1

        It is ridiculous.

        MAD is still very much in play.

    • I'm all for these subs. Expensive but our government is far too big and has plenty that can be cut to help pay for them. The fact that the CCP hates AUKUS shows that it's the right thing to do. Albanese is, overall, a poor PM but on this he's got it right - so well done for continuing what Morrison and Dutton came up with.

      Maybe watch the video before making these outlandish, uninformed opinions? Mr Keating is saying why spend $356B on eight subs when we can buy 45 subs fit-for-purpose in Australian waters

      • No. Nothing I wrote was outlandish or uninformed.

        It's actually up to $350b-odd on up to 13 subs - 5 current Virginia-class and 8 future subs yet to be developed plus weapons, ports, infrastructure, training etc. Our military is thinking that they want to take on the CCP well away from our shores - and they're right. The fight will be well to the North and East of us - the maritime choke points around Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Also to patrol to the West in the Indian Ocean. Our army will be taking on the CCP in the island nations to the North and East - places where they are currently trying to gain influence. It will essentially be a war about economics and logistics and it will be largely maritime - denying the CCP the inward movement of energy, food and resources and the outward movement of their manufacturing. Stop that and the CCP loses. End of.

        Saying all that, I think some of the rhetoric coming out about a potential future war is a bit OTT. The CCP are the real threat of our time but do they really want war? Probably not and the ball is in their court. On the other hand, the only thing that a wayne kerr despot like Xi understands is strength - prepare for a war you never want to fight in other words.

        Please get yourself informed.

  • +2

    If we are spending $400bn - we should be developing our own defence industries instead. Or at least licence some technology transfer agreements with the UK / US. We are selling out ourselves to overseas countries instead of innovating our on our own. Its far too expensive and we should be working with Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Japan and other Asian countries to maintain security in our region. The US / UK are too far to matter.

    • Wrong American nuclear bombs are all that matters

    • The subs are being built here… it literally is developing our own defence industry. That's probably half of the overall cost, in comparison to buying completely off the shelf and having it supported from overseas.

  • +2

    The price tag of $368 billion is overly optimistic for a long term project with so many moving parts. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost ends up being closer to $500 billion with blowouts like all major defence acquisitions (the F35 was another one that took forever and was well over budget).

    It is really telling that Labor really just rolled over and took this entire package as put together by the previous government and just rolled with it, maybe there's too much pressure and if they reneged it would have looked bad on our defence capabilities because of how we nixed the French subs deal.

    Seems like a long term stitch up to me.

    • Remember the F111 fiasco? OMG.

      • +1

        Can only imagine, there's too many subcontractors and private businesses who know defence spending is one of those areas you can't dare touch or meddle with so they can ride it like a solid gravy train for all its worth.

        • +2

          LOL, it's a gravy train alright.
          F111 (How old was that model when we got them?) Blackhawks? We have a history of buying lemons from the US. Would not be surprised if Virginia class joins the list in some form. Yanks are not likely to warn us of their flaws.It's all moot anyway. The timeline is enormous. Technology will leap frog them.
          And if any major player goes the way of germ warfare , game over. Covid showed what a mobile world looks like when a pandemic sets in.

          You would think that having the internet would bring people together, but it has had the opposite effect with us. Politicians are completely disconnected from the decisions they make. And there is no true legal accountability for Ministerial & govt decisions. As said before. ICAC will never scrutinise AUKUS, no body will, and that is a travesty.
          We will never even get a senate enquiry because both sides are wedged in US weapon industry bum crack
          There's even a kid a trolling here claiming we should leave how we make peace, to experts who make war. Go figure.

          • @Protractor: I am not sure what cool-aid you have been drinking from but the F-111 and Blackhawks were both widely considered to be class leading in terms of capabilities.

            All platforms have their issues especially when they are integrating the latest technologies. From unknown hazards to airframe limitations as it is stressed over its service life. Something that R&D has a hard time emulating. It is part and parcel.

            • @Hardly Normal: Not the same koolaid, that's for sure .
              Didn't wings fall of F111's (multiple times) and Blackhawks have a record of just dropping from the sky?

              We were scared into purchasing F111's during another handy period of military hawkish fear mongering

              The price we pay for this "state of the art" stuff, when they are decades old, tech is not justified.
              So I'm not quite sure what sort of 'centric' defends bad mega million deals, bruh, but I think this is where we find ourselves.

              AUKUS supporters should be taxed to pay for the deal, given the voting public had no say.
              And no we did not vote for a blank cheque entree into someone else's war.
              If the Yanks were as "pro Digger" as Hockey reckons about AUKUS , why have the USA never afforded us access to the tech before it went grey and deaf?
              They have had well over 60 years to do so

            • @Hardly Normal: Historical facts.
              The losses of life on home soil with the F111 are not just (and should never be seen as( teething problems. The losses represent living people and loved ones left behind. Don't be duped by the inference in the links that those losses were in combat either. This is home soil losses form the major losses of life (particularly 1973 era) (confirm with RAAF serial numbers)
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_General_Dynamics_F-111…
              Someone even took time to write about the REAL facts>

              https://www.amazon.com/One-Eleven-Down-Crashes-Combat-Losses…

              • @Protractor: The F111s were class leading when they were acquired and to this day they still don't have a direct replacement. The age of the design isn't the most relevant factor. Just look at the F22.

                Losses are also not exclusive to the F111s. The RAAF Mirages were worse. The further back you go in aviation history, the more common losing an airframe was. As aviation has matured the loss rate for airframes and crews has decreased. There has also been a culture shift within the RAAF where the acceptance for any losses is a lot less.

                We can see similar crew/airframe losses with novel modern technology advancements like the Osprey (US). Additionally, problems with airframes are not limited to US supplied gear. The ARH and MRH-90 equally have had their own controversies.

                At the end of the day people who join military outfits understand that the profession of arms carries additional risk to similar occupations within the civilian sector. Military aviation, whether it is fixed or rotary, carries a very different set of requirements. The training and aircraft reflect that.

                Regarding being 'scared' into military purchases, hindsight is 20/20. Militaries act as a deterrent and you hope you never have to use them. But when they are required, you either have the gear/forces or you don't. The stakes are our prosperity and way of life.

                In terms of being given a vote, you were. It was at the election. You will also be given another chance to register your opinion at the next election. That is how our democracy works. I don't love the government like any Australian but polling the general public for big purchasing decisions is dumb. It would be costly, slow and lead to poorly informed decisions based on public consensus. There is a reason we elect representatives and have institutions/organisations were people master a field. If you truly believe that we OzBargainers have a better understanding on the issues at play here I am at a loss. We do not and will never get the full information pack that informed this decision but clearly it was enough to be bipartisan which should say something.

                The future will show if buying nuclear submarines was a good decision or not. It may even go down that we should have done it earlier.

            • @Hardly Normal: Another ( of the many) Blackhawk failure/s.
              I guess they were 'integrating new technologies' ?

              ( Maybe Putin has been hacking the wests military helicopter gyroscopes lately?)

  • Xi Jinping takes a quick drive thru QLD and when his tie gets caught he pulls it out and gets flashed by a belt camera:
    He gets a $1078 ticket and takes it to court. Arriving there there is nobody at 10am other than druggies and robbers. At 3.45 he is told to come back the next day as they have no time for suits.
    He needs to fly home and ops to deal with SPER.
    Gets flooded with illegal texts to ring and pay a $98 surcharge.
    He looks up credentials of possible country leaders.
    He rings Putin for the biggest laugh in world history: Next door you have a comedian but down under hem silly idiots want to see an ex qld cop to become their next PM!!!!

  • Xanthor

  • +2

    Another question will "our submarine" be future proofing by the time it get built?

    • +1

      I think your question is rhetorical. How can something state of the art a decade or 2 ago be future proof in 3 decades time?. It's crystal ball magic.

      • +4

        Imagine our submarine is two or three gen behind when the time it's built. All the money will be down to the drain.
        And it's not the first time we get stitched up in this type of business with our "allies".

        • +1

          Yes. Every positive about this deal is based on theory,optimism and supposition.
          But Albo loves shiny colourful glossy brochures and specky uniforms wiff medals and American accents and stuff.
          He is here to serve YOU>

          (BTW this is probably one case when wiki info is useless. The US is not likely to have allowed any seriously negative points to remain on there for us plebs to discover. The filtering might leave a few critical things there, but the overview will be glowing.
          If any country masters visibility of it or locates it, all it's bells and whistles it has will be useless. )

    • Fleet planning through to operationalisation is measured in decades. So yes.

      • Crystal balls are made in China?

  • +4

    It’s great news!

    Sure they’re expensive. They’re the newest design.

    We’ve taken a huge shortcut by being able to just walk in and buy them, practically off the shelf, bypassing the 70+ years of innovation and research that the US have spent operating these types of nuclear powered boats.

    No doubt the US are looking to build their capability in our region, and what better way to do that then to tuck us under their wing.

    We have been given an opportunity to acquire technology that is simply beyond our national industries, and with it comes new capabilities that the other options simply cannot provide.

    • +1

      I read your post in a cheesy greased up American salesman voice, y'know the crap on free to air TV when everyone's at work - thanks - BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

      • +2

        Aww c'mon this begs for the Al Harrington treatment.

      • I honestly can’t think of a more capable vehicle (besides the Ohio) that combines stealth, payload and range.
        Do we need them? I’m not privy to assessments from the experts, but the people that have seen the intel seem to think they are needed. That’s fine by me.

  • +3

    We should be building nuclear reactors, the subs are an expensive sideshow. The best defence is a productive economy.

    • +1

      The problem is the only good place to put them is the outback and the government is too weak to do that.

      • Building it in the outback isn’t that simple. You’d need to send workers and resources out there which making initial and ongoing costs high.
        Then you need to transmit the power back along a long transmission line which is expensive to build and maintain and introduces a risk of power failure if the line goes down anywhere along its stretch.
        Not to mention inefficiencies and grid stability of transmitting from a remote location

        • Well it doesn't have to be outback outback, either way is better than Lucas Heights

    • Ironic that China as our trading partner is the only reason why we have avoided a recession like the GFC for decades.

      We don't trade as much with the US as we do with China, and actually the US has nicked some of our trade with China as China has increased imports of US beef and wheat at the expense of Australian farmers.

  • -1

    Well done government buying tomahawk missiles is a little bit smarter if reports are correct. I know it's trying to divert attention away from the rip off dinosaur subs but I'll give you a medal .
    Edit : Oops my bad . Maybe they paid 100 bil for 9 tomahawks .

  • -1

    China is the only true military threat to us because they show a power hungry single mindedness and generally a competence to match it. Long range subs mean that we actually contribute to world security rather than sit on our little island saying pls merica do all the scary things out there for me.

    • +6

      Its funny though, when publics are polled around the world and asked what country is the biggest threat to peace in the world, the results are always the same in nearly every country, even including in Australia. The country that wins that contest every time that question is asked is always America.

      • +1

        Because they have an impeccable and unprecedented record of foreign conflict involvement. They are clearly the leaders in self appointed de facto world terrorists police

        Nevermind the oil, gas, minerals, mil-industrial stocks and weapons manufacturing profits

      • America is at some risk of becoming facist but would fight internally well before a facist republican party dominates the country enough to focus outward imo. If they stay well enough democratic then its just typical neckbeards bleating about america is bad. Yeah america can be bad, but its not a threat to free society (yet). If it is, its probably still good to build nuclear sub capability because the world will be a free for all.

        • +1

          You sure about that? They're alot further along than we think. An openly hateful racist, misogynist, vain, lying crimelord and serial rapist spent 4 years, elected to the highest office, to weaponise and activate his cult minions

          Then if you've looked at R v W being overturned and what a tidal wave of oppression & insane human rights assault has followed. It's not a country to admire or envy in many regards

          DeSantis hasn't even started Act II. Trump was just the prequal

        • If Trump is not a fascist, no-one is. Luckily, in America, he is surrounded by willing empty jugs demanding to be filled with his nocturnal emissions

  • -1

    Australia can develop their own nukes with the quality uranium that they auction off to the highest bidder and save a lot of money. Wonder who will oppose the most us for being defence capable.

  • And "the righ"t have awoken

  • +1

    Its time to declare a clear and decisive winner here.

    As the number of votes continues to increase to what must be an OzBargain record number the percentages have stabilised at 35% supporting the deal, and just short of 60% opposing it. Those numbers aren't going to change.

    Its time for the losers, as sure they are that they are that they are in the right, to graciously acknowledge they have lost the debate.

    • +1

      I agree with you.
      The problem the 60% have now, is that our government won't know this or consider this; it's a done deal as far as they are concerned.

      What we 60% have to do now is make our opinions known to our local (federal) politicians and maintain the rage. Maybe even hold a rally or two (some of us are aware of the rallies against the Vietnam war involvement).

      • +1

        Interesting you refer to the Vietnam War protests. We've had a lot of polls here on political issues. How many votes each side gets gives you some idea what people think. The number of people who take the trouble to vote tells you how strongly they think it. How deep public opinion is. The number of votes here in a forum that's not about politics and there's no reason to believe would have much a political bias says this is an issue that there's strong opinion about.

      • Around 60% of polled Aussies were against the Iraq invasion too. Then Bali happened.
        Funny how similar events in Europe helped quell protests there too.

    • +1

      ANKUS is backed by both the Labor and Liberal political parties. Those parties represent the greatest % of Australian people. So the results here may not represent the greater population. But everyone with a keyboard has an opinion so there will never be a 'winner' i feel.

      • I don't doubt that AUKUS is supported by the wider population. My concern is that this specific 'defence' strategy (nuclear submarines) and the related expense hasn't been taken to the electorate.
        Of course, not everything needs to be, but this is a significant expense for our country's economy, for decades to come.

        • +2

          More than expense. The fact this places so much nuclear infrastructure and uranium in multiple locations demands our permission. Then there's the increased risk by way of 'target' status. It's an existential game changer.
          Even small radioactive waste dumps in the middle of nowhere consult the handful of locals, the local and state govts and take years to resolve. This is a total betrayal of Australians by our leadership.
          Hopefully the parliament does what the 'sold out' LNP & ALP will never do, and stop AUKUS. Then it can be directly put to the people at the next election , as it should be.

      • +2

        There is no Labor party anymore. Just some cardboard cut outs with union cards.

    • Are you being serious?

    • We are mostly quite politically apathetic nowadays, jaded even since there's mainly two parties spouting the same policies just in different colours and logos.

      This is unfortunate for Australia, because as the philosopher Hannah Arendt pointed out after the Holocaust unfolded, all it takes for evil to succeed is for the common man to not speak out, as was the case of common German people during Nazi Germany's terror reign. Paul Keating in this scathing criticism of the government's submarine deal is akin to the lone German man in the photo who refused to salute in a 1936 Nazi parade.

      https://www.businessinsider.com/the-lone-german-man-who-refu…

      • We are mostly quite politically apathetic nowadays…

        Are we? My perception was that there were more independent politicians in Federal Parliament after the last election, at the expense of the major parties. The LNP is a shell of its once self, and is not an effective 'opposition' party in my view.

  • "War Never Changes"

    It's a waste of money, better use the money to invest
    on our own R&D for defence instead of relying on US.
    Imagine kangaroos with mini guns, kookaburras with spying tracking cameras plus taunting the enemies by laughing constantly, great white shark with torpedoes, koala with hypnotising vision, wombat with magnetic land mines. The idea is limitless 🤣

    End of the day this is always about a country whom has the highest Asian haters/crime living in itself, highly reliant on the H1b visa highly intelligent immigrants which consist of majority Asians and like what Michio Kaku mentioned it would be a dummy country without them as nobody can do their jobs. So now it organises and group up and call it's besties (AUKUS) and thrives at selling weapons (to China neighbours buy our weapons to defend yourself) to wage a white man's war against an Asian country…by using an Asian country as an excuse. In the meantime in Europe tells its other besties (NATO) buy weapons to defend yourself from Russia.

    Definition of WarmongerPeacekeeper
    a person who encourages or advocates aggressiondefensive stance to prevent conflict towards other countries or groups.

    Funny story not too long ago, Western perception in 1900s label the ethnicity people of China and Taiwan to a dog "No dogs or Chinese admitted" in signs Shanghai. So now they want to save Taiwan? They invaded China with opium by using…. Guess right the chinese own people. I believe this time it's no different they are not trying to protect the Taiwan which consist of Chinese ethnicity people but more for the concern of investment/ supplies of chips.

    Western democractic/civilisation/society's culture are great but sometimes it's so worrying that their government (most government does it but especially if you are the no. 1 country, the damages ripple effects is multiplied as it goes beyond its country but all also those it influences) using tactics on using media to brainwash people is staggering alarming which if a war does happens at the end of the day, the Asian Australian people will suffer regardless especially when you have fairer asian ethnicity….you will always going to be Asian. Haters are going to target us whenever or wherever we are. I have seen that during COVID but at a mild manner where others not so lucky got beaten up for just having the similar looking ethnicity.

    Why can't people see the actual agenda this is leading to… Remember 9/11 and weapons of mass distruction? OK maybe they did find tik tok is trying to spy on… consumer data (Apple, Google, Facebook) China ~~weatherspy balloon and the China is coming to invade you! speech. The country has degraded so much and lost its plot of bringing peace to the world…. Now they just want to sell weapons and be no.1 in everything. They should just focus on their…. Gun law issues, internal racial issues (especially the ongoing discriminating on LGBTQIA+, asians and especially the afro American community after so many years) before it turns into another civil war. Maybe it shoule be called "The United People of Clovis Country" as the states and the people are definitely not united at all.

    I believe the majority people of Australia wouldn't want to wage a war with China, it's suicidal especially when the organiser is living across the globe safely tuck away. China should be kind to its neighbours if it's going to be the no. 1 country to the world based on economic country ranking. Regardless of which country becomes no. 1 ( I prefer Australia to be no. 1) as long as they can be the peacekeeper it is good for me.

    Just five countries make up more than half of the world's entire GDP in 2022: the U.S., China, Japan, India, and Germany.29 Dec 2022

    My grandparents experienced WWII and it was everyday constant fear for life, my parents no…. but grew up with hardship after the war and hell no I wouldn't want a war in Australia or go through Wwiii with my kids…. who does.

    Plus good luck SA people for keeping the nuclear waste pretty sure your kids will be the next in line for the new x-men recruits. (adopt those with magnetism and psychic ones…. disowned those with optic blast vision or claws to prevent ahem fatal accidents) 🤣

    Peace no War ✌️🚫⚔️
    Save the 🐼s! Wife is obsessed with these fur balls.

    • +3

      Taiwanese people don't want to be unified with China.

      No one wants war, but the rights of the ~24 million people of Taiwan should be respected.

      • +1

        Pretty sure the 24+ million in Straya also have rights around AUKUS (in this form) being thrust on us for basically millennia. Maybe we don't want to be unified with big weapons America.
        As opposed to being told, by a govt/s doing the bidding of a dominant (and of growing boldness) defence force cohort and their US brothers in arms.
        I hope (if it's possible) AUKUS is blocked. But I reckon behind the scenes there's a whole lot of manipulation of dissenting members of Parliament, going on.
        I'm surprised there has been very little political pushback (besides the Greens) thus far, so the arm twisting may already have occurred. This issue should send alarm bells across most of the teals, I would have thought

      • I think you are missing the point. Nobody wants war but I believe Taiwan is used like another pawn game similar to Ukraine.

        Not sure you remember our major fires nationwide…. Remember who showed up only after the fire eases and claiming global headlines. History will repeat itself.

        It felt like or probably is that our country is like the sacrificial lamb or mistress to someone.

        Taiwan should be left alone but letting a China enemy/competition station on it is like asking to be in a target practice like Ukraine. Anyway time will tell if Taiwan is willing to risk a war…. It only takes someone to fire first oopsie.

        • Yeah Taiwan must be so angry being used as a pawn.. Having some of the most powerful countries in the world vowing to protect them from China's threats of mass civilian murder and forceful "unification". There is no way a peaceful unification happens, year by year support drops.

          • @Aureus: Why aren't those "most powerful countries in the world" putting through a frame work for peace talks? like the 92 consensus between China/Taiwan. They're actively supporting a Pro-Independence government arming them with only urban warfare weaponry. Anyone with a brain could see what they're trying to achieve here.

            • +1

              @Creamsoda: If there is war in Taiwan it is China's choice. No one wants war outside some morons in the CCP. Taiwan is a democracy, they have a pro-independence government because that is what the people want.

          • -1

            @Aureus: Oops didn't know you are a yankie supporter.
            Well hope you are right when hell breaks lose.

            I don't think China wants to kill its civilians… It's like killing its own people…. Chinese.

            Xi would have a - ve opinion by its people and it defeats the purpose of a unification.

            By the way where you go this info of China threat of mass civilian murder? Western media or Asian media or…. China media? I am curious

            • @luffyex2010: Living under a rock? When China threatens to attack Taiwan, how do you think that happens without mass civilian murder?

              • -1

                @Aureus: You sounded like an arrogant Taiwanese brat. When war happens it's casualty of war not mass civilian murder you twat.

                Hitler round up gas chamber that's called mass Civilian murder.

                • +1

                  @luffyex2010: Yeah arrogant Taiwanese brat because I want Taiwanese people to have freedom to choose their own fate without being threatened with war. You sound like a CCP stooge.

                  When war happens it's casualty of war not mass civilian murder you twat.

                  What a naive way of viewing the world.

                  • -1

                    @Aureus: You are twisting my words , I am explaining from what you said threats of mass civilian murder…. No leader from any country would dare says that, it's all your own words

                    "China's threats of mass civilian murder and forceful "unification"

                    I am pro opposing war and here you are thinking US will come to defend Taiwan. When is the last time you look at yourself on the mirror? You aren't one of them mister. What I am trying to tell you is they will not be at Taiwan's aid when or if a war does happen.

                    They will just keep supplying the weapons at premium prices and after when the war is done they will probably arrive and probably rescue a few planes of Taiwanese people who wants to go Australia, Europe or usa

                    The likelyhood of US starting a war on behalf/reason of Taiwan is higher than China was to start a reunification with Taiwan.

                    Whatever happens I hope there is no war at all for the two countries but you have to be careful with your poor choice of words and do not twist it. People like you will cause more conflict than preventing it.

                    I do not support either Taiwan or China but I do see a culprit that might benefit from the war.

                    Is there a formal/actual video of Xi saying he is going to invade Taiwan by 2027? Really curious to know this for those who can read Chinese.

                    It's all coming to western news
                    3 Feb 2023 — Chinese president Xi Jinping has ordered his military to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027, according to the CIA.

                    • @luffyex2010:

                      You are twisting my words , I am explaining from what you said threats of mass civilian murder…. No leader from any country would dare says that, it's all your own words

                      Fair enough. Not looking to twist any words. They are threatening invasion (which will lead to lots of death), not directly targeting civilians.

                      What I am trying to tell you is they will not be at Taiwan's aid when or if a war does happen.

                      I think they will, but no one knows for certain. Simulations have shown that China would probably eventually win a war with Taiwan, at a very large cost in a 1v1 war. With other countries claiming to have Taiwan's back that should be a pretty big incentive to cool it.

                      The likelihood of US starting a war on behalf/reason of Taiwan is higher than China was to start a reunification with Taiwan.

                      Yeah, nah. Not even a little bit. Delusional if you actually think this. There is no winners in a war like this.

                      I do not support either Taiwan or China but I do see a culprit that might benefit from the war.

                      Everyone benefits from peace. Even China.

                      Is there a formal/actual video of Xi saying he is going to invade Taiwan by 2027?

                      Not to my knowledge. But there was been threats for a long time to invade. If it is all bluster, then that is great. Can't see why China would care about the US offering to protect Taiwan if they have no plans to attack..

                      • @Aureus: I give up, you have more faith in the US than historical facts.

                        Here is a very informative video of US/Ukraine war

                        History will repeat because US strategy has never change but the lies do get more creative.

        • I get Taiwans predicament. But I'm immediately more concerned with what an illegitimately and vastly different,incredibly dangerous,perversely expensive, generational liability like this ball trap YANKUS deal means to every single person in THIS country. I also consider that pisses off the most populous neighbour we have, is absolute ignorant neglect. The 3 players have clearly no intention of engaging us (or Indo) because they know how dodgy this deal is, and how it doesn't stack up, and what that means. It makes us and the region less stable and will continue to do so. It actually raises the possibility that Indo will nuke up. Guess who might help with that aspiration?

      • +2

        Taiwanese people don't want to be unified with China.

        And that principle should apply everywhere. Countries belong to the people who live there. And who rules them should be up to them. But how well have we supported it around the world?

        The people of Bougainville didn't want to be part of PNG, they wanted to be part of the Solomon Islands, or an independent state. Did we support them?

        A lot of the people in West Papua didn't want to part of Indonesia, they wanted to be part of PNG. Did we support them?

        The people of Kashmir don't want to part of India, they want to be part of Pakistan? Did we support them?

        What right does the UK have to carve off part of Ireland, and occupy it?

        The people of Crimea held a referendum. Most of them voted, and most of the ones that did said they want to part of Russia not Ukraine. We call that an illegal Russian annexation/invasion. Even if Russia loses the current war, that won't change the fact that most of the ethnic Russians in that part of Ukraine see themselves as Russians not Ukrainians. Winning will allow Ukraine to maintain its territorial integrity, but it'll just go back to being a country with a regional ethnic minority the majority don't want, and who don't want to be part of the country. It won't solve the problem.

        And then there's the Palestinians. There's always the Palestinians.

        Who we choose to support is not based on democratic principles, it is based on whether the governments involved are ally or enemy. We let allies get away with anything. We condemn enemies even if they doing what they are doing for reasons we'd say we were proud of if we were doing it.

        • And that principle should apply everywhere. Countries belong to the people who live there. And who rules them should be up to them.

          Glad we agree. :)

          Bougainville

          Australia supports their independence as they had a fair referendum with the majority of the population voting for independence. Without a deadly military intervention Australia can't force PNG.

          West Papua

          Australia mostly supported West Papua, including in the UN. The west could have potentially done more. They deserve independence.

          Ireland

          It is complicated, but mostly it is because the people of Northern Ireland wanted to stay with Britain. This is mostly due to Protestants vs Catholics. Even today the majority do not want independence.

          Crimea held a referendum

          If you trust that referendum you need to do more reading..

          Palestinians

          :(

          Who we choose to support is not based on democratic principles,

          No doubt we are more likely to support a democratic country, and in particular allies. I don't think Australia has always made the right decision, but with Taiwan I feel we are in the right.

        • People always conveniently forget these other issues, you know why they aren't blasted on our media?
          Because it doesn't include the letters CCP LOL, simply that.

      • +1

        Not to sound like a (profanity) but do any Australians actually give a real genuine damn about people in Taiwan. Are they or YOU ready to die on Taiwan soil to defend them.

        What about Uyghurs. Do Australians or anyone in the US lose sleep over the Uyghurs. I mean did anybody know what an Uyghur was before mainstream media brought it to the publics attention.

        Oh yeah - INDEPENDANCE FOR SCOTLAND!

        • +1

          Because this Uyghur story has been drummed up to drive the rhetoric :)
          No western country loses sleep for real muslims living amongst all the bombed buildings and crumbled cities, they care about a few fake photos and fake stats made up by political thinktanks tehehhe

  • +6

    The sub deal is the biggest con job under a false threat and transfer of wealth to the US military industrial complex in our nation's history. The sad part is our compromised leaders let this happens.

    • +1

      Hh hm

      Leaders? Clearly we have outsourced leadership to the US decades ago. Look at the level of US ownership,investment,banking,underwriting,mining. We are American owned and run

      • It would be an interesting comparison with the level of Chinese ownership, investment, etc.

      • +1

        you missed out on media ownership too. i looked at some figures when the media were propagating Chinese investment buying out Australia when the figures show all of our critical strategic industries are owned by UK/US companies.

        The colonialist mentality never left they just rebranded it self and market it them selves differently.

  • +1

    the next generation of Australian will suffer bc they are the ones is going to pay for all these, you may think there is nothing to it but wait when you buy your grocery from the supermarkets and realize everything have gone up and up.

    • A few will get some jobs hehe .

  • +2

    Its probably cheaper to pay the operational costs of these subs per year to China for protection services. Food for thought.

    • You mean like Japan and south Korea protection payments to US?

      Quite cheap compared to the submarines
      Japan (they just need to build gundams)
      8.6billion usd for 5 years 2022-2027

      S. Korea
      1.14billion usd for 1 year (trump wanted 5b during his term lol)

      So 368b vs <10b.

      There is no way US would ask its partner for $$$ instead make a partnership and get them to pay for more than half or maybe all from I learn from marketing. The actual cost should be a fraction of 368b not considering our known past history for miscalculation which will bump it up by 2 to 3 folds.

      • +2

        The insane thing is both S.Korea and Japan are pretty much next door to China. China's neighbours arnt crying out about an invasion. Yet 8000miles away on the bottom half of the hemisphere our media our government is jumping up and down about an invasion. The sad thing is the public seems to buying in to all this manufactured fear mongering.

        • The recent media articles copped a lot of criticism, particularly when the background / alliances of the 'advisers' was made public.

        • +1

          The sad thing is the public seems to buying has bought in to all this manufactured fear mongering.
          The 'public' being as many generations as we can imagine, well into the future.

  • +3

    waste of money

    • +1

      whose money?

      • Present and future Aussie taxpayers (60% income tax rate, anyone?)

        Plus Loss of free healthcare (aka Australia to become the next US with a expensive healthcare system)

        Plus welfare payment cuts to Aussies on the dole (more Aussies living below the poverty line)

        • +2

          Plus thousands of social and environmental programs making us safer environmentally and health wise.
          Just imagine how many jobs and benefits that tasty number could create. We could be a paradise in a decade.
          As it is all the sh*t required,raw materials, energy,transport, security,intersts on $$$, etc probably adds mega-more to the negative side of the equation than any social dividends downstream

          I think those parties and individuals championing the scheme should do it via THEIR medicare levy.
          I'll take my chances on no invasion by China,happening in my lifetime.

          AUKUS is almost a rock solid guarantee we will be required to participate physically in any war in Taiwan.

          ANZUS is now looking like a, 'like it or lump it' invite to accept nuclear subs and or weapons. (With us or agin us ideology?)
          One way or another NZ shares whatever the outcomes become whilst they are a key signatory.

        • All those points will help the top % ers get richer.
          BTW the 60% income tax or top bracket they can avoid anyway like normally do .

          • @lostgoat: If they stopped all the tax loopholes for the rich and religious orgs and faux charities we could pave the streets with gold

          • @lostgoat: Nah they only benefit the American military industrial complex

Login or Join to leave a comment