Do You Support Australia's Submarine Policy?

GG57 on 15/03/2023 - 15:41

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
Financial

Comments

          • Protractor on 19/03/2023 - 14:26
            +1

            @Speckled Jim: So you say. If you can't see we were told some subs were coming, and we get a contract to go to war as a part of the deal was approved by the so called opposite end of the spectrum, and in the light of disengagement, with our two most important players in the region, then I'm not the one needing help.
            This ALP govt polished that turd, and made it their own.
            If you cannot see that the potato is smirking at dragging us into a war he can now blame on Labor, you need to brush up on how deep in the gutter the Canberra dwelling parasites of the LNP have dragged this country, and that is never ,ever about national security and always about 'them' and politically fluffing for the uniforms of the USA. Dutto goaded Albo with insinuations around his loyalty. Albo chose the US military contract over and public engagement or regional inclusion,Not leadership, just capitulation.
            Let's watch this space. It's already showing the inevitable signs of what was really signed up for,seeping in.
            It won't smell good.

  • Protractor on 19/03/2023 - 14:36

    and I think ppl will soon start seeing a saturation of spam propaganda in their inboxes bagging China.
    It started a few days ago..
    Gee I wonder where that comes from?

  • Ghost47 on 19/03/2023 - 16:08
    +4

    It's cute people think a few subs would do anything to protect our massive continent lmao. China would crush us under their boot if a war broke out, these subs are a waste of money. Could have spent the money improving the country but no, cHiNA baD!1!!! so of course the government spent our money like this.

    The people who antagonise others need to bugger off (and this goes for anyone in any country, even China).

  • Protractor on 19/03/2023 - 17:38

    Where's the $368 B coming from?
    Raising taxes?
    Did somebody say GST?

    • xdigger on 19/03/2023 - 22:09

      Possibly? Increased superannuation taxes, no more free healthcare (ie, bulkbill GPs/EDs), higher income taxes, will all be on the cards unfortunately mate.

    • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 21:24

      It's unlikely to come from one source.

      For one, they are almost certainly going to have to print more money at some point.

      Second they probably will cut down on people taking the piss with Super. GST is honestly something that a government will probably look at eventually, Australia's is very low by world standards.

      Third it doesn't actually cost the government what the figures say it does, when they're paying most of it out as wages in Australia that gets taxed and a portion returned right back to government revenue, and most of what isn't is spent in the economy increasing economic activity and being taxed again and again. People think about spending money the same way people do, but it's a different calculation when you have the power of taxation to capture it being spent once you give it out. Still slightly inflationary, question is whether that will be as much of a problem as it would be today, in many years time.

      Fourth, they're probably going to cut out some of the rorting done at the moment with some government programs being run through third party providers who take enormous profits for basically no value added service.

      Hopefully this is a big waste of money, the problem is we don't get to see the scenario where we wished we'd had this capability.

      • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 21:52

        Yep, I'm all for pissing off the trough of 'service providers' for govt. There's not much evidence it's better than staying in govt hands if you look at the bang for buck over time. And rarely any policing of KPIs etc.Certainly no penalty for failure. Classic example is Australia Post. What a fecking trainwreck.

        An YaANKUS If we chose not to be protagonists (avoided a $400B and rising cost for a giant target on our glow at night back) we could fix taxes and the cost of living .Fixing enviro issues would actually create jobs AND boost productivity.

        The thing about GST increases is the usual. It affects lower income people more, and it is usually accompanied by an opportunistic price hike across the board. Price point bracket creep if you like. We still have a complex tax system and too many pocket liners for people who can afford to bury assets and stashes, in trust funds etc.
        I believe BEFORE we touch the tax system for the general population we should be closing the loopholes for foreign companies and other significant drains on the tax system. It's perverse that any big profitable business in our country should not pay their fair share.

        I hope they print me some money. A lot, because they more they do, the more we will need, less it will buy.
        Many here have said it. WE should have hired a national body guard and save a few hundred billion. On our terms

        • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 22:11

          Classic example is Australia Post. What a fecking trainwreck.

          Australia post is actually pretty good compared to most other areas, outsourced or government run, was even better under the CEO shown the door over some watches. Try comparing that to some aged care or NDIS providers (both areas that not enough funding reaches recipients vs some providers that pay staff nothing and provide no service in exchange for $$$.)

          for a giant target on our glow at night back

          I don't think you understand how deterrence works. We already have the target painted on us, the point is to make that target too costly to hit, and better yet if they can accidentally hit some US/UK troops that would be great, or better again, not do anything because of that risk. China is already attacking smaller countries (but avoiding the US directly), there's no small country they won't directly stir up a fight with, and there's no guarantee anyone would come and help us. But it's politically difficult for them not to assist if they lose their ow troops in a first strike. There's no additional target for having these subs, but a good reason to avoid starting something. Australia is extremely vulnerable, especially to things like blockades. Even our strategic oil reserves are in the US. We could end up having to surrender without getting to fire a shot without a capability to strike back without warning.

          The thing about GST increases is the usual. It affects lower income people more

          Ultimately this is true, and as such to be done reasonably it needs to come with a range of measures to counteract that, as per when the carbon tax was introduced. The best feature of it was actually the anti-regressive changes that were so vital to huge swathes of lower income people even Abbott couldn't roll them back. GST is also very hard to avoid, so those who spend in the economy have to, more or less, pay it somehow. Companies that sell things also can't shift profits offshore to avoid paying it, and it incentivises them to incur expenses here.

          BEFORE we touch the tax system for the general population we should be closing the loopholes for foreign companies

          This would actually be the best shot at doing that. It's not realistic to rebuild the entire way multinationals work without cooperation from most of the world's economies, which means, basically impossible. GST is a tax foreign companies have a hard time getting out of paying here, while any other type of tax can be cost shifted, in a way where a tax dodge is indistinguishable from a genuine expense in any provable way.

          You're right GST is regressive, but ultimately it's also the only realistic way of achieving your stated aims (and increasingly as % of GDP moves to company profits via automation and offshoring the only sure fire way of getting any government revenue into the future). They just have to compensate those on lower incomes in exchange.

          Many here have said it. WE should have hired a national body guard and save a few hundred billion. On our terms

          I have no idea what any of these sentences? mean.

          • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 22:27

            @JumperC: APost is due for a Royal Commission mate. Not sure how you concluded it's not bad.
            As far as being a trusted institution, efficient, consistent and reliable, ?

            I have no idea what any of these sentences? mean.
            Well you'll need to do bit more reading here to discover the context.Let's say 'outsourcing defence'. Rather than outsourcing sovereignty as per AUKUS

            I'm sure we can get a whole lot more tax back from the big players, long before we touch the GST. All it takes is political will. In other words a Labor govt, (the LNP would never do it)
            It could be hard though because real Labor have gone missing in action after they raided Duttons wardrobe.

            We need a deterrence of the yellow peril narrative first and foremost. It's a piss poor govt who who thinks using fear mongering is a fair and reasonable means to secure a political outcome.

            • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 22:43
              -1

              @Protractor:

              Well you'll need to do bit more reading here to discover the context.Let's say 'outsourcing defence'. Rather than outsourcing sovereignty as per AUKUS

              I don't think there are enough minutes in the day to keep up with your quantity over quality responses here. We absolutely could not afford to defend the country from a super power like China without the exceptionally cheap deal we get by having US forces based here. Half the premise of NATO is having forward deployed forces as cheap insurance against political abandonment. Why would we want to devote our entire national GDP to still not be a match for a country like China when there are cheaper options?

              I'm sure we can get a whole lot more tax back from the big players, long before we touch the GST. All it takes is political will.

              Even the tiniest amount of political will brought down two Labor governments / potential Labor governments. It's wilful ignorance to pretend the world is such where you can ignore reality. A huge chunk of the 'big players' just pay 'royalties' to their overseas subsidiaries. There's zero scope to touch most of this unilaterally without starting a trade war. Just because you would like something to be true doesn't mean it is. I'd like you to be right but a cold hard dose of reality shows you are not.

              We need a deterrence of the yellow peril narrative first and foremost.

              We probably need some education first. If you think this is a narrative you haven't been paying attention. We've already had our aircraft attacked, other countries have had their citizens shot at. India and China are fighting at the border. This isn't 'yellow peril' this is China ascendant and looking to take revenge for their century of humiliation against whoever they feel is weak enough they can't fight back. There's no 'narrative' here, it's happening already at a small scale, we need deterrence to have any hope to prevent escalation further. Fear mongering is children overboard, it's not the actual factual actions taken by China against other countries to date. Ignore them at your peril.

              I'm not sure how 200 odd signatures on a change.org petition is 'due for a royal commission'. That's quite the reality distortion bubble.

              • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 23:35

                @JumperC: Apologies, Fear mongering AND dog whistling .

                AUKUS was stitched up by Dutton long ago, ushered in by Hastie.
                ( Once a solder always a soldier.)
                That started a trade war with China.
                China is doing what the USA has done for decades and I haven't figured out whether your absence of commentary on that behaviour , informs your reasoning.

                Keatings take is closer to pragmatic reality, in that reduces the target on our back, the bill at the end, and the dilution of our sovereignty and it provides a seat at the table. The latter is something we and the Americans seem keen to avoid.His take on the conventional subs was not meant to be seen as a serious military option, it was a comparison to expose the massive sunset of the AUKUS expenditure debt going forward. It's obvious he hit a nerve because the best the MSM could do was roll out the 'he's a sexist , 'he's a dinosaur' card.You can call me quantity over quality all you like, but the takeaway doesn't change the fundamentals of the deal and the claims of what it will deliver. The ability to deter may well be years after we need it. At the moment we are taking the road of agitate rather than negotiate.
                Whether the people of Australia accept it or not we are now a 'forward leaning' military base.
                And the BS that we voted for this AUKUS is delusional
                I'm with you on one thing, I don't think there are enough minutes in the day to keep up with your responses here.
                .

              • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 23:41

                @JumperC: No idea what petition your talking about.
                APOst shit reputation and performance is universally known.

  • nGu on 19/03/2023 - 21:40

    Keating is right that China isn't the enemy, he's right that if war were to occur between our 2 nations we'd get stomped, but he's wrong in that the subs are bought to fight against China. A fleet of ships posted on the coastline and Aus waters will probably be more of a waste compared to 3 subs considering upkeep cost, personnel, materials, fuel, etc.

    America believes that if democracy is the dominant political system then all democratic countries who bought into it will prosper which is why they spend so much money on defense, which is why they're spending tens of billions to make sure Ukraine holds out against Russia.

    The subs are bought as a goodwill gesture that we're committed to democracy in the same way that NATO countries are sending weapons and tanks to Ukraine. Think of it like your mum baking a multi-layer cake from scratch and she calls you over to put on a bit of icing on the top so it looks like you contributed something. You're getting a slice later and at the same time it doesn't look like you're just eating it for free.

    • Protractor on 19/03/2023 - 23:01
      +1

      America & democracy? Crikey what a laugh.
      Tonights news> Trump is tearing the guts out of a stunned mullet country as we speak (again) and with impunity. They don't care about democracy, if they did their voting system and constitution would reflect it. But it has been mutilated by opportunistic manipulation in an over litigated minefield for decades.
      The USA is capitalism and litigation first and foremost.
      Trump epitomises that
      Hasn't the USA wanted to attack itself since it wrote the option into its own constitution?
      How the hell can you have truth and justice with an escape clause like the fifth amendment?

      That cake analogy? Sorry, but you lost me.

      • nGu on 19/03/2023 - 23:11
        +3

        America does not fight for American democracy but democracy as a whole. Yes, they run a very flawed version of democracy but it doesn't change anything that I wrote. You're hyperfocused on the flaws of American democracy but the scope of their goals is much more broad.

        More specifically:
        -Support existing democracies (Germany, Aus, UK, Japan, etc.)
        -Establish countries transitioning to democracy/joining EU/joining NATO (ie. Ukraine)
        -Which leads to greater cooperation between these countries, more trade, bolster defense between allies, weakens countries which are not part of these alliances and makes them less appealing trade partners to the rest of the world in the long run

        • Creamsoda on 20/03/2023 - 00:58

          That's what a ideologue will make sense of American is doing. a realist will see American is fighting for their own interest and nothing but their interest. They will happily support Dictators, Sharia Law or the opposite of Democracy if it benefits them and this is fact.

          No one is spreading communism. China is not a communist country its highly capitalist. They're not forcing anyone to become like them. On the contrary, America has been using "Democracy" as a high moral ideology to spread their influences, forcing regime change to achieve their geopolitical hegemony with absolute disregard for the well-being of the local population (there is open slavery in Libya).

          Democracy can be easily manipulated and corrupted by groups of elites or vested interests unless proper laws are in place to stop them. Unfortunately those vested interests are the ones crafting the laws "ie military industrial complex" the current Secretary of Defence was on the board for Raytheon.

          The world needs to be multipolar just like Democracy needs multiple parties to keep each other in-check. The USA playing the Dictator on a global scale, it has no consequences what so ever when it breaks international law, it even got the audacity to sanction the international criminal court for investigating war crimes in Afghanistan. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/14/us-sanctions-internation…

          • nGu on 20/03/2023 - 01:15

            @Creamsoda: I'm not defending the means in which democracy is spread, it's definitely dirty and a lot of blood has been spilled. I'm just not entirely sure what other option there is.

            I'm not a fan of the class warfare American capitalism has gotten itself into, nor do I like the Authoritarian capitalism China, Russia, Hungary, Turkey does. Theocratic governments are out of the question. All I know is that our (Australian) democracy we have right now is dependent on the strength of democracy as a whole, and countries larger than us are at the drivers' seat. We can't condemn America's vision of it while also enjoying the benefits.

            It's hard for me so to say something like this because it compromises a lot of morals just letting them get away with the stuff they do. But now you have to appreciate the bind that our political leaders find themselves in when Biden calls up Albo and he wants to know whether he's in or not. 3 subs is kind of a drop in the hat for what's to come in the bigger picture.

            • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 14:23

              @nGu: The option begins with us calling out the crap that happens in and by the USA every day. If you think they would smash us for doing so, I think the answer explains AUKUS. We sat back zipped lipped when Trump crapped in in his own backyard, aligned and continually defended Putin, dog whistled, climate denied,democracy trashed,etc etc.
              Our entire parliament mute bar a few voices. What was our policy? Don't feed the troll? How's that going? The place is about to implode again. Maybe the job will be finished this time and we can tear up AUKUS.

              America has become a cartoon.It's not a democracy.
              Our model was once an enviable workable democracy until recently.
              Now the preference whispering , media manipulated populous and facts, vested interest and religious outside influence and infiltration threatens ours too.How was Gladys Liu not expelled from parliament for previous links to the ruling communist party and faking AEC type how to vote signs? How was Hastie bagging out China in parliament at the same time as she sat in the parliament with him?
              We are a bees dick away from a broken system, and AUKUS compounds that. We won't know for 30 years what transpired, to land where it did, and that's a travesty.
              If we REALLY are a free and representative democracy, Biden can ring till his ears burn, and he can join the queue with every other lobbyist with an agenda.If as you say when a US president rings we jump, then either we put it in OUR constitution, or tell them to FO.
              AUKUS almost (maybe does?) make Australia a hostage to THEIR constitution.
              Albo can say what he wants, but because he chose to basically ambush the populous with the cost,scale and risk of AUKUS, he has no moral or political right to claim he is doing in THIS country's best interest.
              That's a deceptive claim.

  • Protractor on 19/03/2023 - 23:23
    +1

    Mmmm k
    ( you may want to let them into that little nugget)

    I sense you may have inadvertently just nailed why no-one on the planet should buy their snake oil, let alone things that can turn the planet into a barren lifeless rock in a heartbeat.
    If Albo doesn't have buyers regret , then he should be scanned for puncture marks.

    • nGu on 19/03/2023 - 23:48

      In the end we can all agree it's better to have a defense budget than to not have it.

      The thing that gets everyone heated is that we never know how much we're supposed to spend until a conflict actually happens, and by that time we'll find out the hard way whether we spent enough or not. And then if a conflict never happens it will feel like a waste regardless. It's a necessary cost no-one ever feels good about paying.

      • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 14:30

        AUKUS is NOT defence. It's 'forward leaning'. That's snake speak for proactive/aggressive/attacking.
        We could and should have chosen to be a 'peace keeper'. NZ isn't quivering under their bed.
        (oh that's right, they don't have all the sh*t the USA wants)

        A defence budget is just that. But it needs to be ON our terms, at our pace, via our informed public, and justified. AUKUS is all ten pins of accountability laying in the gutter on that score.

  • shortgum on 20/03/2023 - 06:49
    +1

    lol im against it but random click for on the poll.

    ozb update the poll so people can correct!

  • Blackadda on 20/03/2023 - 08:50

    Agree with the principle.
    The cost and timeframe is ridiculous (and will probably only blow out from here)

  • NoMoneyNoCry on 20/03/2023 - 11:44
    +2

    If China can put a Space Station in space they can easily take out 8 submarines in 30 years time via drones, hypersonic weapons. They are just sitting ducks.
    Just saying…

    • R4 on 20/03/2023 - 14:18
      -1

      Maybe, we'll see, but then so are theirs…

  • sepa on 20/03/2023 - 13:48
    +7

    Dumb, irresponsible grandstanding from Morrison to foist these ruinously expensive nuclear subs on Australia just so he could run a khaki election and gloss over Coalition mismanagement of the French subs deal.

    An even dumber decision by Labor to agree to it in just 24 hours so it didn't have to fight a khaki election, effectively shutting down any public debate.

    This whole disaster is purely about politics, and in the process Australia has sold out its sovereignty and independence to become a US base and frontline fodder in America's war on China. These subs are designed for attack on China's sea lanes not the defence of Australia, and Marles has proven to be a worse defence minister than warmonger Dutton, and that's saying something. When Labor found it would cost $368b (more like a trillion when they are finally delivered) for a handful of subs surely someone said whoa, maybe this isn't a great idea. No? Dumb and dumber.

    • Kamsi on 20/03/2023 - 21:10
      +1

      well said, I wonder how Australians got to pay for this and whether it is possible for the next ruling government to cancel this stupid AUKUS deal.

    • goober on 21/03/2023 - 10:54
      +4

      Australia lost "independence" or "sovereignty" in 1975 to US
      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/23/gough-…

      Worth the read especially if you <35 yo and may not have heard about it.

    • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 21:35

      These subs are designed for attack on China's sea lanes not the defence of Australia

      This is the same thing. Australia couldn't possibly hope to 'attack' China, but an ability to increase the cost of them attacking through retaliation is itself exactly what a good defence consists of in a world where China could destroy every other defence asset Australia has in 10 minutes flat.

      That we bother having any other defence asset other than these, missiles and drones is where the waste is.

      If you hadn't notice China is already attacking Australia. You have cause and effect wrong if you think this decision is increasing that risk rather than a response to that reality.

  • nosey on 20/03/2023 - 15:12
    -1

    In favour of increased defence spending in uncertain times but i think money would be better spent on armed, unmanned underwater drones versus new subs. They could be parked underwater indefinitely and blend in with ocean floor until needed. It will also be very difficult finding submariners. Unless times have changed over last decade, there arent many of them. Very difficult lifestyle/work environment for the pay.

    • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 21:38

      unmanned underwater drones versus new subs.

      The problem is they need to be operated from somewhere not destroyed within 10 minutes of war breaking out or they're useless as a second strike capability. They also have a very limited range and lifespan underwater isn't indefinite.

      Very difficult lifestyle/work environment for the pay.

      Hence the headline cost (which includes staffing etc). Training has already been going on for at least a year.

  • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 16:03

    I can almost hear the cavalry coming over the hill…….y'all
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-18/dubbo-mine-asm-faces-…

  • GordonD on 20/03/2023 - 16:05
    +2

    So here's the big question.

    How could our poll strongly OPPOSE the sub deal by 59% to 35%, with only 5% undecided, when the Resolve poll done last week and published today in the Sydney Morning Herald says Australians massively SUPPORT it by 50% to 16%, with a third of those polled undecided?

    https://theconversation.com/nsw-resolve-poll-has-narrow-lead…

    Was theirs done BEFORE Paul Keating spoke?

    • Leadfoot6 on 20/03/2023 - 16:11

      Because OzB is not representative of a cross section of the Australian community as a whole.

      • GordonD on 20/03/2023 - 16:21
        +2

        Because OzB is not representative of a cross section of the Australian community as a whole.

        Your statement is just a restatement in different words to what I said.

        And the difference between a non-random sample of 1000+ on OzBargain saying 59-35-5 and an allegedly representative sample of 1600 on Resolve saying 16-50-34 is H-U-G-E. It is almost impossible to believe huge. Once you get into significant numbers of respondents, its hard to get big differences. It is hard to see a reason why OzBargainers are so non-representative, when this isn't a site that you would expect to be politically biased or age non-representative of the wider voting population. Sure, 2/3rds of us are male, but males are more like to support something like nuclear subs.

        • Leadfoot6 on 20/03/2023 - 17:56
          +1

          It is more an age thing.

          I know my 98 year old mother does not have a computer, and has not heard of OzB.
          Neither would most people of a similar demographic.
          They might be called up on the telephone by organisations, such as Nielsen Market Research(who my niece used to work for), or otherwise be able to put forward their opinions, but OzB is a more restricted demographic compared to the Australian population as a whole.

          And, no, my statement was not a restatement of yours "in different words".

        • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 18:11
          +1

          Poll went 12-16th. Keating spoke on the 15th. Readers who voted would have been lucky to have a full day of his speech and the coverage of its impact. And we have no idea what the questions were.
          So the rigged questions had 3 days clean air.
          This poll will form a slab of politicians reasoning that the MSM AUKUS poll result is as good as the public signing 'yes pleases I want this nightmare'.

          And in the same way supporters of AUKUS claim if China is p!ssed, then AUKUS is the right thing to do, we can use exactly the same methodology to say that given Skynews has accused Keating of being contemptible at the NPC, it means that he was 100% on the money.No poll needed

        • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 21:48

          The question here is 'I'm all for it' vs 'I'm against it'. Anyone broadly supportive with reservations about things like cost, can't answer 'I'm all for it', thus may, like myself, simply not answer.

          The resolve poll asked if people supported or accepted it. That's almost permissive in the other direction.

          These are very different questions, asked to very different demographics. OzBargain is also a massive, massive haven for sceptics of everything, those with a negative view are much much more likely to comment (as with a lot of places on the internet). A lot of reasonable people have give up and just left having an account at all due to the often quite toxic nature of similar debates.

          Polling if you want a specific answer just requires you to carefully phrase the question and options. In both cases (especially here) it's a reflection of the inherent bias in the person making the poll more than anything.

    • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 17:20
      +3

      cough, cough. Perhaps our "squeaky clean media" is corrupt and compromised and they have a stake in having a situation where AUKUS succeeds be it needed in a war or not.

      On Sundays insiders the MSM numpty on there was saying the same 'consensus' shite based on a rigged talk fest of 5 already hawkish USA fanboys.Why would anyone trust or believe an MSM backing a govt who doesn't have our best interests front/centre?
      Mothers of potential canon fodder, or parents those diggers lost to the ravages of war, were not invited to that discussion.
      If 50% of the public support this via any media poll either the question was rigged or those asked were 'demographically' filtered.
      Ozbargain is 'reflective enough' of the broader community for this poll to come close to the numbers.
      That dodgy poll will henceforth be called , 'a full and thorough community consultation process'.
      Didn't you hear? 90% us voted at the last election to have a war with China?

      The media (including the ABC) has already proved they are all for AUKUS, so the poll is not coming from a place of accurate info or intention. The media made the bed for us.

      • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 21:53

        AUKUS succeeds be it needed in a war or not.

        If it's needed in a war it's not a success. If it's not needed it's a success. People always seem to get these confused. I wonder if they're the same people that lament getting poor use out of their health insurance.

        Ozbargain is demographically filtered. Both the question here and in the resolve poll are setup to get the answers they wanted. With the resolve poll, no filtering required, just a different question. Believe it or not if people don't agree with you on anything it's not instant proof of something being rigged. There's a reason both major political parties back this, you can count on their own self interest polling to get themselves reelected.

        • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 22:12

          I disagree that this poll is not a reasonable snap shot. The preamble is not a hypnotic one, the question is simple, and most people have a view coming to the question. Most of them unlikely to be swayed. Especially in a 'bi-polar' electorate like Australia. And frankly AUKUS crosses through most of that partisan effect anyway as can be seen. So I believe it stacks up. WelI agree both parties support AUKUS for self interest. .That's obvious. I don't agree it's justified,smart,will do what they claim, is not more about the USA than regional security, and that we won't end up being a uranium dump for theirs and other waste,will create greater tension in the region (burn bridges) fall on it's face if enough of our neighbours do infrastructure deals with China.I don't blame them. (realistically we can't just throw any more money at our island neighbours now we are trapped in YANKUS.
          And remember , China just became Chussia in the last 2 days, so they will bold up on branching out.
          The general consensus is 'if' when China of Chussia makes a move on China, the west is hardly likely to neutralise China. The opposite is likely. It's a poor investment , and one that may actually be obsolete before even the US subs park here on a regular basis, let alone us having a full fleet.
          I know times and circumstances are different, but the ALP has been spooked by the opposition. AUKUS is based on the ALP projecting a mirage to the Australian people, that spending $368B will give Labor a gonad makeover and turn them into 'tough Labor'.
          They can out Lib the Libs. The US has nothing to lose via AUKUS nor has the UK. The risk is almost all ours.
          And then theirs the real regional powers we neglected. good luck herding cats at that level of anger.I doubt that even Wongs verbal somnambulist skills can cut the mustard .

          • JumperC on 22/03/2023 - 22:31
            -1

            @Protractor:

            and most people have a view coming to the question

            The view most people have isn't one of the three allowed responses.

            Especially in a 'bi-polar' electorate like Australia.

            You must not have met many Australians.

            will create greater tension in the region

            Most of our neighbours are quietly relived, they're being bullied by China and would prefer that the situation be more balanced in the region, even if they aren't (especially publicly) pro USA.

            The general consensus is 'if' when China of Chussia makes a move on China, the west is hardly likely to neutralise China. The opposite is likely.

            What does this mean in English? The point of deterrence is the 'IF' it's not to stop people when they attack but to make them second guess even attacking. China may have quite a lot of defence spending but they're still absolutely dwarfed by the USA, to the point that not even China is yet sure they can invade what they regard to be their own land that they can see from mainland China. And Russia has proven to be utterly useless beyond whatever of their nuclear arsenal is still operational.

            and one that may actually be obsolete before even the US subs park here on a regular basis, let alone us having a full fleet.

            Luckily for us we're absolute experts at cancelling obsolete subs, I guess we've got 4 years, there's still time to cancel before then…

            The US has nothing to lose via AUKUS nor has the UK.

            Their nuclear secrets are something they're not too keen on losing. Being drawn into a China-Australia conflict isn't something either of them might want either, but something they will have no choice to do if we were attacked and they suffered casualties. Both countries are contributing development costs, and keep in mind Australia is spending almost nothing compared to the US defence budget. It's plainly obvious that the world is turning to the point where those without forward deployed allies (eg Ukraine) pay an enormous price for their 'lack of spending risk' previously.

            And then theirs the real regional powers we neglected.

            This seems to be a riddle?

      • ceeessjay on 24/03/2023 - 00:09

        MSM has nothing to do with nuclear subs, mate. The bigots making a fuss about the plebiscite were the same ones that got us in this shit in the first place.

  • Protractor on 20/03/2023 - 18:29
    +1

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-20/parliament-debates-ho…

    Kudos to you for the idea, but ironically probably a horse has bolted situation. When 2 sides are as one on signing AUKUS, they are hardly likely to back an idea based on morality / accountability.

  • shortgum on 21/03/2023 - 02:04
    +2

    Today some politicians take real courage to be a realest US puppet. It's truly unbelievable https://imgur.com/a/5HwfY0b

    Spend $368billion tax money on subs is really not far off. These funds can help everyday people so much or almost build an entire new city to live. who know these insane budget will blow out further closer to 2030+ to feed the master

    • Protractor on 21/03/2023 - 10:54
      +1

      Yes.
      Sadly even future rebates for life saving drugs and essential medication will suffer too.All govt spending will be scalped to make way for invisible subs. And every time the ALP try to peel a bit of AUKUS Dutton is ready to pants Albo. Labor bought into , (and dragged the whole country with them) the most expensive ,risk laden,pre-obsolete ,existential lemon in modern history.
      This puts cancer research and every other social endeavour on the back burner. In fact it increases the exposure to radiation causing cancer in multiple heavily populated locations .
      All this staring down the barrel of a recession.And any menial climate change action by the govt will not only be useless, they have already said new oil gas and coal are good to go.Basically business as usual and higher power prices anyway.
      Lunacy

      I wonder if we could raise the price of the Australian gas the US gets gifted to $368B per annum?

  • Protractor on 21/03/2023 - 13:08
    +1

    and then….
    Jim 'the slick' Chalmers, Signs the country's biggest ever blank cheque, and longest vaguest contract ,(basically handballs Strayas PIN to the USA), and then lectures us about inflation. You could not make this stuff up.

    https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/interest-rates/treas…

  • Protractor on 21/03/2023 - 16:01
    +1

    and from the wilderness…
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-21/aukus-nuclear-submari…

    Will he (and the other murmuring back benchers) be 'educated' into compliance?

  • Protractor on 21/03/2023 - 19:23
    +1

    Votes against YANKUS = 666. I think that's a comprehensive number

    (waiting for someone to say the devil is in the detail)

  • Oofy Doofy on 21/03/2023 - 21:36
    +1

    "The Aukus deal is a crime against the world’s climate future. It didn’t have to be like this"

    Found during my wandering around the internet…

    • Protractor on 21/03/2023 - 21:47
      +3

      Yes, it's spot on, and the career deniers will howl it down as lefty BS.
      " Miserable outcomes have never found a better destination than the doorsteps of the apathetic masses."

      The fact that the % of votes was ONLY around 2/3 against AUKUS kinda proves it.

  • emmabravo on 22/03/2023 - 19:01

    It's pretty clear that the West believe submarines are the future of warfare. I personally don't disagree with the decision, but I can understand why a fair few people are disappointed.

    • derrida derider on 22/03/2023 - 22:36

      Who is this "the West"? It seems to me like a handful of people in the RAN believe it. I can't see many countries in "the West" giving submarines to Ukraine at the moment for instance.

      Most people think the future of warfare is completely drone, missile and satellite oriented - including intelligent subsea drones and sophisticated satellites that will soon be tracking huge 8000 tonne submarines any day of the week. The Russian and US tactic of patrolling under arctic sea ice will not be available to us (maybe not much longer for them with global warming). Ours are going to be working in shallow water where big subs are already detectable anyway.

      Not least of the many things wrong with all this is the strong chance that the subs will be sitting ducks by the time we get them.

    • shortgum on 22/03/2023 - 23:39
      +1

      In brief words, aukus is a US policy not our policy. Kangaroo politicians just obey it. world have to wait until US hegemony state fallen or collapse to certain level that so called western allies no longer shackled to be part of theirs

  • Protractor on 22/03/2023 - 19:41

    I see the pro brigade have crept in to raise the vote on the quiet.

    • GG57 on 23/03/2023 - 09:49
      +1

      Not really. I posted the following ~25 hours after the original post:

      Support - 199 votes = 35%
      Against - 334 votes = 59%
      Don't care - 35 votes = 6%

      Just now, the figures are:

      Support - 394 = 35%
      Against - 672 = 60%
      Don't care - 54 = 5%

      So no real change in the poll responses, just more of them.

  • ceeessjay on 24/03/2023 - 00:01
    +1

    The AUKUS deal is a dud that negates any attempt in the past for Australia to act as a 'middle power' as part of South-East Asia and the Pacific.

    Both the US and UK are highly volatile and split between political parties that are more keen on destroying themselves than any kind of responsible governance. Explicitly allying with them makes as much sense as rejoining the British Empire after the Battle of Singapore.

    Every single nation in the region is pissing themselves at the thought of nuclear subs which is a bad thing if we want to actually get them to work with us or have them on our side instead of China's. And all of this is despite acquisition being decades away, making it even more needless and short-sighted.

    A larger fleet of smaller (and thus, probably diesel) subs does more to defend our waters than a few big subs. Let the UK and USA be the world police, it's not our job to go playing in international waters. We're copying their strategic approach rather than offering a capability that they lack.

    Our Army and Air Force need better equipment as well as evidenced by the war in Ukraine and I'm surprised that we haven't had a frank discussion about underwater drone warfare, given the potential for high damage at low cost.

    The PRC bullshit about 'proliferation' is a non-starter, they're just trying to be as annoying as possible. Arguments about that are the Wrong reason to oppose the deal.

    Keating is past his expiry date but at least he knows how to give people new assholes. Nobody should trust him for various reasons, but we gotta acknowledge that his analysis is right on key points.

  • Dack Smith on 28/03/2023 - 18:44

    The Chinese already own most of Australia, along with most here pandering and kowtowing to them and sucking them off for their endlessly cheap and nasty products.

    So no we don’t need the subs

    Because we are all Chinese already.

    Even this site is Chinese

    • Protractor on 29/03/2023 - 13:11

      Speak for yourself. I'm still Australian. If you think we are sold or bought out to the Chinese blame anyone who voted LNP in the last 30 years. They still haven't explained Gladys Liu.
      The LNP put up the for sale sign to all and sundry. Approving foreign ownership in full daylight while they chowed down on America arse, to line the pockets of the US/Israeli weapons industry.
      But I agree, cancel the subs. It all balances out though. Australians own all the wealth in Bali.

  • Protractor on 29/03/2023 - 11:53

    Not sure which is worse, this rancid behaviour from the very people who forced AUKUS on its citizens, or the weak knee trembling sychophants in the ALP who mimicked the LNP stupidity?

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-29/liberals-apologise-in…

    Andrew Hastie shows his true colours again

    • shortgum on 30/03/2023 - 00:04

      https://twitter.com/dissentralintel/status/16407246966132408…

      even the UN secretary these days is under influence of the US. so pretty much you would expect our kangaroo politicians just bend over aukus to master. just because russia or china power enough to fight US hegemony it's own way but most place still stuck with it

      still a freaking long way off australia have it's own policy on everything.

      • Protractor on 30/03/2023 - 11:02

        I don't know, shortgum,. The policy of oppressing First Australians has held steadfast since 1901 with full bipartisan support.

        (BTW, that vid was excruciating to watch. I squirmed as much as the UN dude)

  • Protractor on 30/03/2023 - 12:58

    Even our accents & language are becoming American>
    https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/how-th…

  • Protractor on 31/03/2023 - 10:48

    Watch this space. I'll bet Australia's sovereignty is about to be fully outsourced, as the govt sneakily either adopts (pays for) US security service provision, or just handballs all clearance work to the uSA.
    Come in spinner. It's no coincidence this story was made public.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-31/defence-struggle-secu…

    I am,you are, we are A-MERI-CAN

    I would love to know if Gladys Liu would have passed the ASIO security check.

  • Protractor on 11/04/2023 - 10:14

    LOL, Massive USA military security leak. No doubt AUKUS data and contract details are 'safe', eh?

    When the most powerful d/heads in the western world leave classified homework laying around the house what did they expect?
    Would not be surprised if a Trump fan has done the leaking, to give him an excuse to blame Biden.
    Or, maybe Vlads double agent boys in the USA team did it?

    Cannot believe we allow offshore companies to manage our data, (govt depts,ISPs,banks etc) so ours is likely to be going the same way.
    And fancy letting companies have OS call centre staff (unknown people with unknown police clearance status) manage, access and share everything about us. ID,bank details,licenses,passports etc. Beggars belief.You wonder why you get spam? There's possibly multiple versions of your exact ID in multiple countries.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join