Utopia Talk - Politics

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Apr 26 06:02:04 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / aukus

Seb
Member Fri Mar 10 05:44:57
So - as I suggested - US Virginia's for now, Australia as a partner for Astute replacement.

No capacity to provide astutes for Australia in the short term.

murder
Member Fri Mar 10 06:41:52

I don't understand why Australia wants to go this route. Nuclear subs are extremely expensive for a country with such a limited military budget.

Paramount
Member Fri Mar 10 06:52:30
They were probably forced/threatened to do it by the USA.

Seb
Member Fri Mar 10 06:59:19
murder:

Their only real likely defence needs are to keep the Chinese surface fleet (or some other) from threatening their supply lines*.

So to a degree, opting for nuclear over conventional to obtain longer range, faster speeds, longer time on station etc. all the way into the south china seas is not nuts, even if it means neglecting other capabilities that might not be so relevant.

Australia investing heavily in armoured divisions would be madder.

*you can also argue though that as their main trade partner that is impossible anyway.

murder
Member Fri Mar 10 07:24:42

"Australia investing heavily in armoured divisions would be madder."

That much we agree on. I have absolutely no idea why they would buy Abrams tanks, but they do.

Rugian
Member Fri Mar 10 07:27:01
Ugh. All this accomplishes is giving more American miltech to a future Chicom vassal state.

Seb
Member Mon Mar 13 04:52:43
Murder:

What should they focus on?

I think nuclear subs are actually a pretty good focus.

They can't compete on numbers and China can't and wouldn't attack them directly - they'd strangle trade.

So you need something that makes it really hard for Chinese surface fleet to operate with impunity in all those seas between the pacific, Indian and south china seas.

Planes and surfaces ships can do a certain amount to do escort stop interdiction etc. but subs could do a lot. Then China has to focus on whether it wants to sink commercial vessels with planes, missiles and subs.

It at least deprives them of a "bloodless" route to a bloccade.

Seb
Member Mon Mar 13 07:05:06
Setting aside the fact it will take decades to complete the transition.

Habebe
Member Tue Mar 14 03:31:06
"They were probably forced/threatened to do it by the USA."

We prefer the term strong-armed.

But with China breathing down their necks, it doesn't take much convincing.

Murder, "I have absolutely no idea why they would buy Abrams tanks, but they do."

Because they are fucking sweet. I mean, Id buy one.

Riugian,"Ugh. All this accomplishes is giving more American miltech to a future Chicom vassal state."

So we are in agreement to have a self destruct Australia button just in case?

Paramount
Member Tue Mar 14 14:15:22
Australia is not arming itself against China to protect itself from China. Australia is arming itself against China to protect itself from the United States.

"They don't want us thinking too hard about the fact that we are being coerced by the world's most powerful government into preparing to fight a war of unfathomable horror under the tacit threat of inflicting even worse horrors upon us if we don't."

"So if you're confused as to why Australia is preparing to fight an unwinnable war against its primary trading partner, in direct contradiction to its own security and economic interests, that's why. It's because Australia is ultimately more afraid of the US than it is of China."

"In the end, humanity will not have a chance at health until it has freed itself from the shackles of the US empire."

http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg

murder
Member Tue Mar 14 14:49:32

"They don't want us thinking too hard about the fact that we are being coerced by the world's most powerful government into preparing to fight a war of unfathomable horror ..."

Someone get Caitlin a globe.

murder
Member Wed Mar 15 08:43:30

http://twitter.com/Qldaah/status/1635840697604657153

^ he's right

Paramount
Member Wed Mar 15 10:21:23
Does China also have a 2000 year old plan to invade and destroy Australia? Both the US and Australia is about to be invaded by China?

murder
Member Wed Mar 15 13:37:21

The AUKUS Nuclear-Powered Submarine Pathway

http://www.defence.gov.au/about/taskforces/aukus

Paramount
Member Wed Mar 15 14:09:35
ABC News: "What makes you sure that China isn't a military threat to Australia?"

Paul Keating: "Because I've got a brain."

http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg

Sam Adams
Member Wed Mar 15 16:12:00
"Because china pays me to say that".

murder
Member Wed Mar 15 17:48:58

According to him he has no financial interests in China.

Paramount
Member Thu Mar 16 02:41:37
China is Australias primary trading partner. Every Australian has a financial interest in China. The question is, do Australians want to keep making money or do they want to cut off that hand because the US Empire says so.

Paramount
Member Sun Mar 19 05:45:57
Lol

http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg

show deleted posts

Seb Member	Fri Mar 10 05:44:57 So - as I suggested - US Virginia's for now, Australia as a partner for Astute replacement. No capacity to provide astutes for Australia in the short term.
murder Member	Fri Mar 10 06:41:52 I don't understand why Australia wants to go this route. Nuclear subs are extremely expensive for a country with such a limited military budget.
Paramount Member	Fri Mar 10 06:52:30 They were probably forced/threatened to do it by the USA.
Seb Member	Fri Mar 10 06:59:19 murder: Their only real likely defence needs are to keep the Chinese surface fleet (or some other) from threatening their supply lines. So to a degree, opting for nuclear over conventional to obtain longer range, faster speeds, longer time on station etc. all the way into the south china seas is not nuts, even if it means neglecting other capabilities that might not be so relevant. Australia investing heavily in armoured divisions would be madder. you can also argue though that as their main trade partner that is impossible anyway.
murder Member	Fri Mar 10 07:24:42 "Australia investing heavily in armoured divisions would be madder." That much we agree on. I have absolutely no idea why they would buy Abrams tanks, but they do.
Rugian Member	Fri Mar 10 07:27:01 Ugh. All this accomplishes is giving more American miltech to a future Chicom vassal state.
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 04:52:43 Murder: What should they focus on? I think nuclear subs are actually a pretty good focus. They can't compete on numbers and China can't and wouldn't attack them directly - they'd strangle trade. So you need something that makes it really hard for Chinese surface fleet to operate with impunity in all those seas between the pacific, Indian and south china seas. Planes and surfaces ships can do a certain amount to do escort stop interdiction etc. but subs could do a lot. Then China has to focus on whether it wants to sink commercial vessels with planes, missiles and subs. It at least deprives them of a "bloodless" route to a bloccade.
Seb Member	Mon Mar 13 07:05:06 Setting aside the fact it will take decades to complete the transition.
Habebe Member	Tue Mar 14 03:31:06 "They were probably forced/threatened to do it by the USA." We prefer the term strong-armed. But with China breathing down their necks, it doesn't take much convincing. Murder, "I have absolutely no idea why they would buy Abrams tanks, but they do." Because they are fucking sweet. I mean, Id buy one. Riugian,"Ugh. All this accomplishes is giving more American miltech to a future Chicom vassal state." So we are in agreement to have a self destruct Australia button just in case?
Paramount Member	Tue Mar 14 14:15:22 Australia is not arming itself against China to protect itself from China. Australia is arming itself against China to protect itself from the United States. "They don't want us thinking too hard about the fact that we are being coerced by the world's most powerful government into preparing to fight a war of unfathomable horror under the tacit threat of inflicting even worse horrors upon us if we don't." "So if you're confused as to why Australia is preparing to fight an unwinnable war against its primary trading partner, in direct contradiction to its own security and economic interests, that's why. It's because Australia is ultimately more afraid of the US than it is of China." "In the end, humanity will not have a chance at health until it has freed itself from the shackles of the US empire." http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg
murder Member	Tue Mar 14 14:49:32 "They don't want us thinking too hard about the fact that we are being coerced by the world's most powerful government into preparing to fight a war of unfathomable horror ..." Someone get Caitlin a globe.
murder Member	Wed Mar 15 08:43:30 http://twitter.com/Qldaah/status/1635840697604657153 ^ he's right
Paramount Member	Wed Mar 15 10:21:23 Does China also have a 2000 year old plan to invade and destroy Australia? Both the US and Australia is about to be invaded by China?
murder Member	Wed Mar 15 13:37:21 The AUKUS Nuclear-Powered Submarine Pathway http://www.defence.gov.au/about/taskforces/aukus
Paramount Member	Wed Mar 15 14:09:35 ABC News: "What makes you sure that China isn't a military threat to Australia?" Paul Keating: "Because I've got a brain." http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg
Sam Adams Member	Wed Mar 15 16:12:00 "Because china pays me to say that".
murder Member	Wed Mar 15 17:48:58 According to him he has no financial interests in China.
Paramount Member	Thu Mar 16 02:41:37 China is Australias primary trading partner. Every Australian has a financial interest in China. The question is, do Australians want to keep making money or do they want to cut off that hand because the US Empire says so.
Paramount Member	Sun Mar 19 05:45:57 Lol http://twi...?s=61&t=C7YI8upxCqhyhPMRv9y0zg
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: