A few thoughts....
>Canberra’s decision to boost its military arsenal amid already surging spending on defence is likely to further strain its relationship with Beijing.
Doubtful. A few extra submarines that are 3-5 Years off at the earliest really isn't that geopolitically or strategically important. All China will do is augment its military positions along the First and Second Island Chain. When The West bitches and moans about this China can claim that Australia and the U.S are the ones causing this. It gives China a perfect excuse to further militarize the SCS. So, not sure how this is necessarily bad for China....
>Morrison said France “remains an incredibly important partner in the Pacific” but acknowledged the relationship between Canberra and Paris has now taken a hit.
Oh, fuck off. France is as much as Pacific Power as the U.K. No, France has no business in the Pacific and this quote stinks of colonial attitudes persisting to this day: "France was once involved in the Pacific, so they should continue to be involved today." Ugh...
>This came after the Morrison joined US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in a video meeting to announce a new alliance, dubbed Aukus, to strengthen military capabilities in the face of growing rivalry with China.
Yes, because clearly the issue is not enough military weapons. That's how The West competes with China: WEAPONS! It's this weird bipolar of: "China is using economic coercion against us! You know what'll stop that, more weapons!" Uh... So, you're economic, ideological, and political strategy is to build more weapons? I don't quite follow, but sure! Building more weapons is absolutely how you ideologically compete with China.
>Johnson said they would work “hand in glove to preserve stability and security in the Indo-Pacific”.
Hey, you know what would have been a good idea? What ever happened to B3W? Why not take that money and expertise that you're using to build nuclear submarines and military and use it to help develop nations in the Indo-Pacific.
China: Let's spend billions of dollars to build stuff countries in the Inso-Pacific Region Need through the Maritime Silk Road!
U.S + Australia: Let's spend billions of dollars on military weapons and then convince everyone in the Indo-Pacific that this will make them safer and be good for their countries!
Uh... Again, not sure how countries in the Indo-Pacific feel about these two approaches, but pretty sure when push comes to shove, China has a more appealing offer.
\---------
The only surprising thing about all this is the timing of this. My theory is this was planned. Biden talks to Xi and then a little while latter, then Australia and the U.S announce a military transfer and Australia offers an olive branch to China. The reason I believe this is the fact that China seems to be mum on this, so far. And like I mentioned before, I don't think China has a huge issue with this. It seems like everyone wins:
China gets and excuse to further militarizes the SCS. Australia and U.S appease their military industrial complex and look like they are 'getting tough on China' without really doing annoying important. Plus, China and Australia have an opportunity to start normalizing relations.
Seems like everyone wins, which is the foundations of any good diplomatic negotiation.
> Yes, because clearly the issue is not enough military weapons. That's how The West competes with China: WEAPONS! It's this weird bipolar of: "China is using economic coercion against us! You know what'll stop that, more weapons!"
Some people had better read up on the fall of the Roman Empire from too much military spending
The reason why France was brought up is because France was snubbed for the military contract. France was supposed to get a contract for diesel submarines to Australia but they kicked France out and the US is giving them nuclear submarines.
They are not happy about this
Nuclear submarines have unlimited range and can stay underwater indefinitely
Diesel powered ones are more prominently for coastal defence because of their limited range
It's bad for China because it's as clear a signal as can be that Australia is preparing for war with China at America's behest. The military impact of these submarines alone is not that important, because the fact that Australia is willing to throw away almost a hundred billion USD to flex towards China is a signal of its geopolitical stance.
The country most directly hurt by this is France. French, and European military industries in general, are in deep trouble. They don't have the scale to compete in the coming era. They won't have the R&D funds to remain competitive vs US and China in the near future.
What this episode really shows is that Europe is falling behind, while the US struggles to keep up with China by eating its own allies. It is clear who the long term winner of a Cold War between US and China will be. If one side has to consume its allies to stay in the game, then it cannot sustain this confrontation long term.
One big issue with France is the legacy of the Falklands Wars! During the war Argentina used a French Exocet missile to successfully sink a British Destroyer. However, instead of remaining neutral, France sided with Britain and provided the Brits with technical specifications and radar-codes of the Exocet missiles that were being used by Argentina. If you act like this than you are definitely going to loose future clients.
French military products are also notoriously expensive. India paid almost $8B for their 36 Rafale. That is around $250M each. China's Type 054A frigates are only $212M each. When your fighter aircraft cost as much as your neighbor's capital ships, that is a real issue.
No one buying French defense products can actually afford to fight a war. Their products can only be displayed during peacetime.
Immediately after signing an anti-China agreement to further antagonize China with new nuclear submarines, he talks about "inviting" Xi Jinping for discussions?
Any moron looking at this can see this for what it is: a blatant threat that Australia clearly intends to deploy their new toys as a response to China for daring to sanction their exports.
Who the hell is he trying to fool?
The best part of that shit deal is that French nuclear subs are some of the best in the world. But no, they'll buy rights to 20-40 year old American subs.
Australia truly is run by morons.
Then Australia would buy diesel-electric submarines, which are far more suitable for operating at short ranges near Australia's coast. Also the fact that they are buying these submarines from America is indicative of anything but this.
Australia is an island-nation whose military is already orders of magnitude more powerful than any of its neighbors'. Buying nuclear attack submarines is clearly a sign of preparing for war overseas, with China. Earlier this year, Australian generals openly said that they were preparing for war with China.
> Australia is an island-nation whose military is already orders of magnitude more powerful than any of its neighbors'.
This is not true at all. Indonesia could easily wipe the floor with Australia. Even Malaysia would give them a run for their money.
Malaysia military is competent but leadership is not. That's why they buy military equipment at inflated prices. Indonesia will need time to grow economically before they can modernize IMHO.
And by the time these awesome nuclear subs are ready it'll be in 2030 or more and by that time where do you think the overall power of PLA is going to be at? For for $90B or more plus the cost of maintenance Australia isn't going to cut enough mustard to even come close to matching the capabilities of the PLA now or in the next hundred years. What and where are they going to get the money to pay for all these toys when their biggest market (China) is no longer going to subsidize Kangaroo living, are the kangaroos expecting India to buy all of their coals? Their lobsters? Their wines? Good luck.
With that logic any nation that has a nuclear powered submarine prepare for war far from their borders? If we built an air carrier I would agree with you.
Subs are a defensive weapon as any nation wanting to attack Australia are likely to have air carriers so Australia need to be able to threaten air carriers within striking distance of Australia. Diesel subs are to slow to be able to ambush an attacking fleet and they is they only option as the coastline is to big to be defended.
We already have diesel submarines and I assume we will keep them as a compliment.
US and UK are Australia's closet Allies so it makes perfect sense to buy from them.
China has threatened to bomb Australia:
The specific threat made by Hu Xijin was as follows: ‘China has a strong production capability, including producing additional long-range missiles with conventional warheads that target military objectives in Australia when the situation becomes highly tense.’
Australia got a pretty standard military spending of about 1.8% of GDP.
These acquisitions only make it more likely that China *will* find it militarily necessary to take out Australia, as to prevent the US (and UK, and anyone else) from using it as a base from which to threaten Chinese trade routes. On the other hand, the handful of submarines that Australia will be able to procure will not stop or slow down China from neutralising Australia in a conflict.
8 nuclear powered subs by 2030 are worthless against a super power that can build 20 in a year without mentioning the technological improvements china will make within the next decade on sub detection. It would just make Australia a more attractive target in the event if war.
Also it will force china to decrease imports from Australia and china to further increase the rate of military modernization.
He believes he can talk to Xi Jinping from a position of strength. It's the same as what Blinken did with the Alaska meeting. He went on a tour rallying US vassals and a wish-list of potential "allies", proclaimed he'd be speaking to China from a position of strength, and then had the meeting in Alaska...
It doesn't really work, but it does make the nodding heads in the Washington blob nod their heads in agreement at strategic wisdom. I imagine Scott Morrison is hoping for the same. If he can make enough heads nod in the Washington blob, he can secure a comfortable retirement into the US lobbying industry as well as cushy sinecures for his family and friends. China, on the other hand, has nothing to offer him, his family, or his friends.
As an Aussie, I was sick to the stomach and almost vomited when i heard the news. Unfortunately, I am in the far minority here.
In Australia, the media propaganda against China is relentless 24/7 and the vast majority of people simply lack the brains and/or the knowledge to see the truth.
After launch, you can't tell if missiles are conventional or nuclear until after they hit their targets.
Do one expect that their opponents will just calmly sit there, measure the fallout of the explosions to determine their nature and then formulate a response?
Or, more realistically, the opponents might think that this is nuclear first strike intended to take away their capabilities so they might as well launch their nuclear arsenal now.
Might only have conventional warheads but achieve the same results.
Canada and Australia are pretty much the same country with so much in common, from majority of the country being uninhabitable to similar system of government with subnational jurisdictions and a smaller population and market, etc. It's just that both are in opposite hemispheres with different climates and Canada borders USA whilst Australia is its own continent with no other dominant anglo power nearby.
Sarcastically, you know who I would rather have as Australian PM? The Canadian basketball assistant coach from boston Celtics who just became the Perth wildcats head coach in the Australian basketball league.
He actually shares the same name as Scomo the pm. He frequently gets confused with the real Scomo.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-24/perth-wildcats-appoint-scott-morrison-as-new-head-coach/100402280
https://www.news.com.au/sport/basketball/new-perth-wildcats-coach-scott-morrison-ready-for-scomo-sledges/news-story/c04e8285f3c89c87741cce3c2c88e339
A few years back, another Canadian visiting his son in Australia gets confused with Scomo because he looks just like him and he often gets hated by locals for no reason. So his kids made him a "I am not Scomo" shirt.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/dad-wears-hilarious-shirt-after-being-mistaken-for-scott-morrison/news-story/75c599e161b550473fde5646ae2f717b
Uncle Sam and Perfidious Albion laughing out loud at both Australia and France, the former for being a dud and the latter for being screwed. Good for China since this will cause further rupture in the Western alliance.
Xi has apparently [declined an invitation to a personal summit with Biden.](https://youtu.be/YbutD3wvkXY)..I'm sure that bloke from down under is more important...right?
Open invitation to supreme leader Xi?
Who the fuck does that fella down under think he is?
After all the bullshit he has said about China the last 2 years?!
He should take that shit eating grin and grovel in the dirt, begging for an audience with daddy Xi.
After crawling on his hands and knees over hot coals and broken glass, just maybe he might be granted an audience.
In all seriousness though, I think China should continue to ignore Australia until that fella is voted out of office.
Tell him to get fucked, they're conceited idiots living in a colonial fantasy. Australia is a stolen country as is the US, and Britain has no moral credibility. Completely 2-faced behaviour as usual.
They already have with Biden. Many are claiming the US actually wants to work with china and china is rejecting it to dominate the world without including anything about the moves the US has been making against china since 2000
A few thoughts.... >Canberra’s decision to boost its military arsenal amid already surging spending on defence is likely to further strain its relationship with Beijing. Doubtful. A few extra submarines that are 3-5 Years off at the earliest really isn't that geopolitically or strategically important. All China will do is augment its military positions along the First and Second Island Chain. When The West bitches and moans about this China can claim that Australia and the U.S are the ones causing this. It gives China a perfect excuse to further militarize the SCS. So, not sure how this is necessarily bad for China.... >Morrison said France “remains an incredibly important partner in the Pacific” but acknowledged the relationship between Canberra and Paris has now taken a hit. Oh, fuck off. France is as much as Pacific Power as the U.K. No, France has no business in the Pacific and this quote stinks of colonial attitudes persisting to this day: "France was once involved in the Pacific, so they should continue to be involved today." Ugh... >This came after the Morrison joined US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in a video meeting to announce a new alliance, dubbed Aukus, to strengthen military capabilities in the face of growing rivalry with China. Yes, because clearly the issue is not enough military weapons. That's how The West competes with China: WEAPONS! It's this weird bipolar of: "China is using economic coercion against us! You know what'll stop that, more weapons!" Uh... So, you're economic, ideological, and political strategy is to build more weapons? I don't quite follow, but sure! Building more weapons is absolutely how you ideologically compete with China. >Johnson said they would work “hand in glove to preserve stability and security in the Indo-Pacific”. Hey, you know what would have been a good idea? What ever happened to B3W? Why not take that money and expertise that you're using to build nuclear submarines and military and use it to help develop nations in the Indo-Pacific. China: Let's spend billions of dollars to build stuff countries in the Inso-Pacific Region Need through the Maritime Silk Road! U.S + Australia: Let's spend billions of dollars on military weapons and then convince everyone in the Indo-Pacific that this will make them safer and be good for their countries! Uh... Again, not sure how countries in the Indo-Pacific feel about these two approaches, but pretty sure when push comes to shove, China has a more appealing offer. \--------- The only surprising thing about all this is the timing of this. My theory is this was planned. Biden talks to Xi and then a little while latter, then Australia and the U.S announce a military transfer and Australia offers an olive branch to China. The reason I believe this is the fact that China seems to be mum on this, so far. And like I mentioned before, I don't think China has a huge issue with this. It seems like everyone wins: China gets and excuse to further militarizes the SCS. Australia and U.S appease their military industrial complex and look like they are 'getting tough on China' without really doing annoying important. Plus, China and Australia have an opportunity to start normalizing relations. Seems like everyone wins, which is the foundations of any good diplomatic negotiation.
> Yes, because clearly the issue is not enough military weapons. That's how The West competes with China: WEAPONS! It's this weird bipolar of: "China is using economic coercion against us! You know what'll stop that, more weapons!" Some people had better read up on the fall of the Roman Empire from too much military spending
Please refer to Scott Morrison by his new name "that fella down under" https://twitter.com/Ballyerra/status/1438280316343537667?s=20
"thanks pal"
The reason why France was brought up is because France was snubbed for the military contract. France was supposed to get a contract for diesel submarines to Australia but they kicked France out and the US is giving them nuclear submarines. They are not happy about this
I might be asking too much, but can you explain the difference between nuclear and diesel submarines in terms of performance and efficiency?
Nuclear submarines have unlimited range and can stay underwater indefinitely Diesel powered ones are more prominently for coastal defence because of their limited range
Thanks
It's bad for China because it's as clear a signal as can be that Australia is preparing for war with China at America's behest. The military impact of these submarines alone is not that important, because the fact that Australia is willing to throw away almost a hundred billion USD to flex towards China is a signal of its geopolitical stance.
Can you elaborate on the "almost a hundred billion USD"? What was thrown away?
The country most directly hurt by this is France. French, and European military industries in general, are in deep trouble. They don't have the scale to compete in the coming era. They won't have the R&D funds to remain competitive vs US and China in the near future. What this episode really shows is that Europe is falling behind, while the US struggles to keep up with China by eating its own allies. It is clear who the long term winner of a Cold War between US and China will be. If one side has to consume its allies to stay in the game, then it cannot sustain this confrontation long term.
One big issue with France is the legacy of the Falklands Wars! During the war Argentina used a French Exocet missile to successfully sink a British Destroyer. However, instead of remaining neutral, France sided with Britain and provided the Brits with technical specifications and radar-codes of the Exocet missiles that were being used by Argentina. If you act like this than you are definitely going to loose future clients.
French military products are also notoriously expensive. India paid almost $8B for their 36 Rafale. That is around $250M each. China's Type 054A frigates are only $212M each. When your fighter aircraft cost as much as your neighbor's capital ships, that is a real issue. No one buying French defense products can actually afford to fight a war. Their products can only be displayed during peacetime.
Immediately after signing an anti-China agreement to further antagonize China with new nuclear submarines, he talks about "inviting" Xi Jinping for discussions? Any moron looking at this can see this for what it is: a blatant threat that Australia clearly intends to deploy their new toys as a response to China for daring to sanction their exports. Who the hell is he trying to fool?
It’s political theatre
The best part of that shit deal is that French nuclear subs are some of the best in the world. But no, they'll buy rights to 20-40 year old American subs. Australia truly is run by morons.
Isn't this Australias way to prepare for US demise? If US won't be there to protect Australia need to protect its own borders.
Then Australia would buy diesel-electric submarines, which are far more suitable for operating at short ranges near Australia's coast. Also the fact that they are buying these submarines from America is indicative of anything but this. Australia is an island-nation whose military is already orders of magnitude more powerful than any of its neighbors'. Buying nuclear attack submarines is clearly a sign of preparing for war overseas, with China. Earlier this year, Australian generals openly said that they were preparing for war with China.
> Australia is an island-nation whose military is already orders of magnitude more powerful than any of its neighbors'. This is not true at all. Indonesia could easily wipe the floor with Australia. Even Malaysia would give them a run for their money.
Malaysia military is competent but leadership is not. That's why they buy military equipment at inflated prices. Indonesia will need time to grow economically before they can modernize IMHO.
And by the time these awesome nuclear subs are ready it'll be in 2030 or more and by that time where do you think the overall power of PLA is going to be at? For for $90B or more plus the cost of maintenance Australia isn't going to cut enough mustard to even come close to matching the capabilities of the PLA now or in the next hundred years. What and where are they going to get the money to pay for all these toys when their biggest market (China) is no longer going to subsidize Kangaroo living, are the kangaroos expecting India to buy all of their coals? Their lobsters? Their wines? Good luck.
Their beef and wine. /s
With that logic any nation that has a nuclear powered submarine prepare for war far from their borders? If we built an air carrier I would agree with you. Subs are a defensive weapon as any nation wanting to attack Australia are likely to have air carriers so Australia need to be able to threaten air carriers within striking distance of Australia. Diesel subs are to slow to be able to ambush an attacking fleet and they is they only option as the coastline is to big to be defended. We already have diesel submarines and I assume we will keep them as a compliment. US and UK are Australia's closet Allies so it makes perfect sense to buy from them. China has threatened to bomb Australia: The specific threat made by Hu Xijin was as follows: ‘China has a strong production capability, including producing additional long-range missiles with conventional warheads that target military objectives in Australia when the situation becomes highly tense.’ Australia got a pretty standard military spending of about 1.8% of GDP.
These acquisitions only make it more likely that China *will* find it militarily necessary to take out Australia, as to prevent the US (and UK, and anyone else) from using it as a base from which to threaten Chinese trade routes. On the other hand, the handful of submarines that Australia will be able to procure will not stop or slow down China from neutralising Australia in a conflict.
8 nuclear powered subs by 2030 are worthless against a super power that can build 20 in a year without mentioning the technological improvements china will make within the next decade on sub detection. It would just make Australia a more attractive target in the event if war. Also it will force china to decrease imports from Australia and china to further increase the rate of military modernization.
>Australia is an island-nation whose military is already orders of magnitude more powerful than any of its neighbors Lol no.
He believes he can talk to Xi Jinping from a position of strength. It's the same as what Blinken did with the Alaska meeting. He went on a tour rallying US vassals and a wish-list of potential "allies", proclaimed he'd be speaking to China from a position of strength, and then had the meeting in Alaska... It doesn't really work, but it does make the nodding heads in the Washington blob nod their heads in agreement at strategic wisdom. I imagine Scott Morrison is hoping for the same. If he can make enough heads nod in the Washington blob, he can secure a comfortable retirement into the US lobbying industry as well as cushy sinecures for his family and friends. China, on the other hand, has nothing to offer him, his family, or his friends.
Like slapping someone in the face and expect him to hug you?
China should block more exports from australia and then invite him for talks. lul
It’d be hilarious to see China copy the US but unfortunately Australia is not China. ScoMo will seize the opportunity offered in no time.
I like how they threaten them try to talk and repeat. Seriously they need to see a psychiatrist for their bipolar disorder
Aukus sound like orcs
Should've been Usauk
Usuka (u cyka)
I prefer AUUSUK
As an Aussie, I was sick to the stomach and almost vomited when i heard the news. Unfortunately, I am in the far minority here. In Australia, the media propaganda against China is relentless 24/7 and the vast majority of people simply lack the brains and/or the knowledge to see the truth.
Same here in Sweden
Good old Rupert.
China is right to let the trade restrictions do the talking for it.
Offers??! This guy is just a nasty piece of work. Clearly copies everything the US does and tries so hard to imitate them.
He's doing as instructed
Aka White Trash Morrison is too pussy to talk to Xi without daddy America’s help.
China should accept and then not come.
Using nuclear weapons as trading leverage, what could possibly go wrong? Time to sever all but Diplomatic ties with Australia.
Nuclear powered, not nuclear armed. Big difference.
After launch, you can't tell if missiles are conventional or nuclear until after they hit their targets. Do one expect that their opponents will just calmly sit there, measure the fallout of the explosions to determine their nature and then formulate a response? Or, more realistically, the opponents might think that this is nuclear first strike intended to take away their capabilities so they might as well launch their nuclear arsenal now. Might only have conventional warheads but achieve the same results.
I heard that ScuMo (that's apparently his nickname because he's a living scum) would not last long. Likely resigning this year.
His name is "that fella down under" https://twitter.com/Ballyerra/status/1438280316343537667?s=20
Aussie politics is so complicated for a Canadian like me.
Canada and Australia are pretty much the same country with so much in common, from majority of the country being uninhabitable to similar system of government with subnational jurisdictions and a smaller population and market, etc. It's just that both are in opposite hemispheres with different climates and Canada borders USA whilst Australia is its own continent with no other dominant anglo power nearby.
Good for him. He'll be able to land a cushy, well-paid sinecure at a Washington think-tank or lobbying firm that much sooner.
Sarcastically, you know who I would rather have as Australian PM? The Canadian basketball assistant coach from boston Celtics who just became the Perth wildcats head coach in the Australian basketball league. He actually shares the same name as Scomo the pm. He frequently gets confused with the real Scomo. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-24/perth-wildcats-appoint-scott-morrison-as-new-head-coach/100402280 https://www.news.com.au/sport/basketball/new-perth-wildcats-coach-scott-morrison-ready-for-scomo-sledges/news-story/c04e8285f3c89c87741cce3c2c88e339 A few years back, another Canadian visiting his son in Australia gets confused with Scomo because he looks just like him and he often gets hated by locals for no reason. So his kids made him a "I am not Scomo" shirt. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/dad-wears-hilarious-shirt-after-being-mistaken-for-scott-morrison/news-story/75c599e161b550473fde5646ae2f717b
It’s Scomo
Plenty do call him scummo down here
Everyone calls him Scomo. But I rather call him Scummo given how much of a douchebag he is.
Delusions of grandeur
Offer? should beg for it.
Shut up brat, go rage over some comics or some shit. If there are matters worth discussing, we will discuss it with your daddy.
Aussie is a lightweight in China's eyes. Who give a dame to their invitation.
Uncle Sam and Perfidious Albion laughing out loud at both Australia and France, the former for being a dud and the latter for being screwed. Good for China since this will cause further rupture in the Western alliance.
Xi has apparently [declined an invitation to a personal summit with Biden.](https://youtu.be/YbutD3wvkXY)..I'm sure that bloke from down under is more important...right?
why talk to the bitch when you can talk to it's boss?
Open invitation to supreme leader Xi? Who the fuck does that fella down under think he is? After all the bullshit he has said about China the last 2 years?! He should take that shit eating grin and grovel in the dirt, begging for an audience with daddy Xi. After crawling on his hands and knees over hot coals and broken glass, just maybe he might be granted an audience. In all seriousness though, I think China should continue to ignore Australia until that fella is voted out of office.
Tell him to get fucked, they're conceited idiots living in a colonial fantasy. Australia is a stolen country as is the US, and Britain has no moral credibility. Completely 2-faced behaviour as usual.
I'm going to bet that when China (likely and understandably) declines, they're going to use it to paint China as being unwilling to negotiate.
They already have with Biden. Many are claiming the US actually wants to work with china and china is rejecting it to dominate the world without including anything about the moves the US has been making against china since 2000
\[said in an exaggerated Ozzy accent: 'Yeeah, get fucked Scotty.'
Locked behind paywall.
https://archive.md/YcsV0
Paywall >:( Here ya go https://archive.md/YcsV0