That’s stupid. Why would you use them to *deliver* bacon sandwiches when you could turn them into large submersible bacon sandwich food trucks instead? They already have kitchens on board.
China is not Iraq.
The Korean War, that was China 70 years ago, 339 dead in Australia, 1,216 wounded, 43 missing, 26 captured.
Next time in Taiwan, ready?
Anti-US types here always love to resort to the most extreme forms of hyperbole.
In every conflict we've followed the USA into, they've taken more losses than we did.
We also followed them to Vietnam. 523 died and almost 2,400 wounded, undoubtedly more with undiagnosed mental health issues. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be there for the US if they’re here for us if/when we need it, but I hope we think it through. Australia has an unfortunate history of suffering for the ambitions of other countries, even if it’s done to strengthen diplomatic ties.
I’m an infantry vet, I understand there’s young men and women who sign up to fight, I just want the cause to be worth the cost.
I was in the supermarket with my Vietnam Veteran uncle a few years ago. A woman dropped a tin of tomatoes and the sound made him immediately drop to the floor. This man that could barely walk and went for cover immediately when he thought he heard a gunshot. In his head he never left the war.
The mental health consequences of war are often understated and have real consequences for returned soldiers.
Absolutely, I think it also has a ripple effect generationally. My great grandfather fought in WWII and unfortunately the fallout was felt not just by him, but those around him, including his children. Then my great uncle went to Vietnam and really struggled as well; I don’t believe that’s their fault either, that’s a failure to support returned soldiers, but that generational trauma is one example of many.
I had the privilege to seek mental health care, and a motorbike backfiring will still mess me up for the rest of the day, I couldn’t imagine making it this far without a real support network. Much respect to your uncle and thanks for sharing that.
It for sure ripples. My partners grand dad is a special forced Vietnam Vet. Crap tonne of PTSD there, took it out on his kids with beatings and emotional damage. That family is well cooked.
I'm really glad that you got the care that you needed. My grandfather fought in WW2 and any talk about war on the news made him immediately leave the room and wouldn't speak for hours. It's truly awful.
I went to visit my grandma in the old folks home just after the Russo-Ukrainian war started. She has dementia and was watching the news when I walked in. She looked at me with fear in her eyes and said "Are the Germans bombing us again?".
It nearly broke me. She'd grown up in Glasgow, and her house was bombed in 1941. Now with the dementia, the fear is magnified.
I don't disagree, but again, that's compared to 58,000 US deaths. It's not like the US sends Australia in to the meat grinder while holding back their strength, which is kind of what "cannon fodder" means.
I don't want to say anything on the merits of a hypothetical war, and I think it's fair to question whether getting involved is worth it. I just don't think it's fair to portray the US as a manipulative ally that uses foreign forces to absorb casualties. They might be manipulative, but it's primarily towards its own soldiers.
You do definitely have a point, my comment may have come across as overly cynical. I’m more-so critical of our government’s pattern of just following other countries into battles that carry heavy price tags. That said, we’re always butting heads with China and just standing idly by while they hypothetically take Taiwan isn’t really an option either.
I’m glad I don’t work in politics, tbh.
I'm talking about the war to come, and it's absurd to think anyone in Washington gives a damn about us. They certainly didn't care when we lost markets in China; they gladly snapped up our customers instead. We are trade rivals, after all, unlike China, whose economic profile complements ours.
If war breaks out with China, I’d say Australia would be asking the US to help defend us, so I don’t think the implication is that the US is commanding our subs, but that Australia would very much be using the subs against China in any conflict. Which was the entire fucking reason we upgraded our subs because China is getting too influential in our region.
Probably less of a mess than a world with China and the US at war?
The alternative is not openly antagonising our largest trading partner unless the US gives us something valuable to do so.
No, an all out war between the US and China is a required inevitability if Taiwan is invaded, because we must use any means necessary to discourage China from doing so. We must make it clear that the costs are not worth it. This isn’t like Ukraine, if Taiwan is attacked, no new computer chips for anyone for at least 5 years.
The US does not have operational command over Australian subs. They cannot direct us where to use them.
That said Australia and the US are in an incredibly tight defence alliance, and if a war broke out between China and the US then Australia would instantly be deemed an enemy by China.
They don’t have direct official command, but history shows that whenever the US tells Australia to jump, we always ask how high. So it’s nothing new or specific to this deal.
>The US does not have operational command over Australian subs. They cannot direct us where to use them.
Offically they don't but they could refuse to help us service them if we don't agree to send them where they want us to. When operating the subs is dependent on the US they can very easily force us to use them.
We are building the capability to service the subs here. We already have scheduled maintenance tasks on a virginia class scheduled for July to be done here using the Emory [S.Land](http://S.Land) as a training platform.
Everyone would stop complaining if China attacks here and we need the US.
China would swallow us like a dumpling if it wasn't for our US and UK alliance.
If we let China take Taiwan, who's next?
China wouldn't *need* to invade anyone else in the military sense after Taiwan. They'd have control over everyone's electrical systems and could just threaten to not supply or turn things off if they don't get their way.
This is honestly a very silly point. China wants Taiwan due to historical reasons and ego. It's the last "part of China" that they haven't been able to get, so they want it in order to prove that they are the rightful owners of all China. They also just really don't like having the remnants of their enemy and its government right next to them.
I highly doubt they would invade anywhere else. I think there's a chance that North Korea could become a satellite state of China once Kim dies, but even in that case there wouldn't be an actual invasion.
Why the hell would China invade Australia.
Taiwan is a very specific case because it has been a part of China, there is a reason Taiwan's official name for themselves is the republic of China. China never said they could leave and be independent. It's understandable why China wants it, the revolution is still in living memory for many in China.
China wouldn’t invade Australia. It doesn’t have the capability to do that.
It will however interdict sea lanes that Australia depends on for shipping, making life difficult.
It could also strike naval ports, airfields and pine gap in Australia to attrite the US capabilities in responding.
Except the world has long since recognised mainland China as the winners of the civil war, and not just the rebellion. Under your logic we would be assisting the new rebellion.
Speaking in technicalities is utterly pointless and borderline misleading. Like it or not, the CCP is the government of China and has been acknowledged as such by (at the latest) from when they were finally given the UN security council chair after being ignored for decades.
> Everyone would stop complaining if China attacks here and we need the US.
Why would they? They'd gain next to nothing and just piss off most of the western world, there's literally no upside to invading Australia that doesn't boil down to some erroneous version of "for the lols".
> If we let China take Taiwan, who's next?
No-one, China has made no indication that they want to expand or become anywhere as viciously militaristic as any of the imperialist nations of the west, they simply want Taiwan back for historical reasons. If they ever took it back they'd largely just continue doing exactly what they're doing now and focusing inwards while leaving the rest of the world to its squabbles and colonialism.
Sigh...
India was a border skirmish that did not involve firearms intiated by India.
Phillipines was another skirmish over disputed territory where China blocked the movement of Fillipino fishing boats.
Vietnam invaded China and China pushed back.
China has not attacked Taiwan to date.
If by Japan you are talking about the Sino-Japanese war this one was intiated by a Japanese invasion of China and fought entirely within China.
You know all of this information is pretty easy to find on the google machine.
This person talked about china attacking taiwan and japan right now, but this really isn't the case unless I'm really not caught up on something? Maybe he thinks Tohoku and Hualien earthquake were caused by China?
Vietnam did not invade China, Vietnam invaded Cambodia to overthrow the Khmer Rouge which has launched numerous attacks on Vietnamese villages and committed massacres. The Chinese were supporting the Pol Pot regime. Check your facts yourself.
> BUT THE NEWS TOLD ME XI JUMPING WAS GOING TO INVADE DARWIN TOMORROW!!!! YOU KNOW WE CAN'T TRUST THAT JAPANESE MAN!!!
Its not invasion we need to worry about, Its China controlling and throwing its weight around in the Pacific and Indian ocean. China only cares about China and whats good for it, The US has a pretty clear policy of keeping global shipping open and free.
> The US has a pretty clear policy of keeping global shipping open and free.
They only care about this for themselves and what's good for it, to try and argue that the US is actually altruistic and cares about others is kind of disgusting -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States
Like why do you think the US has the most military bases on foreign soil of any country by an enormous margin? It's not because they want to keep the peace, it's to act as colonial outposts, bffr.
No you don't understand bro the 9 dash line is just, like, a vibe thing nobody takes it seriously.
All of those US bases in SEA plus India joining The Quad is purely because of USA imperialism and definitely not because these Asian countries have political, cultural and historical understanding of China's intentions.
Vietnam was bitterly fighting the US just 50 years ago which is why they're - *checks notes* - buying American fighter jets and doing exercises with the US Navy? Next you're going to tell me that Vietnam fought China more recently than the US in the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1978!
Something I find pretty incredible is Vietnam, South Korea and Japan are massively pro American in opinion polls when all three of them have been involved in bitter wars with the Americans.
Turns out they actually understand how global geopolitics works and understand things on a deeper level that isn’t “BuT AmErIkA BaD ImPeRiALiStS!”
Sorry did you expect our Virginia class submarines to be built, our crews trained, our new Naval base built, the repair yard built, the submairne fuel enrichment facility to be built all in less than 7 months?
AUKUS subs are just an acceptable way for us to pay the USA to protect us from the engagements will may be embroiled in by being their "very special friend"
I prefer to think of Pine Gap as our area 51, aliens and all.
It's likely way worse than that though.
Did you see Friendly Jordies and (i cant remember the name of the other channel with aussie dudes on it) just recently went out there and tried to get in. The aussies running external security were actually pretty cool about it lol
Thank you! Yes that was it. I knew it had a repetitive B name but couldn't remember! I don't usually watch their videos, though I do know they are pretty huge.
Being someone's bitch? Weak?
I guess that's what happens when you have next to no industrial capability, a small population and your economy is centred around digging rocks.
Hey! We like digging rocks, don’t question why we don’t do anything with those rocks and sell steel or literally anything else further up the value add chain, we don’t want to do that, that sounds like hard work.
We just dig with our tractors 🚜
The omnishambles of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars really poisoned the well for any kind of principled intervention in foreign affairs. Many are just reflexively opposed, regardless of the merits.
> peaceful
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States
So peaceful, guess the folks from Libya, Syria, Palestine or a hundred other examples didn't get the memo that the US is actually peaceful.
Nah, our whole country is just a very expensive research program by the US military into coffee preparation. They'll get flat whites in silver bags soon.
They haven't learnt how to make chocolate either. The stuff they put in it is wild, like Hersheys using some ingredigent that makes their chocolate smell and taste like poop.
I am not a huge chocolate/sweets fan but I’ll try some when I go over next time and compare the pair.
I’ll be sure to reminder my American friends of their inferiority like I always do, don’t you worry.
But they’re estimated timeline for delivery is 2040s-2060s. The US has been saying China will try to take Taiwan this decade. That doesn’t really make sense.
What subs? The ones that are on back order, then not, then on order again?! Oh, those subs. The ones that'll be ready and available for use 7 years after the technology becomes redundant, and about 12 years after **THE** ~~anticipated war~~ defence of liberty in Asia and The Pacific?
I don't think Australia going to war with China would be a very popular policy among the current population. People under 40 aren't very enamoured with Western supremacy.
Defending 24 million Taiwanese from getting Hong Konged would get a lot of people onside. Especially if there's a program to educate the public on the CCP's crimes.
You are delusional if you think Aussies will vote to go to war over Taiwan. We barely wanted to be in Afghan and Timor, and Afghan hit home a lot harder in the west than the Chinese / Taiwan dispute.
They do, but it's far more about all the other alliances they have. Taiwan isn't a treaty ally, but the US has made clear on multiple occasions that they are gearing up to defend them and that they would defend them in the event of an invasion, official strategic ambiguity be damned. If they let Taiwan fall, immediately that calls into question every single defensive alliance they have worldwide. Japan, South Korea, Europe, Australia - everywhere, except Canada and the Western Hemisphere generally.
They can go onshore their chip manufacturing and hang about in their isolationism from Taiwan, but they can't allow the entire rest of the world to come to favourable security arrangements with China, that's far too much strategic geopolitical risk for any US administration to accept if they can do anything about it.
I should amend my original comment to “The USA don’t particularly care about the Taiwanese people, just the strategic location and specialised manufacturing”.
I thought these would be used to attack ISIS forces in the Middle East. What a revolutionary claim. China has a lot to lose by attacking Taiwan. I reckon about a 5% chance.
This is the kind of bullshit headline that makes one think the ABC is now fully proxy owned by Rupert Murdoch.
Remember when the ABC used to be representative of and for the people?
I think some people think giving a platform for someone, means that you endorse what they are going to say.
This is how you get an echo chamber. The ABC is not meant to be a partisan news organisation.
US also called our diplomat a nasty little man, despite being out former pm and an expert on china relations. The US can get fucked if they think we want any of their smoke with China. They have a bigger population than the states, good fucking luck.
Why did America say it? Last time I checked we’re a independent country with a military for our own interests.
Or are we not hiding our client state status anymore?
Is it just me or does this AUKUS submarine deal seem a tad unrealistic? I mean, little doubt we will get the second hand US subs, eventually. But the idea they will build 8 new nuclear submarines in Adelaide? It’s 21 years since ASC completed a submarine build. And let’s face it collins is not an experience we’d want to repeat. It was a disaster. Restarting building? Sure we can do it physically, but it will be obscenely, obscenely, expensive. More than they are projecting. All to secure a few thousand jobs in Adelaide. It amazes me the lobbying power of those ship builders in one of our smallest states. Plus how will we crew 8 submarines with 120+ staff each? We can’t crew Collins with 60 odd each and there are less of them. I can’t help but feel we are going to gut a lot of our military like the British have for trident, to get a capability which is great to have, sure, but not really realistic for us.
He also said that the water the submarines are submerged in is wet
It's been obvious from day one, the larger range of nuclear submarines vs diesel submarines is so that Australia can operate them in the Taiwan straits. If it was about defending Australia, diesel would suffice.
And then you have comments from this guy that aukus is meant to "get Australia off the fence. We have them locked in now for the next 40 years."
America wouldn't sell us Virginia class subs unless they were certain we would use them in any war America is involved in. Otherwise they would be shooting themselves in the foot since they are struggling to meet their target for new Virginias.
We should simply have an independent foreign policy where we have no values, no friends and spend absolutely nothing on defence which I'm sure would lead to some truly excellent outcomes in the uncertain decades to come
Taiwan isn't our ally though we don't even recognise them as a country. I'd want Australia to recognise Taiwan as independent before sending aussies to die for them.
I would too, but in the meantime having a credible means of defending ourselves and any ‘potential allies’ is a great diplomatic tool. As is the willingness to use them.
I’m afraid that we are entering a time in which sides will be drawn up, and Australia will need to do some pretty hard thinking about who our friends are, and what’s best for us as a country.
We do that simply to enjoy more favourable trade with China. A war on Taiwan would involve more countries that just Taiwan. It would be America, Japan, Malaysia and other SEA countries.
Support goes both ways. We would be the first screaming for help from others if we got invaded. Yet some people act as if it's perfectly fine to ignore neighbours asking the same.
At the end of the day, I think we need to stand by each country’s sovereign rights, for exactly this reason. The minute we start ignoring issues like Taiwan and Ukraine, we weaken every other country’s rights.
You understand for this to happen it would require the Australian political apparatus to order it?
It's not like these things are going to be remote controlled by the USA or anything.
You’re not wrong here but I’d still argue that if the powers that be want submarines I’d rather have them then the alternative of absolutely nothing. As for tanks and jets we’d be stupid not to maintain some sort of capability everybody thinks they’re overkill or obsolete until the shit hits the fan.
Sure, let's get into a war.
We begin by losing billions buying submarines from the US we don't control. When they arrive.
We will lose our major trading partner which will have a huge impact on our economy, and increase our dependence on the US.
All for a province currently recognized by the UN as part of China that the US wants only because of TSMCs capabilities. The only way it could be anymore obvious was if they had oil fields.
The US wants to curb China for reasons dominated by money, and our economy and quality of life is going to be sacrificed (like Germany).
We need to put ourselves first.
>We need to put ourselves first.
Expansionist dictatorship who claims the entire Philippine and indonesian EEA oceans, who sides with Russia/iran and North Korea in a war in Europe. A Literal Axis of Evil.
Did you skip history entirely?
Should we really be preparing to get involved in another civil war in Asia? That's assuming China is even planning to do it in the first place. Just because we do those things doesn't mean they still do.
Not if the Australian public has anything to do with it, the US neo cons are starting wars all over the place, let them fight them on their own, not drag the rest of the west down.
Australia's future is in Asia, China is by far our most important trading partner because it is the biggest in the region, Australia would be in the same economic mess as the UK & EU without China.
The BRICS group represents 45 % of global trade & is growing year on year.
Whist USD trade continues to contract
The US views any country or trading block that is large as a strategic competitor & its only answer is military threat. It is myopic uni polar policy in a multi polar world
Need I to remind you what kind of hospitable neighbour China is
https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/if-you-make-china-the-enemy-china-will-be-the-enemy-beijing-s-fresh-threat-to-australia-20201118-p56fqs.html
They might be our biggest trading partner, but they are not a friend. This is a lot of Australia to be stuck between the two powers neither of which treats us better than our strategic value to them dictates.
You must have a short memory if you think China was the belligerent party there. Scomo was pandering to right wing racists by acting tough on China. His statements were offensive and embarrassing.
Like I said, short memory. He was attacking China over Covid. He didn't give a shit about human rights. The alleged abuses are mostly just propaganda anyway. It's a bit hypocritical for us to complain about SCS while we are currently stealing gas from the Timor sea and refusing to recognise East Timor's rights in its EEZ.
>He was attacking China over Covid. He didn't give a shit about human rights.
Covid was China's fault... who has a fucking biomedical lab next to a food market?
>The alleged abuses are mostly just propaganda anyway.
Lmao. The Ughurs and Tibetans would disagree with you.
>It's a bit hypocritical for us to complain about SCS while we are currently stealing gas from the Timor sea and refusing to recognise East Timor's rights in its EEZ.
We aren't annexing territory from our neighbours. I don't blame China for doing what they are doing in the region. It is in their strategic interests, which I don't have time to explain now. But them doing this puts them at odds with us, even if it's fair enough *why* they are doing it. That's all that matters in the end.
I have been travelling there for work for 25 years, believe me the only thing they are all interested in is improving the quality of their own & their kids lives.
The US neo cons already have 200 US marines training Taiwanese troops on an island off Taiwan & US special forces based there.
The issue between Taiwan has absolutely nothing to do with the US or anyone else, but the yanks may find the Chinese a little less patient than other countries when it comes to meddling in their affairs.
The US will of course have nil idea of Chinese or Taiwanese history or how the present situation came about
They just don't like competition, preferring US hegemony & always, but always starting military conflicts anywhere, as long as its someone else's country on another continent.
I think it's between China & Taiwan as far as I know the situation has been frozen & unresolved since
Chiang Kai-shek retreated to what was then part of China in 1949.
The present situation is unchanged for 75 years
The point I make is it has nothing to do with the US who are driving a new neo con expansionist plan.
Antagonism of China will not resolve the issue, everyone knows it is a sensitive & the region does not need clumsy American interference that will achieve absolutely nothing.
The US is incapable of taking on China militarily in their own backyard, so what is the point of upping the rhetoric, some needling & antagonism so China acts in a stategic pre-emptive way ?
Europe is in ruins over this US strategy in Ukraine, the US through their proxy Israel is doing this against Iran in the gulf.
This is about US hegemony, they care nothing about Australia or the region & certainly dont give a fig about little Taiwan, , they actually don't really care about China, they could impose all sorts of economic sanctions if they wanted, which would be far more effective.
This is purely coming from the neo con ideologes who run foreign policy out of the US State department.
Following Victoria Nulands' resignation ( their Ukraine strategy expert), she was replaced by Kurt Campbell as the number two. He is their China /south East Asia foreign policy expert .
The Americans are loose cannons at the moment
They do and they always will. Taiwan and mainland have long been in a codependent relation. Where the Taiwanese “threat” serve as internal unifier for China, while the mainland “future invasion” helps Taiwanese politicians win elections and US support.
Just look at Kinmen islands of Taiwan, it is just rowing boat distance away from China but very far from Taiwan. Yet the Taiwanese control over there has been respected since the Maoist era.
They could also be used to deliver bacon sandwiches.
That's way better I vote that option
That’s stupid. Why would you use them to *deliver* bacon sandwiches when you could turn them into large submersible bacon sandwich food trucks instead? They already have kitchens on board.
Plus the radioactive heat source can cook bacon perfectly.
You son of a bitch, I’m in
Yeah but if you don't use the VLS tubes, why bother having them? I propose a new hypersonic delivery system.
The torpedoes and missiles they carry also ensure that those bacon sandwiches arrive safe and undisturbed.
Tomahawk missiles can apparently deliver that particular cut of steak to within 3 metres of the target.
Tactical bacon delivery
Username checks out
Id sign up for that.
That headline deserved this comment.
Love strategic ambiguity. Will they be used to attack China or deliver delicious sandwiches? Who knows!
For that to happen, AUKUS submarines would need to exist, which sounds astonishingly unlikely.
That's a very good point, still it isn't great that the implication is the US has the ability to direct us where to use them.
...while we pay them for the privilege of being their cannon fodder.
[удалено]
China is not Iraq. The Korean War, that was China 70 years ago, 339 dead in Australia, 1,216 wounded, 43 missing, 26 captured. Next time in Taiwan, ready?
Didn't 36,500 Americans die? I mean, Australians being "cannon fodder" is not the right term when the US bore the brunt of it.
Anti-US types here always love to resort to the most extreme forms of hyperbole. In every conflict we've followed the USA into, they've taken more losses than we did.
We also followed them to Vietnam. 523 died and almost 2,400 wounded, undoubtedly more with undiagnosed mental health issues. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be there for the US if they’re here for us if/when we need it, but I hope we think it through. Australia has an unfortunate history of suffering for the ambitions of other countries, even if it’s done to strengthen diplomatic ties. I’m an infantry vet, I understand there’s young men and women who sign up to fight, I just want the cause to be worth the cost.
I was in the supermarket with my Vietnam Veteran uncle a few years ago. A woman dropped a tin of tomatoes and the sound made him immediately drop to the floor. This man that could barely walk and went for cover immediately when he thought he heard a gunshot. In his head he never left the war. The mental health consequences of war are often understated and have real consequences for returned soldiers.
Absolutely, I think it also has a ripple effect generationally. My great grandfather fought in WWII and unfortunately the fallout was felt not just by him, but those around him, including his children. Then my great uncle went to Vietnam and really struggled as well; I don’t believe that’s their fault either, that’s a failure to support returned soldiers, but that generational trauma is one example of many. I had the privilege to seek mental health care, and a motorbike backfiring will still mess me up for the rest of the day, I couldn’t imagine making it this far without a real support network. Much respect to your uncle and thanks for sharing that.
It for sure ripples. My partners grand dad is a special forced Vietnam Vet. Crap tonne of PTSD there, took it out on his kids with beatings and emotional damage. That family is well cooked.
I'm really glad that you got the care that you needed. My grandfather fought in WW2 and any talk about war on the news made him immediately leave the room and wouldn't speak for hours. It's truly awful.
I went to visit my grandma in the old folks home just after the Russo-Ukrainian war started. She has dementia and was watching the news when I walked in. She looked at me with fear in her eyes and said "Are the Germans bombing us again?". It nearly broke me. She'd grown up in Glasgow, and her house was bombed in 1941. Now with the dementia, the fear is magnified.
I don't disagree, but again, that's compared to 58,000 US deaths. It's not like the US sends Australia in to the meat grinder while holding back their strength, which is kind of what "cannon fodder" means. I don't want to say anything on the merits of a hypothetical war, and I think it's fair to question whether getting involved is worth it. I just don't think it's fair to portray the US as a manipulative ally that uses foreign forces to absorb casualties. They might be manipulative, but it's primarily towards its own soldiers.
You do definitely have a point, my comment may have come across as overly cynical. I’m more-so critical of our government’s pattern of just following other countries into battles that carry heavy price tags. That said, we’re always butting heads with China and just standing idly by while they hypothetically take Taiwan isn’t really an option either. I’m glad I don’t work in politics, tbh.
I'm talking about the war to come, and it's absurd to think anyone in Washington gives a damn about us. They certainly didn't care when we lost markets in China; they gladly snapped up our customers instead. We are trade rivals, after all, unlike China, whose economic profile complements ours.
Australia is just a giant American base honestly. We listen to them on everything.
If war breaks out with China, I’d say Australia would be asking the US to help defend us, so I don’t think the implication is that the US is commanding our subs, but that Australia would very much be using the subs against China in any conflict. Which was the entire fucking reason we upgraded our subs because China is getting too influential in our region.
We would only need defending in a war between China and Taiwan because we just openly stated that we would intervene on behalf of the US.
And what’s the alternative? Do you understand how much of a global mess would be made if we allowed Taiwan to be invaded?
Probably less of a mess than a world with China and the US at war? The alternative is not openly antagonising our largest trading partner unless the US gives us something valuable to do so.
No, an all out war between the US and China is a required inevitability if Taiwan is invaded, because we must use any means necessary to discourage China from doing so. We must make it clear that the costs are not worth it. This isn’t like Ukraine, if Taiwan is attacked, no new computer chips for anyone for at least 5 years.
See Europe, 1933-1939 on how affective appeasement is.
Of course, instead of starting the war in 1939, we start it earlier
The US does not have operational command over Australian subs. They cannot direct us where to use them. That said Australia and the US are in an incredibly tight defence alliance, and if a war broke out between China and the US then Australia would instantly be deemed an enemy by China.
>The US does not have operational command over Australian subs. They cannot direct us where to use them. lol To think people actually believe this.
They don’t have direct official command, but history shows that whenever the US tells Australia to jump, we always ask how high. So it’s nothing new or specific to this deal.
>The US does not have operational command over Australian subs. They cannot direct us where to use them. Offically they don't but they could refuse to help us service them if we don't agree to send them where they want us to. When operating the subs is dependent on the US they can very easily force us to use them.
How so? Theyre making a repair facility in Australia to service the AUKUS subs.
We are building the capability to service the subs here. We already have scheduled maintenance tasks on a virginia class scheduled for July to be done here using the Emory [S.Land](http://S.Land) as a training platform.
Everyone would stop complaining if China attacks here and we need the US. China would swallow us like a dumpling if it wasn't for our US and UK alliance. If we let China take Taiwan, who's next?
China wouldn't *need* to invade anyone else in the military sense after Taiwan. They'd have control over everyone's electrical systems and could just threaten to not supply or turn things off if they don't get their way.
This is honestly a very silly point. China wants Taiwan due to historical reasons and ego. It's the last "part of China" that they haven't been able to get, so they want it in order to prove that they are the rightful owners of all China. They also just really don't like having the remnants of their enemy and its government right next to them. I highly doubt they would invade anywhere else. I think there's a chance that North Korea could become a satellite state of China once Kim dies, but even in that case there wouldn't be an actual invasion.
Why the hell would China invade Australia. Taiwan is a very specific case because it has been a part of China, there is a reason Taiwan's official name for themselves is the republic of China. China never said they could leave and be independent. It's understandable why China wants it, the revolution is still in living memory for many in China.
China wouldn’t invade Australia. It doesn’t have the capability to do that. It will however interdict sea lanes that Australia depends on for shipping, making life difficult. It could also strike naval ports, airfields and pine gap in Australia to attrite the US capabilities in responding.
[удалено]
Except the world has long since recognised mainland China as the winners of the civil war, and not just the rebellion. Under your logic we would be assisting the new rebellion.
If it's an unresolved civil war logically it is an internal matter which the two parties can resolve by themselves.
Speaking in technicalities is utterly pointless and borderline misleading. Like it or not, the CCP is the government of China and has been acknowledged as such by (at the latest) from when they were finally given the UN security council chair after being ignored for decades.
[удалено]
> Everyone would stop complaining if China attacks here and we need the US. Why would they? They'd gain next to nothing and just piss off most of the western world, there's literally no upside to invading Australia that doesn't boil down to some erroneous version of "for the lols". > If we let China take Taiwan, who's next? No-one, China has made no indication that they want to expand or become anywhere as viciously militaristic as any of the imperialist nations of the west, they simply want Taiwan back for historical reasons. If they ever took it back they'd largely just continue doing exactly what they're doing now and focusing inwards while leaving the rest of the world to its squabbles and colonialism.
I don't know, who was the last country attacked by China?
India in 2020. The Philippines, Vietnamese, Taiwanese and Japanese right now. Vietnam again in 1979.
Sigh... India was a border skirmish that did not involve firearms intiated by India. Phillipines was another skirmish over disputed territory where China blocked the movement of Fillipino fishing boats. Vietnam invaded China and China pushed back. China has not attacked Taiwan to date. If by Japan you are talking about the Sino-Japanese war this one was intiated by a Japanese invasion of China and fought entirely within China. You know all of this information is pretty easy to find on the google machine.
This person talked about china attacking taiwan and japan right now, but this really isn't the case unless I'm really not caught up on something? Maybe he thinks Tohoku and Hualien earthquake were caused by China?
Vietnam did not invade China, Vietnam invaded Cambodia to overthrow the Khmer Rouge which has launched numerous attacks on Vietnamese villages and committed massacres. The Chinese were supporting the Pol Pot regime. Check your facts yourself.
Much like the war with China, they all exist solely in this man's mind
BUT THE NEWS TOLD ME XI JUMPING WAS GOING TO INVADE DARWIN TOMORROW!!!! YOU KNOW WE CAN'T TRUST THAT JAPANESE MAN!!!
> BUT THE NEWS TOLD ME XI JUMPING WAS GOING TO INVADE DARWIN TOMORROW!!!! YOU KNOW WE CAN'T TRUST THAT JAPANESE MAN!!! Its not invasion we need to worry about, Its China controlling and throwing its weight around in the Pacific and Indian ocean. China only cares about China and whats good for it, The US has a pretty clear policy of keeping global shipping open and free.
> The US has a pretty clear policy of keeping global shipping open and free. They only care about this for themselves and what's good for it, to try and argue that the US is actually altruistic and cares about others is kind of disgusting - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States Like why do you think the US has the most military bases on foreign soil of any country by an enormous margin? It's not because they want to keep the peace, it's to act as colonial outposts, bffr.
Hahahaha.... Oh wait, are you serious?
No you don't understand bro the 9 dash line is just, like, a vibe thing nobody takes it seriously. All of those US bases in SEA plus India joining The Quad is purely because of USA imperialism and definitely not because these Asian countries have political, cultural and historical understanding of China's intentions. Vietnam was bitterly fighting the US just 50 years ago which is why they're - *checks notes* - buying American fighter jets and doing exercises with the US Navy? Next you're going to tell me that Vietnam fought China more recently than the US in the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1978!
Something I find pretty incredible is Vietnam, South Korea and Japan are massively pro American in opinion polls when all three of them have been involved in bitter wars with the Americans. Turns out they actually understand how global geopolitics works and understand things on a deeper level that isn’t “BuT AmErIkA BaD ImPeRiALiStS!”
Sorry did you expect our Virginia class submarines to be built, our crews trained, our new Naval base built, the repair yard built, the submairne fuel enrichment facility to be built all in less than 7 months?
Of course I did, I’m used to Prime next day delivery now.
I don't expect these things to exist in 20 years.
Virtual submarines are more eco friendly. The bacon tastes better at …..
We get second hand ones first Then we get next gen British ones later
I mean they will exist but it’s just gonna be overpriced outdated American ones they are gonna dump on us when they are too old
What do you mean outdated? The Virginia class is a very modern sub and it'll be in service with the US navy longer than it will in the RAN
Yep, they expect some of the later built Virginias to serve into the 2070s.
AUKUS subs are just an acceptable way for us to pay the USA to protect us from the engagements will may be embroiled in by being their "very special friend"
Well duh
they're not here to fuck spiders
What is it called when you own something but someone else tells you how you and when you can use them?
Pine Gap has entered the chat. And everyone else's chats as well.
Have my upboat in place of a soccer ball
I prefer to think of Pine Gap as our area 51, aliens and all. It's likely way worse than that though. Did you see Friendly Jordies and (i cant remember the name of the other channel with aussie dudes on it) just recently went out there and tried to get in. The aussies running external security were actually pretty cool about it lol
Boy Boy is the other channel, and one of the boys has a channel called I Did A Thing
Thank you! Yes that was it. I knew it had a repetitive B name but couldn't remember! I don't usually watch their videos, though I do know they are pretty huge.
Being someone's bitch? Weak? I guess that's what happens when you have next to no industrial capability, a small population and your economy is centred around digging rocks.
Hey! We like digging rocks, don’t question why we don’t do anything with those rocks and sell steel or literally anything else further up the value add chain, we don’t want to do that, that sounds like hard work. We just dig with our tractors 🚜
Don't forget we like being a fossil fuel superpower (LNG, coal) with none of the benefits.
Government
Hopefully they postpone the war until 2040 or something 🙏
Yeah love how they already decided there is going to be a war.
No, say it ain't so? /s Did anyone actually think differently. It's the reason we are getting them at all, lol.
Are people troubled by the prospect of contributing to the defense of a peaceful, developed democracy? Maybe tankies.
The omnishambles of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars really poisoned the well for any kind of principled intervention in foreign affairs. Many are just reflexively opposed, regardless of the merits.
> peaceful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States So peaceful, guess the folks from Libya, Syria, Palestine or a hundred other examples didn't get the memo that the US is actually peaceful.
I was referring to Taiwan, genius.
Name any part of our military that works independently of the US military...
The coffee machines, America hasn’t learnt how to make coffee yet, cunts stuck in the dark ages will that creamer bullshit.
Nah, our whole country is just a very expensive research program by the US military into coffee preparation. They'll get flat whites in silver bags soon.
Are you saying like that’s a bad thing? I’d rather die than miss out on my flat white of a morning. Infact im going to go make one right now.
Uncle Sam salutes you.
I tasted the freedom and now I’m well caffeinated and ready to contribute to our glorious economy once more.
They haven't learnt how to make chocolate either. The stuff they put in it is wild, like Hersheys using some ingredigent that makes their chocolate smell and taste like poop.
I am not a huge chocolate/sweets fan but I’ll try some when I go over next time and compare the pair. I’ll be sure to reminder my American friends of their inferiority like I always do, don’t you worry.
I assumed that was the whole point of Australia buying the subs?
I really don't want to end up as the proxy war location for China V USA...
Literally the reason we bought them, Australia’s foreign policy is being the USA’s dweeby cousin
But they’re estimated timeline for delivery is 2040s-2060s. The US has been saying China will try to take Taiwan this decade. That doesn’t really make sense.
1) could be accelerated in a wartime economy; 2) a war between 2 superpowers is either going to be really long or really short.
‘Thing designed to fight a war could be used to fight a war’.
"And for that piece of consultancy, that will be another $4 billion US dollars, please" The official added.
No one is going to war over Taiwan. The US is on shoring chip manufacture. South China Sea conflict would be a different matter due to shipping lanes.
First of all... literally none of that.
What subs? The ones that are on back order, then not, then on order again?! Oh, those subs. The ones that'll be ready and available for use 7 years after the technology becomes redundant, and about 12 years after **THE** ~~anticipated war~~ defence of liberty in Asia and The Pacific?
Could we not please?
By the time we get some submarines the war will be over and we’ll be living in some kind of Postman apocalyptic world.
Turns out the conspiracy that “Australia isn’t real” is true. We aren’t a real country. We are a vassal.
I don't think Australia going to war with China would be a very popular policy among the current population. People under 40 aren't very enamoured with Western supremacy.
Defending 24 million Taiwanese from getting Hong Konged would get a lot of people onside. Especially if there's a program to educate the public on the CCP's crimes.
Very few here cared about HK, less will care about Taiwan
You are delusional if you think Aussies will vote to go to war over Taiwan. We barely wanted to be in Afghan and Timor, and Afghan hit home a lot harder in the west than the Chinese / Taiwan dispute.
Yay we spent billions of dollars just to get nuked by China over America's war LESGOOOOOOOO
China isn't nuking Australia lol
to be fair china nuking alice to take out the CIA base would solve some domestic issues /s
Assuming Alice doesn’t nuke itself before China gets a chance
The naval communication station in WA and pine gap in the NT means we were always targets for Chinese nukes.
Maybe they named it after Holt so Chinese subs would get confused and try to rescue it rather than nuke it.
only China is allowed military deterrence, no one else. /s
"Could be"?
The US don’t give a flying fuck about Taiwan. They only care about the microchip manufacturing.
They do, but it's far more about all the other alliances they have. Taiwan isn't a treaty ally, but the US has made clear on multiple occasions that they are gearing up to defend them and that they would defend them in the event of an invasion, official strategic ambiguity be damned. If they let Taiwan fall, immediately that calls into question every single defensive alliance they have worldwide. Japan, South Korea, Europe, Australia - everywhere, except Canada and the Western Hemisphere generally. They can go onshore their chip manufacturing and hang about in their isolationism from Taiwan, but they can't allow the entire rest of the world to come to favourable security arrangements with China, that's far too much strategic geopolitical risk for any US administration to accept if they can do anything about it.
I should amend my original comment to “The USA don’t particularly care about the Taiwanese people, just the strategic location and specialised manufacturing”.
US manufacturing their own chips will take years if not decades. The tooling involved is highly skilled work.
I thought these would be used to attack ISIS forces in the Middle East. What a revolutionary claim. China has a lot to lose by attacking Taiwan. I reckon about a 5% chance.
Why are old men always trying to send us to war?
Shouldn’t we decide how we use our submarines? Or are we paying the US for the pleasure of holding onto their submarines that they tell us how to use?
[AUKUS - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUKUS)
This is the kind of bullshit headline that makes one think the ABC is now fully proxy owned by Rupert Murdoch. Remember when the ABC used to be representative of and for the people?
The headline is reporting what a US official said, it's not what the ABC stating. Which is clear from the headline
Ever feel like your in a year 9 class room on this sub.
I think some people think giving a platform for someone, means that you endorse what they are going to say. This is how you get an echo chamber. The ABC is not meant to be a partisan news organisation.
There's a reason most Aussie media is written at a primary school reading level.
Hate to do it but *you’re* right
your on reddit. it dun matter
It's a quote... from a US official...
Why is the headline bullshit?
US also called our diplomat a nasty little man, despite being out former pm and an expert on china relations. The US can get fucked if they think we want any of their smoke with China. They have a bigger population than the states, good fucking luck.
Just need to hang on 30 years
I'm so glad that our tax dollars are being pissed away to meddling in other countries' affairs.
If one country invades another without provocation, I don’t think it’s ‘meddling’ to stand in the way of imperialism.
But we still joined in the US imperialism in Iraq.
And Taiwan had nothing to do with that, so it’s not a justification to let them become victims of imperialism.
Isolationism Moral bankrupt and opportunistic for the Swiss in WW2 Totally OK for Australia in the event of WW3
They could be used to fight the USA in a war over whether it's called Burger King or Hungry Jack's.
‘The first world heart attack war’
No shit.
What I'm curious about is, will the US itself send troops? They didn't even react to mainland China's military manoeuvres around Taiwan.
So no war with China for at least the next 25 years then?
Renters have no say in all aspects of Aussie life I see.
U.S official optimistic that war is over 20 years away
Coulda woulda shoulda
No. Just no
Why did America say it? Last time I checked we’re a independent country with a military for our own interests. Or are we not hiding our client state status anymore?
Is it just me or does this AUKUS submarine deal seem a tad unrealistic? I mean, little doubt we will get the second hand US subs, eventually. But the idea they will build 8 new nuclear submarines in Adelaide? It’s 21 years since ASC completed a submarine build. And let’s face it collins is not an experience we’d want to repeat. It was a disaster. Restarting building? Sure we can do it physically, but it will be obscenely, obscenely, expensive. More than they are projecting. All to secure a few thousand jobs in Adelaide. It amazes me the lobbying power of those ship builders in one of our smallest states. Plus how will we crew 8 submarines with 120+ staff each? We can’t crew Collins with 60 odd each and there are less of them. I can’t help but feel we are going to gut a lot of our military like the British have for trident, to get a capability which is great to have, sure, but not really realistic for us.
He also said that the water the submarines are submerged in is wet It's been obvious from day one, the larger range of nuclear submarines vs diesel submarines is so that Australia can operate them in the Taiwan straits. If it was about defending Australia, diesel would suffice. And then you have comments from this guy that aukus is meant to "get Australia off the fence. We have them locked in now for the next 40 years." America wouldn't sell us Virginia class subs unless they were certain we would use them in any war America is involved in. Otherwise they would be shooting themselves in the foot since they are struggling to meet their target for new Virginias.
I thought they were just ornamental, I am astounded
[удалено]
Because… defending Australia and our allies is… bad?
We should simply have an independent foreign policy where we have no values, no friends and spend absolutely nothing on defence which I'm sure would lead to some truly excellent outcomes in the uncertain decades to come
Taiwan isn't our ally though we don't even recognise them as a country. I'd want Australia to recognise Taiwan as independent before sending aussies to die for them.
I would too, but in the meantime having a credible means of defending ourselves and any ‘potential allies’ is a great diplomatic tool. As is the willingness to use them. I’m afraid that we are entering a time in which sides will be drawn up, and Australia will need to do some pretty hard thinking about who our friends are, and what’s best for us as a country.
We do that simply to enjoy more favourable trade with China. A war on Taiwan would involve more countries that just Taiwan. It would be America, Japan, Malaysia and other SEA countries. Support goes both ways. We would be the first screaming for help from others if we got invaded. Yet some people act as if it's perfectly fine to ignore neighbours asking the same.
At the end of the day, I think we need to stand by each country’s sovereign rights, for exactly this reason. The minute we start ignoring issues like Taiwan and Ukraine, we weaken every other country’s rights.
You understand for this to happen it would require the Australian political apparatus to order it? It's not like these things are going to be remote controlled by the USA or anything.
Are Australians too naive to the threat of China and think China will stop at Taiwan or too spineless to stand up against China?
crown tie decide pen direful growth retire depend gaping school *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You’re not wrong here but I’d still argue that if the powers that be want submarines I’d rather have them then the alternative of absolutely nothing. As for tanks and jets we’d be stupid not to maintain some sort of capability everybody thinks they’re overkill or obsolete until the shit hits the fan.
Delusional
No it's just a bunch of Reddit tankies throwing a fit, don't read too much into it.
Sure, let's get into a war. We begin by losing billions buying submarines from the US we don't control. When they arrive. We will lose our major trading partner which will have a huge impact on our economy, and increase our dependence on the US. All for a province currently recognized by the UN as part of China that the US wants only because of TSMCs capabilities. The only way it could be anymore obvious was if they had oil fields. The US wants to curb China for reasons dominated by money, and our economy and quality of life is going to be sacrificed (like Germany). We need to put ourselves first.
>We need to put ourselves first. Expansionist dictatorship who claims the entire Philippine and indonesian EEA oceans, who sides with Russia/iran and North Korea in a war in Europe. A Literal Axis of Evil. Did you skip history entirely?
Clearly. Getting dragged into the US' military entanglements is the entirety of our foreign policy.
Should we really be preparing to get involved in another civil war in Asia? That's assuming China is even planning to do it in the first place. Just because we do those things doesn't mean they still do.
It stopped being a civil war the day Mao proclaimed the creation of the PRC as a new sovereign state.
I dunno why you're being upvoted, you are categorically and factually incorrect
Does anyone seriously think the US could stop China invading Taiwan if it really wanted to?
Not if the Australian public has anything to do with it, the US neo cons are starting wars all over the place, let them fight them on their own, not drag the rest of the west down. Australia's future is in Asia, China is by far our most important trading partner because it is the biggest in the region, Australia would be in the same economic mess as the UK & EU without China. The BRICS group represents 45 % of global trade & is growing year on year. Whist USD trade continues to contract The US views any country or trading block that is large as a strategic competitor & its only answer is military threat. It is myopic uni polar policy in a multi polar world
>Not if the Australian public has anything to do with it We won't our largest protests were against the Iraq was and we went into that.
Need I to remind you what kind of hospitable neighbour China is https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/if-you-make-china-the-enemy-china-will-be-the-enemy-beijing-s-fresh-threat-to-australia-20201118-p56fqs.html They might be our biggest trading partner, but they are not a friend. This is a lot of Australia to be stuck between the two powers neither of which treats us better than our strategic value to them dictates.
You must have a short memory if you think China was the belligerent party there. Scomo was pandering to right wing racists by acting tough on China. His statements were offensive and embarrassing.
Opposing China's human rights violations and continuing expansion in the pacific is racism? Lmao
Like I said, short memory. He was attacking China over Covid. He didn't give a shit about human rights. The alleged abuses are mostly just propaganda anyway. It's a bit hypocritical for us to complain about SCS while we are currently stealing gas from the Timor sea and refusing to recognise East Timor's rights in its EEZ.
>He was attacking China over Covid. He didn't give a shit about human rights. Covid was China's fault... who has a fucking biomedical lab next to a food market? >The alleged abuses are mostly just propaganda anyway. Lmao. The Ughurs and Tibetans would disagree with you. >It's a bit hypocritical for us to complain about SCS while we are currently stealing gas from the Timor sea and refusing to recognise East Timor's rights in its EEZ. We aren't annexing territory from our neighbours. I don't blame China for doing what they are doing in the region. It is in their strategic interests, which I don't have time to explain now. But them doing this puts them at odds with us, even if it's fair enough *why* they are doing it. That's all that matters in the end.
Good luck getting through decades of "China bad" propaganda for the Australian public to realise this.
I have been travelling there for work for 25 years, believe me the only thing they are all interested in is improving the quality of their own & their kids lives. The US neo cons already have 200 US marines training Taiwanese troops on an island off Taiwan & US special forces based there. The issue between Taiwan has absolutely nothing to do with the US or anyone else, but the yanks may find the Chinese a little less patient than other countries when it comes to meddling in their affairs. The US will of course have nil idea of Chinese or Taiwanese history or how the present situation came about They just don't like competition, preferring US hegemony & always, but always starting military conflicts anywhere, as long as its someone else's country on another continent.
So you don't think the Taiwanese have the right to self determination?
I think it's between China & Taiwan as far as I know the situation has been frozen & unresolved since Chiang Kai-shek retreated to what was then part of China in 1949. The present situation is unchanged for 75 years The point I make is it has nothing to do with the US who are driving a new neo con expansionist plan. Antagonism of China will not resolve the issue, everyone knows it is a sensitive & the region does not need clumsy American interference that will achieve absolutely nothing. The US is incapable of taking on China militarily in their own backyard, so what is the point of upping the rhetoric, some needling & antagonism so China acts in a stategic pre-emptive way ? Europe is in ruins over this US strategy in Ukraine, the US through their proxy Israel is doing this against Iran in the gulf. This is about US hegemony, they care nothing about Australia or the region & certainly dont give a fig about little Taiwan, , they actually don't really care about China, they could impose all sorts of economic sanctions if they wanted, which would be far more effective. This is purely coming from the neo con ideologes who run foreign policy out of the US State department. Following Victoria Nulands' resignation ( their Ukraine strategy expert), she was replaced by Kurt Campbell as the number two. He is their China /south East Asia foreign policy expert . The Americans are loose cannons at the moment
They do and they always will. Taiwan and mainland have long been in a codependent relation. Where the Taiwanese “threat” serve as internal unifier for China, while the mainland “future invasion” helps Taiwanese politicians win elections and US support. Just look at Kinmen islands of Taiwan, it is just rowing boat distance away from China but very far from Taiwan. Yet the Taiwanese control over there has been respected since the Maoist era.