For anyone still naive enough to think that the war in Afghanistan was to save a few peasant women from having to wear the burkha rather than to put a ring of steel around Chine I would let you know this. Biden has announced that the US and their pucky little lapdog, The UK, are to supply Australia with nuke subs. Fresh off their ignominious defeat in Afghanistan they are moving to a different tack. Keep the "3 eyes" on China and control the Pacific.
Listen to yourself.
Imagine Loyalists and Unionists running off to form a break-away region in a part of this country after say, an internal rebellion, then pretending to be the rightful government of Ireland.
Then after real poitik takes root and the rest of world decides that ROI is actually the government of Ireland, you're here to tell us nope, it's those unionists in the north that are. And if they aren't, well then they must be awarded their very own country.
There is no such thing as 'NATO spec'. France and the UK have nuclear powered and armed subs, but they are not built to a common spec and they are quite different from each other.
These subs won't be getting their fuel from Australia because it has no nuclear enrichment infrastructure. Uranium ore is long way away from nuclear fuel rods.
These subs will use nuclear fuel instead of diesel. That is the be-all and end-all of this. iI should be as controversial as replacing the diesel generators with a big battery pack, but a lot of people seem to lose 75% of their inate intelligence anytime the word 'nuclear' is used.
Sorry, but that's BS. Building something to NATO standard does not automatically mean it's nuclear capable. Case in point is the F/A-18 Super Hornet order that the Luftwaffe just placed. They're fully NATO compatible, obviously, but will require significant modifications to be able to carry the B-61 nuclear bombs based in Germany under NATO's Nuclear Sharing program.
It's the same for submarines. Just because a boat can fire standardised NATO weapons, that does not mean it is automatically able to deploy nukes. First of all, there's the command-and-control side of things. Even with the US' lax attitude to nuclear weapons control in the past, they won't just allow an ally to store any nuclear-tipped cruise missiles next to regular torpedoes, especially since torpedo rooms are often used as extra berthing on subs. So there'll need to be a specialised storage area for nuclear weapons, which will further constrain the already limited space within a submarine's pressure hull. That compartment will need to be access controlled so that the weapons can only be launched after proper authorisation. The submarine will require the necessary communication and authentication system, and any nuclear weapons would likely be subject to the SIOP or whatever the US call it nowadays, meaning that Australia wouldn't have operational control over such weapons in the first place.
The Aussies have been upping the anti-china rhetoric for the past few years now, it's clear they and of course the US now see China as a credible threat.
Australia as a nuclear power would make a nice deterrent in the US' eyes - another strong Western power to reign them in.
True, but technology for creating/delivering nuclear weapons is, which is what a NATO standard built submarine is, and as I mentioned before, I doubt the UK or US will be the place these subs will be getting refuelled, especially with Uranium Ore reserves that Aus have... I think it would be incredibly naïve to think it will be not built to NATO spec, or think it will be refuelled in the UK or US...
If the US and UK were to sell this system/technology to cover those two points to Aus, that would be an infringement, however, if Aus were to build it itself with knowledge share from US/UK, this circumnavigates the NPT.
If it were a simple nuclear sub, they wouldn't need to liaise with the IAEA
There a bit more info here.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42390/australian-navy-goes-nuclear-with-future-submarine-force
It would seem to run counter to the current affairs forum charter. Seems more appropriate for after hours or the conspiracy forum.
Though its an interesting news piece if it was posted on its own.
The white paper provides a very good insight into the Chinese drive to improve their capabilities. I'd agree and simplify the explanation further.
China are seeking military and in particular force projection and capacity commensurate with their economic hegemony. China has a naval strategy focused very much on its immediate vicinity, Pacific, Indian Ocean and south China sea. It's soon to be a 3 carrier navy and the belief is that the new Type 003 will be CATOBAR making it comparable to only the US and France in being able to launch fully fuelled and fully armed aircraft. The 003 will also likely be lead ship of a class of at least 3.
That could put China over the top versus and US-UK-AUs alliance and represents a serious threat to India also.
I think that any Pacific pact needs to bring India along with it. Both to remove it from Russian influence sphere and to allow greater range of flexible response to entire Indo-Pac region. The Rafale deal, theMMRCA programme and US/French efforts to sell fighters along with recent GE engine deal could signal and Indian pivot towards a similar deal.
The question is why are they expanding their military.
There are obviously local territorial disputes. But the main driver would seem to protect its overseas interests.
"....
Turbulence, terrorism, and piracy, as well as natural disasters and epidemics in some areas, have posed threats to China’s overseas interests. The changing international arena is forcing the country to rethink its strategies. According to “The Diversified Employment of China’s Armed Forces,”
With the gradual integration of China’s economy into the world economic system, overseas interests have become an integral component of China’s national interests. Security issues are increasingly prominent, involving overseas energy and resources, strategic sea lines of communication, and Chinese nationals and legal persons overseas. Vessel protection at sea, evacuation of Chinese nationals overseas, and emergency rescue have become important ways and means for the PLA to safeguard national interests and fulfill China’s international obligations.47
The latest white paper onChina’s Military Strategy lists safeguarding “the security of the country’s overseas interests” and its “security and interest in new domains” as a strategic task to be shouldered by its armed forces.48
China’s use of its military in evacuation operations shows growing capability and confidence in that capability. While some might view China’s increasing use of its military overseas as a threat, China sees it as a necessity. Furthermore, as China expands its overseas interests abroad, the Chinese government and military are forced to increase their involvement. China is taking steps that indicate the PLA will become increasingly more active in the evacuation of its citizens overseas, which means that it will most likely also increase its presence in other ways overseas. The question is, how far will it go?..."
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/November-December-2017/Compelling-Reasons-for-the-Expansion-of-Chinese-Military-Forces/
I don't care, I just want my outrage. This format of posting a news article and then completely misrepresenting it really does it for me, it's amazing if one of these rolls in when I'm having my morning coffee. I spend the rest of the day angry at everything for absolutely no reason.
The US needs to make some more neutron weapons. Military simulations indicate that they are probably the only answer to China's ability to throw cannon fodder at any conflict. Incredible to think Macarthur might have been right when he called on nuking the Chinese forces in the Korean conflict.
A logical extension of your argument is that Kuwait, Singapore, South Sudan, Belgium, the former Soviet Republics and indeed any country that has ever seceded or won independence from another should not ever be granted UN recognition and indeed that recognition of a Country as being free and independent should vest upon UN recognition?
Utter nonsense, but interesting to read on an Irish website? What do the Chinese call the King's Shilling?
China is almost constantly in conflict with someone.
Most of what they are using are russian clones and clones of American equipment , even the Israeli's have sold them equipment ,but like that there big stealth programs have turned out to be anything but Stealth ,they have numbers but in this day and age it doesn't add up to much ,huge columns of men and equipment tend to turn into killing fields without ever having to put other men on the ground
They are very aggressive. Instead of waging wars they are acquiring territory by stealth and acts of fait accompli - whereby they invade and occupy land militarily and basically then declare it belongs to them and dares anyone to try and get them out.
There will be a significant military conflict with China fairly soon I believe, as this expansionist aggressiveness can not go unchecked. They recently attacked India by having their military hackers knocking out the electrical grid, which undoubtedly cost lives. Acts of criminality and aggression by their hackers should be met with a physical military response.
Does Ireland recognize a country called Taiwan?
You are wrong, it most certainly is an independent country - and a democracy to boot. The UN is irrelevant and should be scrapped it's voting system, particularly of the security council, is so utterly flawed.
Ah yes the United Nations whose 2nd biggest funding partner is... drumroll please... the People's Republic of China!
Why would they say that Taiwan belongs to PRC, I cant think why..
That's not how the United Nations sees it.
Taiwan or the Republic of China is the last remaining territory belonging to the real China republic. Communist revolution created the PRC who took over mainland China.
Taiwan is not, and never has been, a part of the PRC.
That's correct the Chinese haven't been at war in the last 70 years...but the western BS narrative is that its an aggressive nation that wants to take over the world.
Doesn't look very aggressive to me...now on the other hand those that are accusing it of being aggressive, oh dear where would you even start listing their wars!
They've had a few skirmishes over the years.
We've no idea how good the modern China military is. They mostly buy in arms and copy it.
The sheer size of it, is the issue.
It most certainly is not a country.
Does anybody in the UN recognize it as a country?
I don't know really. I haven't seen the Chinese operate in an active war yet. Apart from some skirmishes in the Himalayas and the Korean war are they actually tested?
Anyway noone should be terrified, its just a remote country getting some defensive subs.
Not really. There been over 2000 nuclear explosions on this planet.
Yet we are still here.
It's a democratic country , the only reason it's known as anything else is to keep China happy ,
Texas used to be in Mexico and Alaska used to be in Russia , Kaliningrad is Germany , don't see anything changing in them countries ,
Taiwan is a country and should be recognised as such
This is a great move on the part of Australia and I support it, though I think the money would be better spent on buying balistic missiles that can reach China.
These submarines will only be nuclear powered and will not have any nuclear weapons, which is a bit of a miss.
Don't be coming in her with your facts and straight talk! It doesn't fit the narrative.
Well being the case that there is no such country called "Taiwan", it's hardly an invasion.
It's flipping rogue Chinese territory, that is all.
I'd say the Chinese are terrified, the lads who just got kicked out of Afghanistan by a few thousand sandle wearing tribesmen with AKs now have a few new subs.
No doubt the Chinese are already trying to negotiate some kind of surrender agreement 😂
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/afa86289e513a2013ca0bb778681b4cd.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eaabbaf8a16773590ee22dd6c15f1d68.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ae95441af6570c932058bb1c78524df6.svg)