FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > uk usa australia security pact.
uk usa australia security pact.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
This is about US influence in the region.
Nuclear subs will be built in Australia, using US and UK technology, but they will NOT carry nuclear weapons.
These will replace the conventional subs that were going to be built by the French. That deal, now defunct, was worth £27 billion to the French!
New Zealand have already announced that these subs will be barred from their territorial waters. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"China is furious!
Good. Fuck em.
Shouldn't be taking the piss in the south china sea and around Taiwan/Vietnam."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcFiJwpvmq0 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This is about US influence in the region.
Nuclear subs will be built in Australia, using US and UK technology, but they will NOT carry nuclear weapons.
These will replace the conventional subs that were going to be built by the French. That deal, now defunct, was worth £27 billion to the French!
New Zealand have already announced that these subs will be barred from their territorial waters. "
Good to see a sensible comment.
A new Cold War against China is - as this announcement makes clear - going to be expensive. Unlike the Cold War against the Soviet Union, it's not going to end in the economic collapse of our "opponent".
It's probably needed, to be fair, for balance; ie. capitalist democrats vs capitalist communists.
It's a tall order for Australia, even with US/UK help - 10 modern nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines (and 10 would be a minimum requirement, given the size of the patrol area) come with a huge price tag; and, importantly, they take a long time to build.
The RN only has 4 in service, with 3 or 4 more to come over the next 5 years. Even if the Australians start tomorrow - and they won't - it'll be at least a decade before all the new submarines are in service.
The Chinese won't be sitting with their thumbs up their arses in the meantime. They'll be building more islands, expanding the belt and road, taking advantage of the melting polar ice, etc.
I don't think AUKUS is a bad idea - but I very much doubt if the Chinese are as annoyed about it as they're making out.
Whilst the US and UK been navel gazing and making the middle east a worse place, since the collapse of the Berlin Wall; the Chinese have been playing the long, smart game.
AUKUS is an entirely predictable - and very American - reponse, in many ways. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
New developments on trade in the Far East and a brand new trade deal with China in the offing. Should be a walk in the park now. Liz Truss got out just in time .
We follow the US yet again but this time we should align to Vietnam, Singapore etc as China will just think colonial Britain and fuck us over .
Remember they will soon overtake the US as the world greatest economy and unlike the US they have cash not debt.
Reagan squeezed the pips until Russia couldn’t afford to keep up. Russia’s economy even today is only two thirds the size of ours and that half a million troops they have take some paying for.
Having said that if Russia reaches it potential regarding resources they will leave us for dust anyway.
We can’t easily put the squeeze on China as Reagan did with Russia.
Can’t see this leading to anything positive but I temper that with we need to push China back on their influence and bullying land grabs. I personally think we should stop manufacturing our crap there. Stop giving them what’s left of our wealth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"palming off the english obsession with owning weapons of mass destruction onto second tier ex-colonies is merely preparations for the inevitable break up of the UK"
Ok you tell yourself that
The fact we and other western nations have nuclear weapons is why the rest of europe wasnt part of the USSR after the demobilsation of Allied forces at the end of WW2. Its also why China doesn't now own the whole of the Korean peninsula
Funny you wouldnt of been wealthy anymore but you may still of been hung, or atleast you would of wished you would of been while doing a tenner in Siberia |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"China is furious!
Good. Fuck em.
Shouldn't be taking the piss in the south china sea and around Taiwan/Vietnam."
The fact that China has the hump tells you all you need to know. The French response will doubtless lead to Brexit related nonsense...which tells you all you need to know |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"China is furious!
Good. Fuck em.
Shouldn't be taking the piss in the south china sea and around Taiwan/Vietnam.
The fact that China has the hump tells you all you need to know. The French response will doubtless lead to Brexit related nonsense...which tells you all you need to know"
One french newspaper is likening it to the loss at trafalgar.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"China is furious!
Good. Fuck em.
Shouldn't be taking the piss in the south china sea and around Taiwan/Vietnam.
The fact that China has the hump tells you all you need to know. The French response will doubtless lead to Brexit related nonsense...which tells you all you need to know One french newspaper is likening it to the loss at trafalgar. "
If this impacts the wine trade further I will be launching my own nukes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"China is furious!
Good. Fuck em.
Shouldn't be taking the piss in the south china sea and around Taiwan/Vietnam.
The fact that China has the hump tells you all you need to know. The French response will doubtless lead to Brexit related nonsense...which tells you all you need to know One french newspaper is likening it to the loss at trafalgar. "
Well the selling and manufacturing of Arms is massive part of the french economy. Think the biggest arms dealers are United States, Russia, France, Germany and China, in that order. We are sixth behind China. Russia is getting upset with China though because of IP theft and then selling those versions cheaper like the J-11/15 being straight rips of the Su-33/27 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?"
Yep China not happy but I would imagine they plan for all events and would not expect to have things all their own way. Not sure why it upsets them so much as unless they have ambitions of aggression to countries in the region it will not affect them. Upsetting France, well I'm sure they will get over it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It was inevitable, China’s ambitions to be the dominant superpower in the 21st century cannot be ignored. France may complain about it not winning a contract, but even they can see it was the right decision in the long run. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
we haven't even started paying the thousands upon thousands of billions for trident and yet we are already planning on squandering more thousands of billions on the next lot of junk we will never use. so it turns out brexit was just about firmly cementing our place as america's little poodle. meet the new boss, same as the old boss.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Funny you wouldnt of been wealthy anymore but you may still of been hung, or atleast you would of wished you would of been while doing a tenner in Siberia"
i will remain both wealthy and hung despite your personal attacks used to bitch about my post |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"New developments on trade in the Far East and a brand new trade deal with China in the offing. Should be a walk in the park now. Liz Truss got out just in time .
We follow the US yet again but this time we should align to Vietnam, Singapore etc as China will just think colonial Britain and fuck us over .
Remember they will soon overtake the US as the world greatest economy and unlike the US they have cash not debt.
Reagan squeezed the pips until Russia couldn’t afford to keep up. Russia’s economy even today is only two thirds the size of ours and that half a million troops they have take some paying for.
Having said that if Russia reaches it potential regarding resources they will leave us for dust anyway.
We can’t easily put the squeeze on China as Reagan did with Russia.
Can’t see this leading to anything positive but I temper that with we need to push China back on their influence and bullying land grabs. I personally think we should stop manufacturing our crap there. Stop giving them what’s left of our wealth. "
Again easiest and quickest way to deprive China of finance is to try and get all Western and westernised nations on the same page.
Pro-democratic block manufacturing.
I know it's an unpopular opinion with some on this forum, but it's infinitely better if we encourage our low value manufacturing to be based in Eastern or Central Europe, over being based in China.
Obviously it would be better if those jobs came here, but not all can.
The next stage is to outmanouver China in Africa, Latin America, and the developing Indo Pacific nations. This takes diplomatic savy and money, and I struggle to see our government being able to tread the fine line needed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.  "
We will do whatever America tell us , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now? "
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? "
Right its gone from 6 months to this year now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now. "
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Funny you wouldnt of been wealthy anymore but you may still of been hung, or atleast you would of wished you would of been while doing a tenner in Siberia
i will remain both wealthy and hung despite your personal attacks used to bitch about my post "
I dont think you understand what a personal attack is
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing "
Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months  in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in."
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in.
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
"
In that case i apologise i didn't see the post where he shifted the goalposts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"we haven't even started paying the thousands upon thousands of billions for trident and yet we are already planning on squandering more thousands of billions on the next lot of junk we will never use. so it turns out brexit was just about firmly cementing our place as america's little poodle. meet the new boss, same as the old boss. "
We are not the customer in this deal but helping to provide the equipment. In other words no buying from the UK side |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in.
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
"
This is correct, Boris will be gone this year (or maybe next ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in.
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
This is correct, Boris will be gone this year (or maybe next ) "
I like the subtle inclusion of "or maybe next"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in.
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
This is correct, Boris will be gone this year (or maybe next )
I like the subtle inclusion of "or maybe next"
"
Be gone? Make it so? Is this star trek? Gone where? Up North coz its level |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So once again all those doom and gloom mongers with a downer on the uk have been proved wrong when they said the uk was fucked when sleepy joe won the election.
We will do whatever America tell us , I have given up on your mystic meg predictions wasnt boris supposed to be gone by now?
This year, are you happy with the job he is doing? Right its gone from 6 months to this year now.
Nope, I always said this year. Are you happy with the job he is doing Too busy to go back and find it but you def said 6 months in general given he circumstances im pretty happy with this gov although you are never going to agree on everything whomever you vote in.
I would like to vouch for the fact Fab did officially shift his prediction earlier this year (just before his previous prediction of 6 months was about to expire) - current prediction is that the glorious leader will be gone by the end of this year …
This is correct, Boris will be gone this year (or maybe next )
I like the subtle inclusion of "or maybe next"
"
Hedging my bets , there is still plenty of time for him to go this year  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"New developments on trade in the Far East and a brand new trade deal with China in the offing. Should be a walk in the park now. Liz Truss got out just in time .
We follow the US yet again but this time we should align to Vietnam, Singapore etc as China will just think colonial Britain and fuck us over .
Remember they will soon overtake the US as the world greatest economy and unlike the US they have cash not debt.
Reagan squeezed the pips until Russia couldn’t afford to keep up. Russia’s economy even today is only two thirds the size of ours and that half a million troops they have take some paying for.
Having said that if Russia reaches it potential regarding resources they will leave us for dust anyway.
We can’t easily put the squeeze on China as Reagan did with Russia.
Can’t see this leading to anything positive but I temper that with we need to push China back on their influence and bullying land grabs. I personally think we should stop manufacturing our crap there. Stop giving them what’s left of our wealth.
Again easiest and quickest way to deprive China of finance is to try and get all Western and westernised nations on the same page.
Pro-democratic block manufacturing.
I know it's an unpopular opinion with some on this forum, but it's infinitely better if we encourage our low value manufacturing to be based in Eastern or Central Europe, over being based in China.
Obviously it would be better if those jobs came here, but not all can.
The next stage is to outmanouver China in Africa, Latin America, and the developing Indo Pacific nations. This takes diplomatic savy and money, and I struggle to see our government being able to tread the fine line needed. "
Jobs are moving back to Eastern Europe from China as slow unreliable logistics is a problem and rising pay expectations are starting to close the cost gap. The trans Siberian trains are an attempt by the Chinese to stop the movement of manufacturing back to Europe but limited capacity means it’s not having a big effect. Chinese workers now want western living standards so costs are rising.
Sadly we have to much debt to invest in Africa etc. Think that boat has sailed.
Bad self interested governments over 50 years have seen us fall down the individual wealth list despite a constantly growing economy. The rich have scooped up the extra cash while the rest of the U.K. have been treading water. .
Repeated governments failure to invest long term by taxing sensibly and “really” managing spending is a structural failure that is now being exposed.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
"
I understand the French government are more than annoyed but I think they need to slow down a little and think about the long term implications of their actions.
The US has signalled for quite a while that they are going to pivot to the Pacific. That move is not a surprise and it is going to be the fundamental driver for the US moving forward. The UK signaled that they are also taking a much bigger interest in the area with the 2021 Integrated Review and that they are also looking to create a much more international view point post Brexit and are pivoting away from Europe.
The Australians know they need support in their local area and if the biggest power comes along wanting to offer the most cutting edge military capabilities and support then that is going to be very attractive.
The US and UK have aligned interests (albeit for different reasons) and it is not a surprise that the US would choose the UK as it’s preferred military/strategic partner than the EU - not the least of which is that the EU does not have any military or coherent foreign policy capabilities and it is unlikely that they will achieve those within the next decade at a minimum. Macron is pushing for much greater EU military capability (which I think he is right to do) but it will not happen because of huge misalignments within the member states.
The EU is great at being nice but that doesn’t help you when the big kids want to take your sweets in the playground.
The French know this and have a very hard choice to make. The US, UK and Aus are not going to change their minds and a full split is not going to make a difference. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why are we poisoning after the United States again? As if following them into Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan wasn’t bad enough we now want to go shaking sticks at China?
Just no."
The US are a declining ‘super power’ China are getting stronger, we have backed the wrong horse , we should have stayed neutral |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed. "
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why are we poisoning after the United States again? As if following them into Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan wasn’t bad enough we now want to go shaking sticks at China?
Just no.
The US are a declining ‘super power’ China are getting stronger, we have backed the wrong horse , we should have stayed neutral "
That is a luxury I don’t think we have. We have to choose a side, whether we like it or not, as we have far more international interests than most other countries.
The EU lacks the global military reach, China is highly unlikely to be an ally which only leaves one other party. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
things have gone very wrong for this government very very quickly, which is why they are planning for war so they can distract from the rapidly failing situation in britain. it's looking very much like there will be a winter of discontent comming this year. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why are we poisoning after the United States again? As if following them into Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan wasn’t bad enough we now want to go shaking sticks at China?
Just no.
The US are a declining ‘super power’ China are getting stronger, we have backed the wrong horse , we should have stayed neutral
That is a luxury I don’t think we have. We have to choose a side, whether we like it or not, as we have far more international interests than most other countries.
The EU lacks the global military reach, China is highly unlikely to be an ally which only leaves one other party."
Maybe, I don’t think it’s a wise move to ‘side’ with the US in this way, it has left the UK very exposed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why are we poisoning after the United States again? As if following them into Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan wasn’t bad enough we now want to go shaking sticks at China?
Just no.
The US are a declining ‘super power’ China are getting stronger, we have backed the wrong horse , we should have stayed neutral
That is a luxury I don’t think we have. We have to choose a side, whether we like it or not, as we have far more international interests than most other countries.
The EU lacks the global military reach, China is highly unlikely to be an ally which only leaves one other party.
Maybe, I don’t think it’s a wise move to ‘side’ with the US in this way, it has left the UK very exposed "
Who do you propose we “side” with if it is not the US or do you think we should just go it alone? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why are we poisoning after the United States again? As if following them into Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan wasn’t bad enough we now want to go shaking sticks at China?
Just no.
The US are a declining ‘super power’ China are getting stronger, we have backed the wrong horse , we should have stayed neutral
That is a luxury I don’t think we have. We have to choose a side, whether we like it or not, as we have far more international interests than most other countries.
The EU lacks the global military reach, China is highly unlikely to be an ally which only leaves one other party.
Maybe, I don’t think it’s a wise move to ‘side’ with the US in this way, it has left the UK very exposed
Who do you propose we “side” with if it is not the US or do you think we should just go it alone?"
Why do we have to side with anyone, can’t we just be neutral and stay on good terms with both sides? Although I guess that is difficult now we have left the EU, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"things have gone very wrong for this government very very quickly, which is why they are planning for war so they can distract from the rapidly failing situation in britain. it's looking very much like there will be a winter of discontent comming this year."
Who are they planning a war against |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"building attack submarines is not defence unless one is a moronic idiot.
So China do not have any nuclear subs then ?
"
Yes they do, so how does this work, they have 10 we build 10 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"building attack submarines is not defence unless one is a moronic idiot.
So China do not have any nuclear subs then ?
Yes they do, so how does this work, they have 10 we build 10 "
Probably or do we just not build any defensive stuff at all then ?
That’ll work
It’s just a sad fact of life that you need to keep up with everyone else human nature being what it is.
In a perfect world nobody would have any need for arms but unfortunately it’s not a perfect world |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"building attack submarines is not defence unless one is a moronic idiot.
So China do not have any nuclear subs then ?
Yes they do, so how does this work, they have 10 we build 10
Probably or do we just not build any defensive stuff at all then ?
That’ll work
It’s just a sad fact of life that you need to keep up with everyone else human nature being what it is.
In a perfect world nobody would have any need for arms but unfortunately it’s not a perfect world "
Apart from money , why are the UK getting involved? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
the conservatives are determined to keep the country as america's little poodle ... it's apparent that the outcry over the last 20 years of war has been a lesson that many are too stupid to learn from, especially the current government and the lickspittles that dogmatically support them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?"
The accusation was that they are planning a war. My question was who are they planning a war against.
With regards to building weapons if your theory is correct then that means most countries must always be planning a war as they build or buy weapons all the time. This includes France who were originally going to build subs for Australia all be it older technology ones. We're they also planning a war |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"the conservatives are determined to keep the country as america's little poodle ... it's apparent that the outcry over the last 20 years of war has been a lesson that many are too stupid to learn from, especially the current government and the lickspittles that dogmatically support them. "
Nah want we should learn is to keep out of any countries internal problems and let them sort it out.
Afghanistan is always going to be in the same shit as long as old men in beards spouting religious shite and ruling with fear and ignorance.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?
Good question, "
Seen on the news, usa has 54 of these type submarines, china has 12.
The usa is still the biggest in terms of military, so how's this move balancing things up? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?
The accusation was that they are planning a war. My question was who are they planning a war against.
With regards to building weapons if your theory is correct then that means most countries must always be planning a war as they build or buy weapons all the time. This includes France who were originally going to build subs for Australia all be it older technology ones. We're they also planning a war"
you've changed words i have written to words that i haven't written which underhand to say the least and as such your questions do not deserve an answer |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?
The accusation was that they are planning a war. My question was who are they planning a war against.
With regards to building weapons if your theory is correct then that means most countries must always be planning a war as they build or buy weapons all the time. This includes France who were originally going to build subs for Australia all be it older technology ones. We're they also planning a war
you've changed words i have written to words that i haven't written which underhand to say the least and as such your questions do not deserve an answer "
You say they are planning for war. I simply ask against who. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
guess if europe is having its own army, australia/us/uk should?
as for arms race, weve been here before, its always a good idea to have the biggest cock, i mean sword, even if you dont use it, just lets the opposition know youre packing, do you really want the beast out of the pants! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?
The accusation was that they are planning a war. My question was who are they planning a war against.
With regards to building weapons if your theory is correct then that means most countries must always be planning a war as they build or buy weapons all the time. This includes France who were originally going to build subs for Australia all be it older technology ones. We're they also planning a war
you've changed words i have written to words that i haven't written which underhand to say the least and as such your questions do not deserve an answer "
everyone is planning for war, for a war they hope they dont have to have! could be against china or against a virus or media manipulation or ...... parking, which is a common one |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who are they planning a war against
why are they building more machines for war?
The accusation was that they are planning a war. My question was who are they planning a war against.
With regards to building weapons if your theory is correct then that means most countries must always be planning a war as they build or buy weapons all the time. This includes France who were originally going to build subs for Australia all be it older technology ones. We're they also planning a war
you've changed words i have written to words that i haven't written which underhand to say the least and as such your questions do not deserve an answer
everyone is planning for war, for a war they hope they dont have to have! could be against china or against a virus or media manipulation or ...... parking, which is a common one "
Have you tried reverse parking a nuclear submarine? Nightmare!, and them fucking traffic wardens!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"France will pull out of nato and go it with the Russians. "
The French tried to withdraw from NATO in 1966 but were unable to actually complete that due to legal restrictions. It is the reason why the NATO headquarters are no longer in France. They only changed their mind in 2009 when they fully rejoined.
As for them joining with the Russians - lol is all I can say. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ynecplCouple
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
"France will pull out of nato and go it with the Russians. "
That is impossible, France as a founding member of NATO is unlikely to want to give up that status. Russia would like to see the break up of the EU again something the French can't afford to happen.
The French as always will throw their toys out of the pram but ultimately they are powerless to stop what has happen or force things back the way they were. If anything it will tie France closer to Germany and the EU as that is the only way it will remain a major power on the political stage. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French, "
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French,
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally "
The embittered spirit of De Gaulle lives on! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
Just been reading the Australian press on this.
Seems the French deal wasn't going very well. Cultural differences between the French and Australia, were causing certain tensions. Lots of anger about secrecy over costings as well.
It could be that Australia got a better offer, and decided to cut their losses, before increasing punitive "break" clauses in the contract kicked in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French,
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally "
You do seem to total downer on the uk never a good word.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French,
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally "
On the news it was between that the UK was a junior partner but also the French don't want to break communication with the UK. Even the French say they have been totally humiliated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French,
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally "
And the fresh would not have done the same things ?
I think they would |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
This wild name-calling reaction really is all about Macron in his Election year. It's proper embarrassing for him. How the French can call it unacceptable behaviour is just wild. Remember when they joined the Eurofighter project, then stayed just long enough to garner the technology and then left to re-develop major parts of the Rafale. All the arguments at the time clearly indicated that this was a pre-planned move right for the beginning.
And the stupidity of saying that: 'The move could cause a nuclear war' is desperation on Frances part.
Months ago it was in the News and the French knew full well what the problems were - problems for they themselves to solve,
For example:
"SYDNEY — “A stab in the back” is how French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian described Australia’s move to tear up a submarine deal worth more than €50 billion to instead acquire nuclear-powered subs from the United States.
France could have seen it coming.
Canberra signalled in June it was looking for a way out of the contract, signed in 2016 with French company DCNS (now known as Naval Group) to build 12 Barracuda submarines.
Questioned by a Senate committee about issues with the project, Australia's Defense Secretary Greg Moriarty said: "It became clear to me we were having challenges ... over the last 15 to 12 months." He said his government had been considering its options, including what it could do if it was "unable to proceed" with the French deal.
Moriarty's admission came after his government in April refused to sign a contract for the next phase of the French submarine project, giving Naval Group until this month to comply with its demands. There were reports dating back to the beginning of this year that Canberra was seeking to walk away."
and . . .
"Trouble began brewing almost immediately after Canberra chose the French bid ahead of alternate designs from Germany and Japan in April 2016.
That August, before the Australian deal was formally signed but after it had been announced, the company DCNS admitted it had been hacked after 22,000 documents relating to the combat capacity of its Scorpene submarines being built in India were leaked, raising concerns about the security of its Australian project.
The Australian defense department warned the submarine-builder it wanted top-level protection for its project.
And while politicians from Australia's ruling center-right Liberal Party sought to downplay the implications of the hack on the Barracuda subs, opposition figures jumped on the revelations, with some calling for negotiations with the French firm to be suspended."
Then . . . in 15 months the contract price went form 50 billion to 145 billion !
So a damn sight more than a little au contraire in the French camp.
It was all to be had - and all to be lost. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"This wild name-calling reaction really is all about Macron in his Election year. It's proper embarrassing for him. How the French can call it unacceptable behaviour is just wild. Remember when they joined the Eurofighter project, then stayed just long enough to garner the technology and then left to re-develop major parts of the Rafale. All the arguments at the time clearly indicated that this was a pre-planned move right for the beginning.
And the stupidity of saying that: 'The move could cause a nuclear war' is desperation on Frances part.
Months ago it was in the News and the French knew full well what the problems were - problems for they themselves to solve,
For example:
"SYDNEY — “A stab in the back” is how French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian described Australia’s move to tear up a submarine deal worth more than €50 billion to instead acquire nuclear-powered subs from the United States.
France could have seen it coming.
Canberra signalled in June it was looking for a way out of the contract, signed in 2016 with French company DCNS (now known as Naval Group) to build 12 Barracuda submarines.
Questioned by a Senate committee about issues with the project, Australia's Defense Secretary Greg Moriarty said: "It became clear to me we were having challenges ... over the last 15 to 12 months." He said his government had been considering its options, including what it could do if it was "unable to proceed" with the French deal.
Moriarty's admission came after his government in April refused to sign a contract for the next phase of the French submarine project, giving Naval Group until this month to comply with its demands. There were reports dating back to the beginning of this year that Canberra was seeking to walk away."
and . . .
"Trouble began brewing almost immediately after Canberra chose the French bid ahead of alternate designs from Germany and Japan in April 2016.
That August, before the Australian deal was formally signed but after it had been announced, the company DCNS admitted it had been hacked after 22,000 documents relating to the combat capacity of its Scorpene submarines being built in India were leaked, raising concerns about the security of its Australian project.
The Australian defense department warned the submarine-builder it wanted top-level protection for its project.
And while politicians from Australia's ruling center-right Liberal Party sought to downplay the implications of the hack on the Barracuda subs, opposition figures jumped on the revelations, with some calling for negotiations with the French firm to be suspended."
Then . . . in 15 months the contract price went form 50 billion to 145 billion !
So a damn sight more than a little au contraire in the French camp.
It was all to be had - and all to be lost. "
The French called it" the contract of the sentry"
Adelaide haven't lost anything. Cherboug must be reeling at the news. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"
The French called it" the contract of the sentry"
Adelaide haven't lost anything. Cherboug must be reeling at the news. "
As for Britain being a spare tyre - maybe the French have forgotten that they were already paying Britain for insight into technology in our new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier/s for their DEAC carrier plans and had already paid £55 million to share it with them!
It's not a major embarrassment for them, it's a MEGA embarrassment for them.
Like I said it really was for them to win - and for them to lose.
They did everything wrong - contract was moved on years and the missed major promises of staged delivery. The French said that the Australian industry wasn't up to scratch to assist in building and reigned back a 90% local input to 60% - most thought that that was just the French taking the jobs back to mainland France.
And this has been a constant drip since 2016.
They fooked it Royally (if you can fook Royally in France lol)- and now I think that they are more angry with themselves than anything 'real' out there in diplomacy land.
Family members (in France) say the French media are pulling apart their own failures bit by bit and asking what they should have done differently.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"This wild name-calling reaction really is all about Macron in his Election year. It's proper embarrassing for him. How the French can call it unacceptable behaviour is just wild. Remember when they joined the Eurofighter project, then stayed just long enough to garner the technology and then left to re-develop major parts of the Rafale. All the arguments at the time clearly indicated that this was a pre-planned move right for the beginning.
And the stupidity of saying that: 'The move could cause a nuclear war' is desperation on Frances part.
Months ago it was in the News and the French knew full well what the problems were - problems for they themselves to solve,
For example:
"SYDNEY — “A stab in the back” is how French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian described Australia’s move to tear up a submarine deal worth more than €50 billion to instead acquire nuclear-powered subs from the United States.
France could have seen it coming.
Canberra signalled in June it was looking for a way out of the contract, signed in 2016 with French company DCNS (now known as Naval Group) to build 12 Barracuda submarines.
Questioned by a Senate committee about issues with the project, Australia's Defense Secretary Greg Moriarty said: "It became clear to me we were having challenges ... over the last 15 to 12 months." He said his government had been considering its options, including what it could do if it was "unable to proceed" with the French deal.
Moriarty's admission came after his government in April refused to sign a contract for the next phase of the French submarine project, giving Naval Group until this month to comply with its demands. There were reports dating back to the beginning of this year that Canberra was seeking to walk away."
and . . .
"Trouble began brewing almost immediately after Canberra chose the French bid ahead of alternate designs from Germany and Japan in April 2016.
That August, before the Australian deal was formally signed but after it had been announced, the company DCNS admitted it had been hacked after 22,000 documents relating to the combat capacity of its Scorpene submarines being built in India were leaked, raising concerns about the security of its Australian project.
The Australian defense department warned the submarine-builder it wanted top-level protection for its project.
And while politicians from Australia's ruling center-right Liberal Party sought to downplay the implications of the hack on the Barracuda subs, opposition figures jumped on the revelations, with some calling for negotiations with the French firm to be suspended."
Then . . . in 15 months the contract price went form 50 billion to 145 billion !
So a damn sight more than a little au contraire in the French camp.
It was all to be had - and all to be lost.
The French called it" the contract of the sentry"
Adelaide haven't lost anything. Cherboug must be reeling at the news. "
Oops.... That should say "contract of the Century" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Macron escalating the situation now, by recalling Ambassadors.
Throwing dummies out. They really are miffed.
Tbh, it is pathetic behaviour from the French,
The French spokesman made me laugh though. He said we are not recalling our HK ambassador as this is the usual opportunist behaviour of the British. In any event they are clearly the third wheel in this pact.
He’s nailed it totally You do seem to total downer on the uk never a good word. "
I have a downer on this government as I think they are incompetent divisive and liars. They are not fit to be in power. I worry for the country I live in and have always been proud of. I am alarmed by our direction such as pushing migrants economic or otherwise back in inflatable boats . Really???
Press freedom being eroded so less accountability. Arab justice minister snd deputy PM that’s just wrong!! Parachuted MP candidates ( both parties) which results in more central control not democracy. I grew up believing this country set standards for the world to follow. I don’t believe that anymore.
We are now dumbing down while our rich elite laugh at the deluded notion we carry that we have freedom of choice. They keep their cash while the average workers coughs his 20-45% year after year.
The bad governments time after time have dragged this country down by incompetent swing extremism. We need the best answer to a problem not what does our manifesto say!
Our debt was increasing rapidly before Covid now we’re verging in being a basket case!
I worry for our future if we don’t start taking more interest in who’s running this country because it’s definitely not the citizens . (Subjects)
So no I’m not on a downer on the great people or great history of this country only the shit few who are always in charge. Three schools provide most of our PMs that’s not democracy that’s elitism. Just like the generals in the First World War being given their rank based on name and money not ability. The poor bastards who died didn’t come out of it well but how many of those generals died? ( a lot of Captains did but more your middle class)
As with the war we are a great people lead and mislead by self interested charlatans. Anyone who wants to be an MP should be banned as the saying goes!!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know. "
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components. "
Thank you |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components. "
And technical know-how. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components.
And technical know-how. "
I also hear that as well as the subs the deal covers a few other area's where the UK and US aid Australia and create business at the same time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components.
And technical know-how.
I also hear that as well as the subs the deal covers a few other area's where the UK and US aid Australia and create business at the same time"
Any examples of those extras? Again interested to know. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
BAE Systems are already building type 26 frigates for Australia and all that incumbent supply chain that goes with it. And they are doing that in Adelaide already. Rolls Royce could get the Nuclear Reactor part of the deal. Sonar and Silent running Technology has already been discussed - but not yet agreed. So there are may hundreds of avenues and opportunities that it could go down.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components.
And technical know-how.
I also hear that as well as the subs the deal covers a few other area's where the UK and US aid Australia and create business at the same time
Any examples of those extras? Again interested to know. "
going by the BBC they say the sub deal is the big ticket item but it will also include cyber capabilities and other undersea technology. So far they have not been anymore specific |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?"
The USA has given the UK permission to share information on nuclear powered submarines. Don't believe that we are free to do this of our own volition.
Very unlikely to have anything to do with the trade deal.
The French submarines were far cheaper, but diesel-electric so just not as useful.
Australia was clearly not offered this technology until right now.Tactically they are absolutely right to take the opportunity.
Just sounds like very poor diplomacy on how the French learned about this.
Why alienate an important ally? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
They saw it coming months and months ago - faux omg! is their ONLY reaction.
The USA and GB have long had an exclusive sharing of technologies with regard to nuclear submarines.
People need to stop pretending that we know nothing of the technologies involved and that we have developed our own systems in tandem with and independently of the Americans. After all we have had nuclear submarines since 1960. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"They saw it coming months and months ago - faux omg! is their ONLY reaction.
The USA and GB have long had an exclusive sharing of technologies with regard to nuclear submarines.
People need to stop pretending that we know nothing of the technologies involved and that we have developed our own systems in tandem with and independently of the Americans. After all we have had nuclear submarines since 1960."
"They saw it coming"? Really?
When did you "see it"?
Nobody said that we know nothing of the technology, we just aren't free to share it as we wish. Our submarine reactors are based on US technology which we cannot do with as we choose.
Quite surprised that we have been able to take the lead on it, but assume that just means that we are a generation behind the US.
Take it as a military export win, but don't get carried away that we could have done this without permission. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Btw who’s building these subs ?? I don’t think it’s us is it? We’re just selling some tech so where’s the hundreds of jobs being created? Genuine question as I don’t know.
Being built in Adelaide.
The US and the UK will be supplying components.
And technical know-how.
I also hear that as well as the subs the deal covers a few other area's where the UK and US aid Australia and create business at the same time
Any examples of those extras? Again interested to know.
going by the BBC they say the sub deal is the big ticket item but it will also include cyber capabilities and other undersea technology. So far they have not been anymore specific"
Thanks Leroy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
Yes. They did see it coming. Go read up properly.
GB Didn't have a need or a desire to share it.
The terms of the original agreement (1960) was mutual permission. When Tube Alloy was in operation GB demonstrated the two stage detonation. From that point GB provided crucial technical assistance to the Manhatten Project.
We are not and never have been junior partners in any way at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes. They did see it coming. Go read up properly.
GB Didn't have a need or a desire to share it.
The terms of the original agreement (1960) was mutual permission. When Tube Alloy was in operation GB demonstrated the two stage detonation. From that point GB provided crucial technical assistance to the Manhatten Project.
We are not and never have been junior partners in any way at all. "
Spot on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Yes. They did see it coming. Go read up properly.
GB Didn't have a need or a desire to share it.
The terms of the original agreement (1960) was mutual permission. When Tube Alloy was in operation GB demonstrated the two stage detonation. From that point GB provided crucial technical assistance to the Manhatten Project.
We are not and never have been junior partners in any way at all. "
Sure. Everyone knew. Nobody was surprised.
When did you know?
Oh, bless. You think that we have developed submarine reactor technology completely independently since 1960? That the Manhatten project in the 1940s means has a bearing on what happens in 2021?
Sure. If you like |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"Yes. They did see it coming. Go read up properly.
GB Didn't have a need or a desire to share it.
The terms of the original agreement (1960) was mutual permission. When Tube Alloy was in operation GB demonstrated the two stage detonation. From that point GB provided crucial technical assistance to the Manhatten Project.
We are not and never have been junior partners in any way at all.
Spot on."
Absolutely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"Yes. They did see it coming. Go read up properly.
GB Didn't have a need or a desire to share it.
The terms of the original agreement (1960) was mutual permission. When Tube Alloy was in operation GB demonstrated the two stage detonation. From that point GB provided crucial technical assistance to the Manhatten Project.
We are not and never have been junior partners in any way at all.
Sure. Everyone knew. Nobody was surprised.
When did you know?
Oh, bless. You think that we have developed submarine reactor technology completely independently since 1960? That the Manhatten project in the 1940s means has a bearing on what happens in 2021?
Sure. If you like "
Not much for recorded history are you?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"palming off the english obsession with owning weapons of mass destruction onto second tier ex-colonies is merely preparations for the inevitable break up of the UK
Ok you tell yourself that
The fact we and other western nations have nuclear weapons is why the rest of europe wasnt part of the USSR after the demobilsation of Allied forces at the end of WW2. Its also why China doesn't now own the whole of the Korean peninsula
Funny you wouldnt of been wealthy anymore but you may still of been hung, or atleast you would of wished you would of been while doing a tenner in Siberia"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority. "
Yup. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago
northeast |
"New developments on trade in the Far East and a brand new trade deal with China in the offing. Should be a walk in the park now. Liz Truss got out just in time .
We follow the US yet again but this time we should align to Vietnam, Singapore etc as China will just think colonial Britain and fuck us over .
Remember they will soon overtake the US as the world greatest economy and unlike the US they have cash not debt.
Reagan squeezed the pips until Russia couldn’t afford to keep up. Russia’s economy even today is only two thirds the size of ours and that half a million troops they have take some paying for.
Having said that if Russia reaches it potential regarding resources they will leave us for dust anyway.
We can’t easily put the squeeze on China as Reagan did with Russia.
Can’t see this leading to anything positive but I temper that with we need to push China back on their influence and bullying land grabs. I personally think we should stop manufacturing our crap there. Stop giving them what’s left of our wealth. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Yup. "
exactly, is it any surprise there has been a reaction to that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amish SMan
over a year ago
Eastleigh |
27 EU states voting to go to war, it would need a unanimous vote. War would be over by they've agreed the first date for the first vote. It's been muted for years, but very little if nothing ever happens.
As for technology sharing with the US, if we didn't they'd be years behind. Worked with them enough over the years to see it, both uniform staff and US DOD. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"27 EU states voting to go to war, it would need a unanimous vote. War would be over by they've agreed the first date for the first vote. It's been muted for years, but very little if nothing ever happens.
As for technology sharing with the US, if we didn't they'd be years behind. Worked with them enough over the years to see it, both uniform staff and US DOD. "
“ The EU is built for a customs union and a single market. It is only half-built for a monetary union. It is not at all build for a strategic defence union.”
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?"
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything"
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
"
The latest French nuclear subs are several years late into service. I think that only one of the six planned has only just been commissioned.
One of the major selling points of the USA/UK design, is the sealed lifetime service reactor. The technology that the French use, needs the reactor servicing every ten years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
The latest French nuclear subs are several years late into service. I think that only one of the six planned has only just been commissioned.
One of the major selling points of the USA/UK design, is the sealed lifetime service reactor. The technology that the French use, needs the reactor servicing every ten years. "
Did you say USA/UK design?
The one that we developed independently without reference to the USA and not requiring their permission to share, according to some? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority. "
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
The latest French nuclear subs are several years late into service. I think that only one of the six planned has only just been commissioned.
One of the major selling points of the USA/UK design, is the sealed lifetime service reactor. The technology that the French use, needs the reactor servicing every ten years.
Did you say USA/UK design?
The one that we developed independently without reference to the USA and not requiring their permission to share, according to some? "
Its not been revealed yet on what the design will be.
I would imagine an adaption of the US Virginia design but it could be our Astute design. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally."
You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
The latest French nuclear subs are several years late into service. I think that only one of the six planned has only just been commissioned.
One of the major selling points of the USA/UK design, is the sealed lifetime service reactor. The technology that the French use, needs the reactor servicing every ten years.
Did you say USA/UK design?
The one that we developed independently without reference to the USA and not requiring their permission to share, according to some?
Its not been revealed yet on what the design will be.
I would imagine an adaption of the US Virginia design but it could be our Astute design. "
I was referring to the reactor. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball. "
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball.
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally?"
None what so ever and read my post i said its business how you deduce its us v them from that is beyond me so thank you also for speaking for me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
Just to be clear - The French knew absolutely in June that the deal may well not continue. They also knew that their nuclear system was behind in technology and that Aus' had already stated that it would look for the newest system if they decided to go nuclear - (remember the old deal was Diesel/Electric).
This fact is all over in-depth news and defence industry reports and from the Australian Defence briefs.
Twisting an alternative story is fine, if that's where you want to go - It doesn't make it true.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball.
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally?None what so ever and read my post i said its business how you deduce its us v them from that is beyond me so thank you also for speaking for me. "
It's not "business". It's global politics and diplomacy as well based fundamentally around building alliances to cou ter China, which this helps in no way whatsoever.
Us vs them vcomes from you continuing to rame on about Brexit when it is no way pertinet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Just to be clear - The French knew absolutely in June that the deal may well not continue. They also knew that their nuclear system was behind in technology and that Aus' had already stated that it would look for the newest system if they decided to go nuclear - (remember the old deal was Diesel/Electric).
This fact is all over in-depth news and defence industry reports and from the Australian Defence briefs.
Twisting an alternative story is fine, if that's where you want to go - It doesn't make it true. "
Nothing "twisted".
I provided the exact quote above. You and whatever your "in-depth" news sources are have provided an interpretation that I ha e not.
Just to be clear. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafun OP Man
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball.
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally?None what so ever and read my post i said its business how you deduce its us v them from that is beyond me so thank you also for speaking for me.
It's not "business". It's global politics and diplomacy as well based fundamentally around building alliances to cou ter China, which this helps in no way whatsoever.
Us vs them vcomes from you continuing to rame on about Brexit when it is no way pertinet. "
Pot and kettle spring to mind when it comes to brexit its only you bitter remainers who keep banging on about it as far as i see. Its business if Australia has changed its mind and now wants nuclear subs thats their prerogative and as for building alliances to counter china that can only be a good thing or would you prefer to leave our allies out on a limb ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"
Nothing "twisted".
I provided the exact quote above. You and whatever your "in-depth" news sources are have provided an interpretation that I ha e not.
Just to be clear."
Glad that the difference is now clear to you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The uk is now going to help build Australian nuclear submarines they have ditched the French deal to help them. Anything to do with the new trade deal i wonder?
This maybe a silly question but if Australia wanted nuclear subs then why did they not ask the French to provide them. They were already doing business so instead of scrapping the deal change it to nuclear instead. The French would have been happy as its more business, the Australians would get the subs they want. US and UK would not have lost anything
It's because the Australians knew that the US/UK system was superior to the French system. The Aus' defence minister was particularly worried that the system would be behind even before it was built.
"
Thanks. Yes does sound like a logical reason for not continuing with the French deal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"Will it take a while to train up the crew to operate a nuclear sub? "
The Australians you mean?
There is talk that they may get 'Lease' Nuclear subs in the interim - they would share ship time with experienced crews for sure.
There is still 18 months of contract chat between US/UK before anything happens. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball.
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally?None what so ever and read my post i said its business how you deduce its us v them from that is beyond me so thank you also for speaking for me.
It's not "business". It's global politics and diplomacy as well based fundamentally around building alliances to cou ter China, which this helps in no way whatsoever.
Us vs them vcomes from you continuing to rame on about Brexit when it is no way pertinet. Pot and kettle spring to mind when it comes to brexit its only you bitter remainers who keep banging on about it as far as i see. Its business if Australia has changed its mind and now wants nuclear subs thats their prerogative and as for building alliances to counter china that can only be a good thing or would you prefer to leave our allies out on a limb ? "
This is not Brexit related. you understand that, right? YOu are the only one "banging on about it". Scroll up and read.
I didn't say that Australia could not do what they wanted. I have actually said that it's a sensible decision.
all that I have indicated that its announcement was handled incredibly badly with respect to the ultimate purpose of the exercise which is working together to contain China.
What have you seen that indicates otherwise? Write it down. Show me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Australian PM warned President Macron in June, that they weren't happy with the state of the contract and that it likely to be shelved.
I read that when France gains the EU Presidency on Jan 1st 2022, that they will make an EU Security Pact across the bloc, their main priority.
Not, actually, what was said. That's a reported interpretation.
"I made it very clear, we had a lengthy dinner there in Paris, about our very significant concerns about the capabilities of conventional submarines to deal with the new strategic environment we're faced with," Morrison told 5aa Radio.
"I made it very clear that this was a matter that Australia would need to make a decision on in our national interest," he said.
Saying that you are concerned and would need to take a decision is a warning, but that could be a price negotiation as much as anything else and it does not imply an imminent alternative exists.
It also does not mean that France had any warning of the announcement.
I'm not surprised France are livid. There will have been significant upfront investment, some of which carried out "at risk".
Jobs or entire industries could be at risk.
Imagine this happening to the UK?
Again, why do this in such a humiliating way to an ally?
An ally.You would have been happily posting "it was all down to brexit" if it was the other way round, its business the uk,s gain is frances loss thats the way it goes.I see france are now calling on the EU because that big bad boris has taken macrons ball.
Well done speaking for me. Quite a talent.
I have said quite clearly that it was in Australia's interest to take this decision, but it has been handled very undiplomatically.
Sadly you are the one who seems to be taking an "us vs them" view on this.
I will ask again: What is the benefit of angering an ally?None what so ever and read my post i said its business how you deduce its us v them from that is beyond me so thank you also for speaking for me.
It's not "business". It's global politics and diplomacy as well based fundamentally around building alliances to cou ter China, which this helps in no way whatsoever.
Us vs them vcomes from you continuing to rame on about Brexit when it is no way pertinet. Pot and kettle spring to mind when it comes to brexit its only you bitter remainers who keep banging on about it as far as i see. Its business if Australia has changed its mind and now wants nuclear subs thats their prerogative and as for building alliances to counter china that can only be a good thing or would you prefer to leave our allies out on a limb ?
This is not Brexit related. you understand that, right? YOu are the only one "banging on about it". Scroll up and read.
I didn't say that Australia could not do what they wanted. I have actually said that it's a sensible decision.
all that I have indicated that its announcement was handled incredibly badly with respect to the ultimate purpose of the exercise which is working together to contain China.
What have you seen that indicates otherwise? Write it down. Show me. "
Your right there! If a stunt like that is done to the French after secret talks behind their backs then that could easily happen to us too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Will it take a while to train up the crew to operate a nuclear sub?
The Australians you mean?
There is talk that they may get 'Lease' Nuclear subs in the interim - they would share ship time with experienced crews for sure.
There is still 18 months of contract chat between US/UK before anything happens."
It will, indeed. However, they'll be able to get a lot of simulation and, as has been mentioned, joint training in.
They'll have at least five years before the first one's built, though. Possibly a year after that to be commissioned.
Let's hope the Chinese sit with their thumbs up their arse whilst we're getting ready. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
