Most likely they'll exchange preferences, but end up mostly flowing on to the coalition in some way.
Senate they might get one or two up in Queensland and NSW.
Senate they might get one or two up in Queensland and NSW.
I might do it before then, if I get the time. Just to give a primer, along with a recap of the outcomes of the last election. We know it's coming soon, most likely in May. May as well get started (time permitting - I'll need to dedicate an evening/some time on the weekend to put such a post together).
I saw the Chinese marine maneuvers east of Australia the last days and was wondering how you feel about this wonderful submarine deal now ?
/s
/s
How many modern diesels could you buy and run for the cost of the nukes?
Good idea. I would suggest including a sentence each about the following:
Preferential voting
Compulsory voting (assuming you're enrolled)
The role of the AEC
The day of the week we vote, and why the date itself is not fixed
The role of the Prime Minister and how ministers are appointed
... and the all important link to the democracy sausage finder (which is not an alias for Grindr).
Doesn't really make much difference. We still wouldn't have subs, even if Morrison hadn't screwed the French on the deal. It's really a question of how many years after China started doing exercises off the coast we got the subs.
That said, we would be getting them a lot sooner under the original France deal, and that would be preferable. With the added bonus they wouldn't be nuclear.
The Fench subs that we were originally intending to get were nuclear powered but we wanted them retrofitted with diesel electric. I don't know if France would have been willing but it seems to me that if we really needed nuclear powered subs then the simplest way would have been to ask France to build us some non-retrofitted Barracuda class boats.
AUKUS is just a total scam, Aussie tax-payers subsidising foreign manufacturing in the vain hope that said foreign nations would come to our defence.
Foreign nations that were already committed to come to our defence due to existing treaties.
Honestly, with things going the way they are in the US, I think you lot should just ask the French.
They, being French, might not forget what happend, but they might be quite willing to forgive, considering the quite magnificient diplomatic coup this would represent. Might even give you a good price.
I thought there was suppose to be strategic value in having nuclear subs instead of diesel subs, so China understands that Australia has some strike capabilities.
There's definitely strategic value in the nuclear subs over a diesel sub, but it comes with price tag four or five times higher. The delivery schedules are also significantly much longer with a nuclear sub.
State of the art diesel subs starting in five to ten years delivered by companies that know what they're doing at a much cheaper price would have been my pick.
We wouldn't have necessarily had nuclear weapons, that's a whole different problem, even though just getting the nuclear powered subs already put us in violation of the non-proliferation treaty. We would be looking at conventionally armed, nuclear powered submarines.
The key advantage of nuclear powered submarines is range, especially submerged range. A diesel-electric submarine is limited by the battery capacity, since you typically don't want to run the diesel engine underwater. (I can't remember if that's even possible. Certainly don't think so for modern subs.) A nuke can run indefinitely, the limiting factor is ability to maintain a breathable atmosphere. Which, assuming systems are running properly, is again indefinite.
In any event, diesel subs we can have now are preferable to nukes we won't get for 10 years or more, that we won't technically own, we don't currently have the experience to manage, and that will most likely remain controlled by our generous benefactors.
I'm going to go against the grain a little and say that AUKUS was a good plan (putting aside the clusterfuck of how the French contract was handled) and nuclear subs serve a meaningful purpose for Australia; they are the only feasible way to project power in the South China Sea aka Taiwan.
It has to be viewed in the context of late 2021. Biden knocked Trump out of office and seemingly stabilised America, China was taking hostile diplomatic and trade positions against Australia, and an invasion of Taiwan seemed like the only possible spark for WW3. Committing AU$300B to deterrence and by extension global peace isn't really that crazy.
... in 2025, things have changed a little and I've soured on the whole deal too. The USA has proven utterly schizophrenic, Russia launched a land invasion of Ukraine and half the world shrugged, delivery timeframes have blown out further and further. Who the fuck knows if America would even defend their treaty allies, let alone Taiwan?
It has to be viewed in the context of late 2021. Biden knocked Trump out of office and seemingly stabilised America, China was taking hostile diplomatic and trade positions against Australia, and an invasion of Taiwan seemed like the only possible spark for WW3. Committing AU$300B to deterrence and by extension global peace isn't really that crazy.
... in 2025, things have changed a little and I've soured on the whole deal too. The USA has proven utterly schizophrenic, Russia launched a land invasion of Ukraine and half the world shrugged, delivery timeframes have blown out further and further. Who the fuck knows if America would even defend their treaty allies, let alone Taiwan?
I'd agree and In that scenario, without 100% guaranteed complete autonomy, what good are Virginia class boats?
The Virginias are a stop gap until the Brits build a brand new model, aren't they?
Supposedly but first the UK has to build their own fleet. What does this mean for Australia, our strike capability will be enhanced in 2060? And manned boats will be out of date?
edit - Wilipedia says the SSN-AUKUS boats should be in service for Australia by the early 2040s. That's if they're on time and big defence projects are notoriously late.
edit - Wilipedia says the SSN-AUKUS boats should be in service for Australia by the early 2040s. That's if they're on time and big defence projects are notoriously late.
Probably. My limited understanding is that he Americans don't even have capacity to provide us Virginias either.
I believe the Virginias were provided as loans from the US fleet. It was a way of standing down some subs while keeping them ready for action by letting us have a go on them.
Should an actual war break out, the US would recall them, leaving us without subs once again. With the British subs, I'm not sure what the deal was, they may actually have ended up being ours, but we have to wait an extra 10 years to get them.
It was a bad deal, especially given we had subs on order from France that would actually be ours, and would have been diesels, so we already had crew that were able to maintain them. But the coalition under Morrison and now Dutton has such a hard-on for nukes, they couldn't help themselves.
Should an actual war break out, the US would recall them, leaving us without subs once again. With the British subs, I'm not sure what the deal was, they may actually have ended up being ours, but we have to wait an extra 10 years to get them.
It was a bad deal, especially given we had subs on order from France that would actually be ours, and would have been diesels, so we already had crew that were able to maintain them. But the coalition under Morrison and now Dutton has such a hard-on for nukes, they couldn't help themselves.
On a different topic, though I'm pretty sure this guy has been discussed in this thread before.
Coming from the "Some guys just gotta crime" file ...
https://www.theage.com.au/national/...-accused-of-stealing-car-20250224-p5lelm.html
Yes, yes it's behind a paywall. But the head line says it all. You're not missing anything except the dates.
Alleged offense is 20/11/2024
Lehrmann was arrested, charged and bailed on December 2 last year.
adjourned the matter to June 19
Just, WTF dude?
O, and my opinion on AUKUS is, ... it's to far into the future. We need better (and lots more) Military hardware now or RSN
Coming from the "Some guys just gotta crime" file ...
https://www.theage.com.au/national/...-accused-of-stealing-car-20250224-p5lelm.html
Yes, yes it's behind a paywall. But the head line says it all. You're not missing anything except the dates.
Alleged offense is 20/11/2024
Lehrmann was arrested, charged and bailed on December 2 last year.
adjourned the matter to June 19
Just, WTF dude?
O, and my opinion on AUKUS is, ... it's to far into the future. We need better (and lots more) Military hardware now or RSN
Hence the 500 million USD we just handed over to the US to help them fund their own fleet.
There's a point at which even he must be thinking "Maybe if I just stayed locked indoors for a bit, it would be better for everyone. Especially me."
I guess he's at least trying new things?
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...nce-isn-t-enough-by-half-20250305-p5lh23.html
Paywalled, but it's a 'complimentary' article. So, incognito will get it for free.
I don't trust a word from the current US government, but He's right. Australia needs to spend more on Defense, because the US won't come to our aid if we need them.
Paywalled, but it's a 'complimentary' article. So, incognito will get it for free.
I don't trust a word from the current US government, but He's right. Australia needs to spend more on Defense, because the US won't come to our aid if we need them.
Yeah, but I'm guessing they want that extra money to go to US suppliers and contractors.
Thing is, if China decides it "wants" Australia, is any amount of spending enough to stop them without backup from the states?
Frankly, yes. Even the US at the height of their superpower status couldn't fight a major overseas war without allied staging points. Overlord was launched from Britain, Korea and Vietnam were US-backed territory, and Desert Storm was launched from Saudi Arabia.
Unless we're talking a WW3 scenario where China takes all of SE Asia, there really isn't any credible threat to the Australian mainland.
Bullying via trade pressure is a more likely scenario, but even that can only escalate so far until Australia cuts off iron-ore exports (one of the few things which would hurt China as much or more than Australia).
Last edited:
Cutting Australian coal would hurt us, but China would be okay; their domestic production is 10x higher than Australia, and there are plenty of other sources. For iron ore there's really no substitute; we're about 1/2 the world's iron ore exports and have 1/3 the total mineral reserves.
Don't forget they actually did ban Australian coal (among others) in 2020, but the iron kept flowing.
Does anyone else think that an unethical Labor would have a ridiculously easy path to re-election?
- Publicly bash on some easy MAGA targets like Musk and DOGE to wedge Dutton
- "Leak" how Albanese and all of Australia is laughing at Trump for beating him so easily on trade negotiations
- Trump lashes out with threats of tariffs, breaking the alliance, invading Australia, the usual bullshit
- $$$
China invading would mean a huge number of troops moving a long way over deep waters. It's hard to see how that could be successful unless (as stated above) China has already steamrolled through SE Asia. I reckon we'll see that coming.
Realistically, I don't think China wants to invade Australia. Not when they can buy it piecemeal. We'll happily sell it to anyone and give ports to foreign powers.
rainynight65
Ars Scholae Palatinae
Well, here goes nothing.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ralia-would-be-crazy-if-taiwan-tensions-flare
I wonder how many people in Canberra are currently wishing that Scott Morrison hadn't been such an utter dilettante when he tore up the French submarine deal...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ralia-would-be-crazy-if-taiwan-tensions-flare
I wonder how many people in Canberra are currently wishing that Scott Morrison hadn't been such an utter dilettante when he tore up the French submarine deal...
Colby isn't wrong. America isn't able to satisfy their own sub building requirements, let alone letting us have some.
Great subs, impractical for financial and timeline reasons for Australia.
Great subs, impractical for financial and timeline reasons for Australia.