Biden's Dementia on full display.... (Aus-US-UK Submarine deal) - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Australia.

Moderator: PoFo Asia & Australasia Mods

Forum rules: No one-line posts please.
#15190696


Old cunt can't even remember our PM's name even though he was just told it! Reads it from the fucking teleprompter later.

We tore up the good deal with, ALSO AN IMPORTANT ALLY, France for this crazy demented fool and his Cornpop crap?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... arine-deal

Fuck. The frogs have every right to be pissed. They won't deal with us for a good while.

Trump was somehow more embarrassing than this turd??? You Democrats really believe that fantasy do you?
#15190699
colliric wrote:Old cunt can't even remember our PM's name even though he was just told it! Reads it from the fucking teleprompter later.


Scott begins with an S FYI.

We tore up the good deal with, ALSO AN IMPORTANT ALLY, France ....

....The frogs have every right to be pissed. They won't deal with us for a good while.


The French are pissed because they have lost a multi billion dollar contract. They no doubt will deal with Australia in other ways regardless. Although expect to see more Anglo cooperation in the future given their largest partner China seems to want to break ties with Australia and the US is trying to build up new relationships after Afghanistan. This whole pact is merely the moving of pieces where Australia wants to enter (new) US markets and the US with their poodle want to secure more influence in the Indo-Pacific to counter China. And perhaps that is what we should be worried about. Not this pact specifically given such a pact is useful for defence as well as economic ties and China should appreciate that I guess. But what the purpose of it is in the future which China (and the world) should be concerned of. If this is the start of the new Cold War and we are basically creating an iron curtain split down the Indian ocean then I would rather the UK stay out of it all together. Or if it is really is about Australian security and trade relationships then OK that is fine. And we will know more in the future what the purpose is. Today BoJo did his best to not address China by name but at the same time didn't give insurances that this isn't indeed to counter them. So if this is just a contract for Submarines, we won't be sailing down contested waters will we guys?
#15190709
B0ycey wrote:
This whole pact is merely the moving of pieces where Australia wants to enter (new) US markets and the US with their poodle want to secure more influence in the Indo-Pacific to counter China. And perhaps that is what we should be worried about. Not this pact specifically given such a pact is useful for defense as well as economic ties and China should appreciate that I guess. But what the purpose of it is in the future which China (and the world) should be concerned of. If this is the start of the new Cold War and we are basically creating an iron curtain split down the Indian ocean then I would rather the UK stay out of it all together. Or if it is really is about Australian security and trade relationships then OK that is fine.



China doesn't hesitate to throw it's weight around. Aussies don't want to get pushed around. They look at all the craziness in the South China Sea, and know they need to up their game.
#15190712
late wrote:China doesn't hesitate to throw it's weight around. Aussies don't want to get pushed around. They look at all the craziness in the South China Sea, and know they need to up their game.


I haven't said that Australia shouldn't consider all defensive measures. But we have the Five eyes and this new AUKUS group specifically are the three most skeptical Anglo nations against China within that pact in which they haven't consulted New Zealand and Canada. Why? The truth is like Trident, this measure is using US technology and will be a venture in a key geopolitical region and I suspect we will have more US military presence based down under. In other words, there is going to be another Iron Curtain. And if it stays like that, then perhaps there isn't much to worry about given Australia seems to want to move ties away from China and into US markets. They problem is the US and the UK seems to want to sail in contested waters lately and you can be almost sure that these Subs will likely sail within them too because we are that fucking stupid. And if we do these stupid missions under a defensive pact, then we are provoking war, a war nobody wins and as such this is something we should be worried about. What is the actual objective here. Defence or attack. Is it a new NATO, or is it really just about building subs.
#15190716
Rancid wrote:Didn't new zealand drop out of five eyes?


Not that I am aware of but I know Ardern is a total SJW and as such New Zealand is a hippy loving Island. Which is completely different to Australia which is quite conservative. So perhaps NZ might not get involved in the Five Eyes that much. But even so, they weren't consulted which is quite strange given we are allies and I don't see why we splintered from the Five Eyes anyway. Or perhaps I do. Australia seems to be having a ding doing with China over their wine and the US seem keen to get them on board. I don't think the withdrawal out of Afghanistan was about saving money (and lives). I think it was more to concentrate is key geopolitical regions and I doubt this is all to do with Submarines. :hmm:
#15190717
It could literally be the last flailings of a dying empire.

If the US continues to fragment, the Cold War will warm... WWIII within 5 years?

Not that I will know anything about it. Luckily, we live next door to the largest CIA listening station in the Mediterranean. I will be a shadow on a wall within seconds of hostilities opening - Won't feel a thing.


:)
#15190723
B0ycey wrote:I don't see why we splintered from the Five Eyes anyway.


That's what I'm saying. If I recall right, NZ decided to splinter from five eyes. Why should they consulted if they are not interested in any sort of partnership?

I'm speculating right now, but I believe NZ is trying to play the middle. By not directly cooperating with Aukus, they antagonize China less. However, they still have the cultural/historical connections to the anglosphere, and know they will be protected by Aukus if something crazy happened. Unlikely that Aukus would leave NZ out to dry.

A win-win. They do not receive the ire of Beijing, but also know they still have the Aukus safety blanket if needed.

Did NZ condemn Aukus?

ingliz wrote:It could literally be the last flailings of a dying empire.


Empire in the traditional sense of the world, sure. It could also just be an evolution towards more cooperation and not a death of the US. There is a false equivalence constantly drawn on pofo that when the US decides to finally cooperate with other nations, it's somehow a sign of "the dying empire".
Last edited by Rancid on 16 Sep 2021 17:23, edited 1 time in total.
#15190724
Rancid wrote:That's what I'm saying. If I recall right, NZ decided to splinter from five eyes. Why should they consulted if they are not interested in any sort of partnership?


Because I don't think they have splintered. Although they could have just turned it down anyway given it is hippy Island. Besides, perhaps they maybe fortunate. The idea of playing War Games in the Pacific over a threat I don't think exists doesn't exactly seem appealing IMHO.
#15190727
Rancid wrote:Did NZ condemn Aukus?


No, just they weren't consulted. And I suspect they prefer it that way given they like playing Switzerland. And really I don't think you can really condemn a defense pact anyway. The issue is, this has all the hallmarks of what happened with NATO and the SU. If it is only about Submarines then who gives a shit. But we all know what played out during the Cold War and the pissing contest that occurred and who really wants to be part of that. It wouldn't have been too bad if today was just a reveal about the Submarines, but AUKUS made a big deal on the Indo-Pacific security and that is laymen for War Games and boundary pushing.
#15190745
Rancid wrote:The US holds war games with allies in the region as it is. I know with Korea for sure.


Yeah, I suppose they do. But this time it will be against China and very much the same shit that happened during the Cold War rather than North Korea. Are you aware of the Able exercise of 83?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83

Antagonising isn't exactly sensible due to lack of understanding and this is clear provocative towards China despite the three leaders refusing to say it is. But China is correct about one thing. They will now be forced to reciprocate and there may well be an arms race now. As I said if it was just about Submarines it wouldn't have been too bad. But I wonder, if China was to make a pact with East Timor and base a few of their nuclear submarines there, what the reaction of AUKUS would be. I only wish we didn't have an announcement that this was about Indo-Pacific security as that is perhaps what angered China the most. If anything the area will be less secure now. :hmm:
#15190746
B0ycey wrote:Yeah, I suppose they do. But this time it will be against China and very much the same shit that happened during the Cold War rather than North Korea. Are you aware of the Able exercise of 83?

No, but just read up on it.

B0ycey wrote: They will now be forced to reciprocate and there may well be an arms race now

There wasn't an Arms race already? China has been upping it's nuclear game for many years now. How is that not already an arms race? We've been in a perpetual arms race since the end of WWII (and arguably since the dawn of modern man)

B0ycey wrote:But I wonder, if China was to make a pact with East Timor and base a few of their nuclear submarines there, what the reaction of AUKUS would be. I only wish we didn't have an announcement that this was about Indo-Pacific security as that is perhaps what angered China the most. If anything the area will be less secure now.


I figure they would do something like that anyway.

Generally, escalation is not good, but I feel it's going to happen one way or another. I don't think it's a cycle that can be broken.

This is all more of the same shit to me. An eventual war is unavoidable. China is building a war like culture for it's males for a purpose no? Sounds like they are getting ready to escalate with or without this agreement.

I don't think there's a moral high ground that could help here. This is the ride we're on, hang on tight.
#15190748
Rancid wrote:There wasn't an Arms race already? China has been upping it's nuclear game for many years now. How is that not already an arms race? We've been in a perpetual arms race since the end of WWII (and arguably since the dawn of modern man)


Your (US) arsenal has been reducing by the nuclear disarmament, and China doesn't have the same capacity as the US although it is true they have been building up their defence in the China Sea. That isn't an arms race. An arms race is building more than you need in order to have more than you adversary.

This is all more of the same shit to me. An eventual war is unavoidable. China is building a war like culture for a purpose no?


Well we have always had disagreed on this haven't we. I don't see a war happening the same way a war never occurred during the Cold War. And this pact won't start a war either... unless it was by accident or stupidity. I don't think China is gearing for war either but more that the US fears they will lose their homogeny to China and that is what is causing tensions today. What will happen is both nations increasing their allies and divide the world into two.
#15190751
B0ycey wrote:Well we have always had disagreed on this haven't we. I don't see a war happening the same way a war never occurred during the Cold War. And this pact won't start a war either... unless it was by accident or stupidity. I don't think China is gearing for war either but more that the US fears they will lose their homogeny to China and that is what is causing tensions today. What will happen is both nations increasing their allies and divide the world into two.


I agree that we will always disagree on this. :lol:

Even if the US step away from the Pacific completely, the world would still divide in two (or even more) via China's actions. I think the actions by the US/west is accelerating this divide, but it will happen anyway with China's economic strong arming, and initial forays into meddling. I know I sound like an apocalyptic evangelical that wants the end days to come, but I do like the idea of speeding towards the next global (non-US centric) paradigm. :lol: It needs to get worse before it gets better I guess. :eek:

Hang on to those rails!
#15190753
Rancid wrote:I agree that we will always disagree on this. :lol:

Even if the US step away from the Pacific completely, the world would still divide in two (or even more) via China's actions. I think the actions by the US/west is accelerating this divide, but it will happen anyway with China's strong arming, and inital forays into meddling. I know I sound like an apocalyptic evangelical that wants the end days to come, but I do like the idea of speeding towards the next global (non-US centric) paradigm. :lol:

Hang on to those rails!


I would rather not Rancid. I don't really like to see the next generation playing in ashes. :lol:

I have always has the opinion that the best course of action isn't to be aggressive against your enemies but to reduce ties to a minimum with them. That isn't in correspondence to the US vs China BS shitshow but my opinion in general and perhaps that may well split the world in two in some way but at least it would ease conflict given you are basically separating yourself from them. And that is why I wish we didn't interfere with other nations politics actually. There is no need to change the world. Just start trading more with partners and leave nations to dig their own pit.
"Whether we like it or not"

Proving me right and you humiliatingly wrong. :[…]

@Drlee ; I agree also with @annatar1914 that[…]

Economic tensions can lead to the sort of ideolo[…]

Key Rasmussen Polls

This is becoming a habit. Here's this weekend's […]