Australia - you're standing in it
Supafreak wrote:andy-mac wrote:Another great Scotty move!!
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/08/housing-australia...
Why can’t Australia be independent and produce and manufacture our own fuel needs and forget about what price everyone else is paying, why are we bound by international prices and supply ? I’ve never understand this and can someone explain all of this to me please.
Good question????
Maybe with the way the world seems to be headed, this may change. Staggering our emergency reserves would be located in another country!! Surely we could establish out our refineries etc.
If Labor tries though, the LNP will scream socialism or some other crap and Murdoch and 9 will be right behind them....
It’s too left of of an idea!
We import most of our fuel. I don't think there is any possibility to develop domestic extraction and refinement from scratch at times when everyone wants action on climate change. It would be a political suicide regardless of whether it's coming from left or right. Remember, we will be renewable soon!?
flollo wrote:We import most of our fuel. I don't think there is any possibility to develop domestic extraction and refinement from scratch at times when everyone wants action on climate change. It would be a political suicide regardless of whether it's coming from left or right. Remember, we will be renewable soon!?
Having facilities for reserves though is a no brainer....
Don't live in NSW, but can smell the bacon up here ...
https://m.
flollo wrote:We import most of our fuel. I don't think there is any possibility to develop domestic extraction and refinement from scratch at times when everyone wants action on climate change. It would be a political suicide regardless of whether it's coming from left or right. Remember, we will be renewable soon!?
We capped our wells that were in production & closed down our refineries. If we do go to war in the near future you can bet they will get fired up again. I understand what you’re saying about we are heading in the renewable direction , we are sitting on a fair bit of oil though . https://www.mintpressnews.com/katie-report-australia-oil-shale-reserves/...
I think having national reserves is a no brainer but same as you guys I’m not fully understanding why it’s not done in a better way. I’m raising transition to renewables as a potential mine field for any political option. But in principle, I’m in support of state owned operation. It’s for our strategic interests, especially as a defence tool.
Yes, the opposition might raise it as some crazy left policy but I don’t see it that way. The state would use heaps of contractors to build the capability anyway + the money is already spent doing it in a different, less efficient way.
At the end of the day if the state doesn’t invest into few key areas like defence, crisis management, health and education then what do we have the state for? There is no state in that instance, it’s just a bunch of individuals living in geographic proximity to each other. And by no means am I some left guy. Far from it to be honest. But I’m not an extremist like so many politicians we see in the media on daily basis. We need to fight these extremists and hopefully, get rid of them so we can live in a normal society.
Exactly.
That right-of-centre political parties in Australia are conservative is one of the biggest bits of ongoing propaganda.
They're extremist.
interesting discussion re. fuel reserve
I would argue the one eyed push for renewables is kind of making us more vulnerable
biden and co. - and oz's seemingly blind faith, follow in footsteps, on everything mentality - are sending us both on an overzealous path, with apparently little in the way of contingencies...
donweather's big picture economist guy vid was referring to oil prices well into the future, seemingly well past anything our hopeles leaders appear to be thinking about...
and, whilst I know a ground war for oz is highly unlikely.... pretty sure armies, their trucks, and most other stuff, are going to need diesel for decades to come... cannot see a tank or a truck 'refuelling' for hours out in the sticks or inhospitable environments waiting for a battery to fill up...
I know the tech. will improve, but the capacity to run and quick charge stuff miles away from a cosy city would be a decade away at least... plus diesel is just easier and more practical in every sense for quite some time to come
pretty sure china and friends would just be laughing at some of impracticalities we've set ourselves up with
not sure about other states, but I know SA's oil refinery just got mothballed rather than demolished, much to the surprise of locals. an economic decision by mobil apparently, often speculated as being solely due to an overly expensive environmental clean up.
one would like to think governments were actually making smart decisions in strategically preserving such infrastructure...
but I doubt it
could save our arses eiher way
flollo wrote:velocityjohnno wrote:Apparently all the Sydney trains stopped:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/no-trains-are-moving-all-sydney-trai...
Now everyone will start bitching. I am quite satisfied with our public transport. I used it in most of our cities and never had any issues. It kinda sucks that our cities are so spread out so building a dense network is very expensive and uneconomical. So, there are quite a few underserved areas but overall, I’m happy with the system in all our cities.
As long as you’re satisfied, that’s the main thing. That’ll be consolation to the thousands of people stuck on trains for hours, some without bathrooms, not sure when they’ll be able to get off. Hard to imagine why anyone would want to complain about that.
Regarding the fuel reserve thing it does make sense to have more back up/security, i was curious and there seems to be some logical reasons behind things, main points from this article https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/australia-has-iea-problem-...
1. Figures are a little misleading as anything on water/at sea isn't counted if counted it seems we come close to 90 days fuel supply. (at least at the time of the article)
2. Huge cost, just under 7 Billion would be needed for holding fuel stocks and that would likely be passed on to the consumer.
3. We import petroleum products from about 33 countries, hence risk is lower for real disruption, like say if we only got it from one or two countries or it all traveled through the same shipping routes.
Not in the article, but you would expect it would be hard to justify any real cost when ideally the demand should be falling in the future with a move away from petroleum fuels where possible
BTW. With this silly talk of right of centre parties being extremist heres part of One nation energy policy
"We will restore Australia’s essential 90-day fuel security policy with on-shore oil reserves and the capacity to refine fuels for domestic supply. Australia’s abundant natural resources should be for the prosperity of our own citizens instead of our global competitors."
Hmm wait a minute its almost exactly what you guys have been saying above.
If you mentioned fuel security to parties from the opposite end of the spectrum like the Greens im sure they would say something like we need to ban all petroleum products by 2025, now that would be real extremist type talk.
Indo I think it's not that hard to argue that right of centre parties have extreme economic policies, extreme (anti) environmental policies and extreme (anti) social policies.
We're not far from one of Australia's two remaining refineries, operated by Viva at present. The West has recently shut BP Kwinana, so no refining there - I wonder what happens to all the downstream chemical businesses? Ship in inputs?
The problem would be making sure the oil gets from our US storage to us. From memory, shortest path is to go from Texas, Panama canal, via pacific through Fiji/Solomons to Brissy/Syd/Melb. Last time that area was contested! IJN subs stalking around (to be fair, their doctrine used them more in support of battlefleet, rather than picking off tankers and trade which is what USN did to strangle them). I'd assume convoys would be used.
I'd also assume Singapore refining a lot of our final product might get shut down in a conflict - or at least not be able to supply given proximity to SCS. We could get oil and perhaps product from other sources, either going through Indian ocean, or around the Cape of Good Hope to the West.
Out in Gippsland there's a shed load of coal, and we could use Fischer Tropsch processes to refine it into a lot of diesel if required
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_process
We also have a gargantuan amount of natural gas that could be used as CNG in diesels.
You can buy E85 at some bowsers and there are a few passenger car models of the last 10 years that are tuned to run on it. Better for emissions, and pays Aussie farmers to boot.
And of course electrics, most of which are made in China currently for the Aus market.
Historical parallel: Operation Pedestal. The Brits try to force a convoy centred around the oil tanker SS Ohio through to Malta. If they didn't get the tanker there, it was all over.
https://www.armouredcarriers.com/operation-pedestal-august-10-12-1942
Great site btw, run by an Aussie.
tldr: they did get SS Ohio there, the ship was half underwater when it arrived, but the cost to do so was horrendous. Much better to have oil stored on site and secure!
AndyM wrote:Indo I think it's not that hard to argue that right of centre parties have extreme economic policies, extreme (anti) environmental policies and extreme (anti) social policies.
If right of centre you mean a party like One nation, then in some cases id say yeah for sure, for instance the rest of their energy policy is completely unrealistic and you could say extreme, we all know coal will be phased out, its not really a choice long term.
'One Nation will apply a national plan that guarantees low-cost, reliable, dispatchable power by building new low-emission coal-fired power stations."
But the same can be said of a left of centre party like The Greens especially when in comes to say coal or gas exports or use of gas.
They both have unrealistic policies and could never govern the country, but it doesn't mean everything is extreme for instance here is some of One Nation policies, i bet if you are honest you would even agree with some and really couldn't label any of these extreme.
"Water
Politicians have failed to construct dams and expand our nation's water security for our ever-increasing population. Instead, they have privatised Australia’s water, with more than 20% sold to foreign investors, while withholding the records of those who trade in this precious commodity. Enough is enough. One Nation will build new water infrastructure projects, including dams and increase the supply to Australian farmers and our growing nation. We will also legislate the full disclosure of water ownership and ban the sale of water to foreign investors"
"Australian Jobs and Infrastructure
One Nation supports jobs for Australians first and foremost. In an effort to bolster homegrown tradesmen and women, One Nation will increase its national apprenticeship scheme whereby first-year apprentices receive a 75% wage subsidy, followed by 50% the second year, and finally 25% in their third year. The release of this program in 2019 was taken up within three weeks by regional businesses. The second rollout of the program was again swiftly welcomed. A third installment of this strategy would be combined with nation-building infrastructure projects including water, rail, roads, and energy. One Nation does not support casualisation of the workforce and instead embraces full-time jobs."
"Family Law and Child Support"
One Nation supports the rights of a parent, as much as the rights of a child. Children have a right to have both parents involved in their life if the mother and father are deemed to be fit and able. We also support the rights of grandparents when family relationships sour. One Nation strongly supports the implementation of a fairer child support system whereby the children are financially supported, not the ex-partner. It is imperative that Australia’s Family Law system is made fairer to discourage expensive, adversarial court action.
"Pensioners
One Nation will advocate for a $100 a week rise under the Work Bonus scheme that would allow pensioners to earn up to $13,000 a year without reducing their pension (Work Bonus Scheme is currently $7,800 p.a.). We believe that you must have lived and worked in Australia for at least 15 years before accessing pension entitlements. One Nation opposes the increase to the age of entitlement to 70 years of age."
"Medical Cannabis
Whole plant medicinal cannabis continues to act as a natural, proven alternative for chronic pain relief and other serious health symptoms experienced by Australians. One Nation remains at the forefront of advocacy within the federal parliament and will continue our push to bring the cost of access down."
"Multinational Taxation
One Nation will oppose any increase in the GST as it will heavily impact on Australia’s standard of living and further burden those on the pension and low incomes. We will maintain our opposition to the reintroduction of death duties and pursue a tax regime that ensures multi-national businesses pay their fair share of tax while operating within Australia."
"Health
Australia’s health system was beyond capacity prior to COVID-19 and evidently inadequate in regional parts of the nation. One Nation recognises the need to bolster the number of regional doctors, nurses, and other critical health professionals. In an effort to encourage better regional medical services, One Nation will introduce three-year contracts for newly qualified medical professionals and in return pay their HECS-HELP loans in full."
Try this gents its not bad
You know who first used the term 'main stream media'? Gobells
Indo what I'm trying to say is that all right of centre parties follow a neoliberal agenda. This consciously involves environmental destruction on a massive scale, it involves a zero-sum economic game which leads to massive and increasing wealth disparity as well as social disfunction and stratification.
These parties are not conservative and this ideology is quite radical and extreme.
Some blue sky thinking for those in Victoria. The spirit of Bob Jelly is alive and well.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/south-east/mornington-peninsula-mayo...
That shut him up https://fb.watch/jecah0FmnY/?mibextid=qC1gEa
Supafreak wrote:That shut him up https://fb.watch/jecah0FmnY/?mibextid=qC1gEa
It was pretty brutal.
AndyM wrote:Indo what I'm trying to say is that all right of centre parties follow a neoliberal agenda. This consciously involves environmental destruction on a massive scale, it involves a zero-sum economic game which leads to massive and increasing wealth disparity as well as social disfunction and stratification.These parties are not conservative and this ideology is quite radical and extreme.
Ha ha what a complete load of garbage, the developed world is pretty all much run under a neo liberal system and has some of the strictest environmental policies in the world, you only have to look at the environmental records of communist and socialist countries to see they are not immune, actually some of the worst environmental destruction in history has happened in these countries, because governments do as they wish, while more and more companies in the free market are held accountable for environmental practices by shareholders and customers.
As for wealth disparity, there will always be wealth disparity because not everyone can be top dog, the most important thing though is more the average levels of wealth or average standard of living, again developed countries generally run under a neo liberal system and generally enjoy the highest average levels of wealth and highest standards of living of the world, and the average globally have been rising at crazy rates while levels of poverty falling at crazy rates.
Even in 1950 2/3rds of the world was living in poverty, now it's well below one third.
BTW. You clearly dont know what conservatism is or what the meaning of extreme is.
There’s that good old Indo logic again :)
Just because I said right of centre parties were extreme doesn’t mean that I don’t think far left parties are extreme.
And the funny thing is, environmentalism is a true example of conservatism, as opposed to parties who implement reckless and unsustainable policies.
Part of the definition of political conservatism is “ Conservatives tend to favor institutions and practices that guarantee stability and evolved gradually.”
Right wing policies are often radical and guarantee instability.
Geez I feel safer already....
Not a military strategist, but is this really worth the money being spent? Seems it just made us more of a target, and a poorer one at that, imagine what that kind of money could do if spent on education, health etc. Humans ey....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/14/aukus-nuclear-submarines-a...
AndyM wrote:Part of the definition of political conservatism is “ Conservatives tend to favor institutions and practices that guarantee stability and evolved gradually.”
Left wing policies are often radical and guarantee instability.
Here i fixed it for you.
Most radical policy change LNP have made in the last 30 years or so is bringing in GST and gun laws, as much as i don't like GST as a tradie, both are still positive changes that were needed, the rest of the time it's been tweaking things (Covid policy aside, as more something that just had to be dealt with, and again was obviously needed)
I mean its not like they just got into government and want to change the constitution on something that all other attempts (advisory bodies schemes) have completely failed, common sense and logic would say you ensure something works first before cementing it in the constitution.
@andy-mac
Exactly.
Not sure when it was that the Australian people asked for this…
Seriously guys its like you have an 18 year olds mind in a mid aged body, we all know any government be it LNP or Labor would much rather blow cash on education, health etc things that will result in votes.
But they also live in the real world where military capacity is important, not because they ever hope to use it, but more because if they do purchase them it ironically helps ensure they never will need to use them.
$368b is getting up towards our whole current national debt ($525b) and the cost will surely end up many times over these estimates.
We are now completely captured by the US military-industrial complex and wealthy elite. We have taken the final step to ceding to the US (and UK) all of what was remaining of our political, military, economic and cultural sovereignty and autonomy as a nation. There is basically no longer such as thing as Australia as an independent nation-state. We are a US vassal state and nothing else.
The Australian taxpayer and the nation as a whole is now just a factory manufacturing wealth for the ultra-wealthy US elite and military industrial complex at the expense of our living standards, way of life and our national security. Australia has now put the master stroke on signing itself away to becoming just another for-profit corporation being run by the US, and at the same time just another division of the US military. The Australian taxpayer can look forward to many decades of slaving away under the hot Aussie sun working via proxy for the US wealthy elite and military-industrial complex.
AUKUS will also require the reduction and diverting over many decades of spending on basic services that improve the prosperity and wellbeing of Australia, simply in order to set up Australia to spearhead the US's military adventurism and warmongering. We are actually paying money, ceding our sovereignty and trading off our living standards and way of life in order to do this.
We can look forward to further: escalating geopolitical instability and polarisation in the region and whole planet, reduction in spending on basic social services and associated living standards and prosperity, importing of the US's culture wars, thought control and brainwashing by the US news and social media's near monopoly, pillaging and siphoning of our wealth by US private equity and huge multinationals, ceding to and engraining of US neoliberalism and associated government austerity, privatisation, increased wealth stratification, inequality, disadvantage and poverty.
We have no reason to try to be a "tough guy", flex military muscle and be a major political and strategic player in the Asia Pacific region. We should just quietly and humbly focus on our own backyard, living standards, economic growth and prosperity, way of life, and friendly trade/economic, political and cultural ties with our region, much like how the Nordic nations tend to conduct themselves.
It will be interesting to see if Australia can have it both ways with China: trying to increase economic and trade ties (basically make money off China), while at the same time further strengthening and spearheading a military bloc whose sole purpose is to contain and roll back China's growth and ultimately to go to war with China...
Jelly Flater wrote:@andy-mac
Exactly.
Not sure when it was that the Australian people asked for this…
At a cost $14k for every person in Australia I sure hope they have an open day where those who funded these submarines can have a spin around Sydney harbour in them and get to press a few of those red buttons on board.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I see it we are apparently paying a shitload up front so the Americans can build more submarines for themselves so they can get onto building ours quicker. What happened to good old cash on delivery??
"The Australian taxpayer and the nation as a whole is now just a factory manufacturing wealth for the ultra-wealthy US elite and military industrial complex at the expense of our living standards, way of life and our national security."
Absolutely gsco, the further entrenched it becomes, the more blatant the scams are.
indo-dreaming wrote:Seriously guys its like you have an 18 year olds mind in a mid aged body, we all know any government be it LNP or Labor would much rather blow cash on education, health etc things that will result in votes.
But they also live in the real world where military capacity is important, not because they ever hope to use it, but more because if they do purchase them it ironically helps ensure they never will need to use them.
Military capacity may be important, but how are these submarines going to help? Keeping the ship trading lanes safe for trade, I'm trying to recall who our main trading partner is???
They can have a referendum on the Voice which is fair enough, but I think Australians should also have had some say on what they think is important in regards to military spending. This amount of money going to prop up the USA military complex is a joke. If we are really that concerned would we not be better off obtaining some intercontinental ballistic nuclear missiles as a deterrent? Not saying I would wish for that, but for any government to commit this huge amount of money (our money) to this without it being ok'ed by the Australian public is wrong. Have the Politicians explain to the Australian people why it is necessary.
I bet by the time the subs arrive there will be low-cost mini submarine drones that can hunt them out or just follow them around like pilot fish or sharks trailing a pod of whales and send them to the bottom of the ocean when and if needed.
Aircraft carriers are now super vulnerable to various missiles or drone swarms.
In Roman times vassal states paid taxes to Rome. Now they pay them in big contracts to the MIC and by integrating defence systems so only one source of supply is viable.
The test for whether your country is a vassal state of the Empire is "do you have a US base?".
gsco wrote:$368b is getting up towards our whole current national debt ($525b) and the cost will surely end up many times over these estimates.
We are now completely captured by the US military-industrial complex and wealthy elite. We have taken the final step to ceding to the US (and UK) all of what was remaining of our political, military, economic and cultural sovereignty and autonomy as a nation. There is basically no longer such as thing as Australia as an independent nation-state. We are a US vassal state and nothing else.
The Australian taxpayer and the nation as a whole is now just a factory manufacturing wealth for the ultra-wealthy US elite and military industrial complex at the expense of our living standards, way of life and our national security. Australia has now put the master stroke on signing itself away to becoming just another for-profit corporation being run by the US, and at the same time just another division of the US military. The Australian taxpayer can look forward to many decades of slaving away under the hot Aussie sun working via proxy for the US wealthy elite and military-industrial complex.
AUKUS will also require the reduction and diverting over many decades of spending on basic services that improve the prosperity and wellbeing of Australia, simply in order to set up Australia to spearhead the US's military adventurism and warmongering. We are actually paying money, ceding our sovereignty and trading off our living standards and way of life in order to do this.
We can look forward to further: escalating geopolitical instability and polarisation in the region and whole planet, reduction in spending on basic social services and associated living standards and prosperity, importing of the US's culture wars, thought control and brainwashing by the US news and social media's near monopoly, pillaging and siphoning of our wealth by US private equity and huge multinationals, ceding to and engraining of US neoliberalism and associated government austerity, privatisation, increased wealth stratification, inequality, disadvantage and poverty.
We have no reason to try to be a "tough guy", flex military muscle and be a major political and strategic player in the Asia Pacific region. We should just quietly and humbly focus on our own backyard, living standards, economic growth and prosperity, way of life, and friendly trade/economic, political and cultural ties with our region, much like how the Nordic nations tend to conduct themselves.
It will be interesting to see if Australia can have it both ways with China: trying to increase economic and trade ties (basically make money off China), while at the same time further strengthening and spearheading a military bloc whose sole purpose is to contain and roll back China's growth and ultimately to go to war with China...
Dutton has already come out and said he would approve of money coming out of the NDIS to fund the Sub deal, Guardian this morning.
Well shit, I don't know what to believe.
Long been distrustful of American military adventurism, intervention...whatever you want to call it, but I'm equally leery of China's expansionist ambitions. I find it hard to believe that we, meaning The West, won't somehow be at war with China in the coming decade (most like a proxy war fought elsewhere). Dont think that's being alarmist, don't think it's aping Dutton's 'drums of war' either, just a dispassionate view of two convergent yet incompatible world views. Hope to be wrong, however I reckon history would bear me out.
As Indo says, military capacity is built largely so it doesn't have to be used. Can get to a point where it's irrational - as per nuclear warheads in the eighties - however submarines are largely a strategic deterrent.
He's a little hawkish, but over the years Hugh White has had much to say about boosting our capacity against a superpower reliant on our resources. I guess I fall somewhat into his camp here.
There's a tightrope that Australia must walk and I hope in the future our politicians are skilled statesman that can pull it off. Meaning they can be bonded to the devil we know (US, UK), and still trade with China as they seek to dominate and perhaps usurp the current order.
Better to spend a fraction of the money on a few Missiles and by taking everything important like defence , banking and infrastructure offline. It’s chinas quantum tech that will control the entire internet and that is the real issue. They even named it “old grudge” and “ payback time”. Also don’t go to war over an island that the UN including Britain said belonged to China. Diplomacy these days is the answer and if Biden wants war everywhere give him a sword and put him out front.
I’m pro America but the idiots running the place need to pull their heads in as they have neglected their country and let it rot away and are now using war to scramble back to some weird kind of pride and gun selling finance. Do NOT let your kids fight another Vietnam on behalf of Biden and his madmen. The US has to face reality, they have been a decadent bunch unconcerned with their people and crumbling nation while other powers have been quietly expanding and pretty soon it will be the YUAN in cash and Crypto that will be the global standard. The US dollar is looking grim due to them forcing China and Russia into each others arms.
Shame eh, isn’t it…but …MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN
soggydog wrote:gsco wrote:$368b is getting up towards our whole current national debt ($525b) and the cost will surely end up many times over these estimates.
We are now completely captured by the US military-industrial complex and wealthy elite. We have taken the final step to ceding to the US (and UK) all of what was remaining of our political, military, economic and cultural sovereignty and autonomy as a nation. There is basically no longer such as thing as Australia as an independent nation-state. We are a US vassal state and nothing else.
The Australian taxpayer and the nation as a whole is now just a factory manufacturing wealth for the ultra-wealthy US elite and military industrial complex at the expense of our living standards, way of life and our national security. Australia has now put the master stroke on signing itself away to becoming just another for-profit corporation being run by the US, and at the same time just another division of the US military. The Australian taxpayer can look forward to many decades of slaving away under the hot Aussie sun working via proxy for the US wealthy elite and military-industrial complex.
AUKUS will also require the reduction and diverting over many decades of spending on basic services that improve the prosperity and wellbeing of Australia, simply in order to set up Australia to spearhead the US's military adventurism and warmongering. We are actually paying money, ceding our sovereignty and trading off our living standards and way of life in order to do this.
We can look forward to further: escalating geopolitical instability and polarisation in the region and whole planet, reduction in spending on basic social services and associated living standards and prosperity, importing of the US's culture wars, thought control and brainwashing by the US news and social media's near monopoly, pillaging and siphoning of our wealth by US private equity and huge multinationals, ceding to and engraining of US neoliberalism and associated government austerity, privatisation, increased wealth stratification, inequality, disadvantage and poverty.
We have no reason to try to be a "tough guy", flex military muscle and be a major political and strategic player in the Asia Pacific region. We should just quietly and humbly focus on our own backyard, living standards, economic growth and prosperity, way of life, and friendly trade/economic, political and cultural ties with our region, much like how the Nordic nations tend to conduct themselves.
It will be interesting to see if Australia can have it both ways with China: trying to increase economic and trade ties (basically make money off China), while at the same time further strengthening and spearheading a military bloc whose sole purpose is to contain and roll back China's growth and ultimately to go to war with China...
Dutton has already come out and said he would approve of money coming out of the NDIS to fund the Sub deal, Guardian this morning.
It appears as if Australians have agreed to have their standard of living drastically reduced for the next few decades to prepare for a war by buying what will probably be obsolete subs when finally delivered if delivered. A war where there can be no winners with our largest trading partner who we are still selling iron ore etc to help them build up their military.
Cool and normal.......
stunet wrote:Well shit, I don't know what to believe.
Long been distrustful of American military adventurism, intervention...whatever you want to call it, but I'm equally leery of China's expansionist ambitions. I find it hard to believe that we, meaning The West, won't somehow be at war with China in the coming decade (most like a proxy war fought elsewhere). Dont think that's being alarmist, don't think it's aping Dutton's 'drums of war' either, just a dispassionate view of two convergent yet incompatible world views. Hope to be wrong, however I reckon history would bear me out.
As Indo says, military capacity is built largely so it doesn't have to be used. Can get to a point where it's irrational - as per nuclear warheads in the eighties - however submarines are largely a strategic deterrent.
He's a little hawkish, but over the years Hugh White has had much to say about boosting our capacity against a superpower reliant on our resources. I guess I fall somewhat into his camp here.
There's a tightrope that Australia must walk and I hope in the future our politicians are skilled statesman that can pull it off. Meaning they can be bonded to the devil we know (US, UK), and still trade with China as they seek to dominate and perhaps usurp the current order.
Hope any inevitable proxy war can be contained!!
And I may add, hope the proxy war doesn't take place in Australia.
Some reading on underwater drones suggests they will have strengths and weaknesses. A lot of tech and tactics involved in both offence and defence. All sorts of new submarines are being built by various countries complicating threat and defence.
The old days of sort of feeling big, tough and safely hidden in your expensive sub are fading.
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/defence-white-paper-faqs-the-enduring-...
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/underwater-drones-could-be-end-...
Two Labor leaders ago we were told to embrace the "China Century" and both sides of politics were falling over each other to sell our assets and resources to the Chinese and import Chinese migrants in the hundreds of thousands and sign free trade agreements with the CCP. Now we are told we need to prepare for war.
Something happened during Turnbull's term as leader, something beyond the Dastyari scandal and Chinese money infiltrating our politics. They know something and they are not telling us. What is it that let the hawks kill the doves? If the ALP don't come clean on what the real dangers are and why we have to take such a dramatic turn then this will cost them votes, as it should.
If the CCP are such a danger to us, why are we still supplying the resources Xi needs to build his "wall of steel". He can't do it without our ore. We have leverage. During WW2 the Soviets were still providing the Germans with war resources right up until the day Hitler launched Barbarossa which Stalin and Molotov were convinced wouldn't happen. They lived to regret that.
Probably the shift under Turnbull was because defence and intelligence detected a threat and got the message through.
My example upthread of the Dutch East Indies deciding to stop selling oil to Imperial Japan and what happened next goes some way to explaining why we still are selling ore. Contracts are probably a more telling reason.
Perspective:
Australia has the 6th longest coastline in the world. No land borders. Trade is entirely dependant on maritime access.
China has the 10th longest coastline in the world. Less than half of Australia’s coastline. Multiple land borders. Trade access is diversified across land and sea.
China has the largest Navy in the world (by # of vessels, although admittedly many existing ships are dubious in capability). This figure includes more than 70 submarines, in service now, including 6 nuclear powered Ballistic Missile boats. They have 44 attack submarines, a mix of nuclear and conventional. In terms of real naval capability, ie offensive power, the PLA-N still lags behind the US but projected capability sees them eclipse the US in the mid-2030s. The number of ships and submarines under construction is mind-blowing.
Australia has the 51st largest Navy in the world. Qualitatively it sits somewhere in the 20s. 6 attack submarines over the next 25(!) years is probably prudent. Whether this is a good deal or not is a different question.
Also, I note a few mentions of Australia achieving similar security outcomes through investment in missiles - which I’m assuming to mean ICBMs. That’s a dead-end, strategically. You either go nuke or you don’t bother (as a strategic deterrent). Going nuke-armed would violate Australia’s commitments under the NPT. Non-starter.
velocityjohnno wrote:Probably the shift under Turnbull was because defence and intelligence detected a threat and got the message through.
My example upthread of the Dutch East Indies deciding to stop selling Imperial Japan and what happened next goes some way to explaining why we still are selling ore. Contracts are probably a more telling reason.
I’d say that politicians started listening to what a number of sources were telling them, rather than a threat being detected. My understanding is that the message had been pretty consistent since about 2010, just no one wanted to hear it. There were finally some significant legislative changes around foreign interference and espionage circa 2017. China didn’t like that. Rumbled.
‘It seems that a peaceful world just doesn’t serve America’s interests’
$$$
https://m.
" Contracts are probably a more telling reason."
Pretty sure we had contracts in place to supply our wine and seafood and coal and they didn't give a fuck when it came to expressing their 'displeasure' at us. Fuck sovereign risk when it comes to the CCP, and we don't have to break contracts to pressure them. We just need leadership with balls. Slow down their preparations, bully the bullies and expose their vulnerabilities. We are spending half a trillion and subjecting our future to austerity because they are bullies.
"Pig Ore Albo" as far as I'm concerned. (It's good ore, just dug up by pigs, Twiggy and Gina)
There is the idea that you deliver on your contracts, if it were my business and a client cancelled an order like that, I just wouldn't supply them again so I do not disagree with you.
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/03/consumer-confidence-heads-for-h...
consumer confidence inches closer to the covid lockdown lows...
"I’d say that politicians started listening to what a number of sources were telling them, rather than a threat being detected. My understanding is that the message had been pretty consistent since about 2010, just no one wanted to hear it. There were finally some significant legislative changes around foreign interference and espionage circa 2017. China didn’t like that. Rumbled."
Must've been frustrating 2010-15 or so.
Jelly Flater wrote:‘It seems that a peaceful world just doesn’t serve America’s interests’
$$$
Interesting video....
What a shit show the world is getting itself into ..
The world was so peaceful before 1945.
The "I can't believe it's not politics" thread.