UK, US and Australia launch landmark security pact

[Danllan]

Of course not. But we cannot influence it in a military way. It is delusional to think we can. The only way the Chinese people can obtain democratic freedom is to choose it and fight for it themselves. The USA won't help them. The UK simply doesn't have the capability.

You are missing the point - but whether it's deliberately or not I don't know...

Nobody is looking at regime change inside the PRC, that would be as impossible and stupid as the Chinese thinking they could do the same in the USA. What we are doing, at last, is stopping the unchallenged expansion of China and helping to defend those Chinese who did choose and fight for their freedom, i.e. the Taiwanese, as well as others that China is eyeing further down the road.

For reasons I don't know, many - left and right - seems to have written off the US because they have had two duff Presidents in a row, one left and one right. Their election doesn't really matter, long term strategy is pan / super-presidential.

Of course the UK can't do anywhere near as much as it once could, or may do in the future; but bringing in Australia to SSN capability, along with India's steady progress and, ultimately, Canada too, will mean that there is a credible check to China. And that is not including the ever-growing list of other regional powers such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia etc. who also have very real and justified concerns about China.

Make no mistake, if China is not stood up to it will keep pushing and pushing - study history.

Aussies say they approached UK about some sort or arrangement to get nuclear powered subs, so they could faf around the ocean, playing superpower.
Boris of course realised he can barely muster enough cash to build a new yacht for the royals to faf around the ocean, as if the empire still was a thing.
Therefore he went to the yanks, asked them to pony up and make a deal with the Aussies. Boris promised of course that UK would tag along, to carry stuff like bags and water bottles. Paddy Biden of course took full advantage. Good to have tagalongs, and good to have some cover so the whole thing looks like it’s not just an American imperial thing.
Oh, and here’s the thing. Shelia will still screw GB over a barrel, when it comes to the implementation of the minute details of the trade deal. Untraceable steaks will show up in Asda, at 10 pence a pound. Skippy steaks will be two dozen for a £1.50.

There may come a point when you realise that you sulk just a wee bit too much. Delighted to read your post nonetheless, the more you whine, the more we have to smile about.


And STILL no comment about the EU's awful record in re migrants and law-breaking?

 

[fudge]

You are missing the point - but whether it's deliberately or not I don't know...

Nobody is looking at regime change inside the PRC, that would be as impossible and stupid as the Chinese thinking they could do the same in the USA. What we are doing, at last, is stopping the unchallenged expansion of China and helping to defend those Chinese who did choose and fight for their freedom, i.e. the Taiwanese, as well as others that China is eyeing further down the road.

For reasons I don't know, many - left and right - seems to have written off the US because they have had two duff Presidents in a row, one left and one right. Their election doesn't really matter, long term strategy is pan / super-presidential.

Of course the UK can't do anywhere near as much as it once could, or may do in the future; but bringing in Australia to SSN capability, along with India's steady progress and, ultimately, Canada too, will mean that there is a credible check to China. And that is not including the ever-growing list of other regional powers such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia etc. who also have very real and justified concerns about China.

Make no mistake, if China is not stood up to it will keep pushing and pushing - study history.



There may come a point when you realise that you sulk just a wee bit too much. Delighted to read your post nonetheless, the more you whine, the more we have to smile about.


And STILL no comment about the EU's awful record in re migrants and law-breaking?

There you go again utterly delusional. All the USA is doing is flogging arms. They don’t care about the Taiwanese anymore than they care about the Afghans, Iraqis, Lybians, Vietnamese or Syrians. Indeed they have no intention of upsetting the Chinese too much, their trillion dollar tech companies are underpinned by Chinese manufacturing.

 

[Muck Spreader]

Global Britain.
And it's upset the French. Win win.

If you know anything about the defence industry it will take a while to work out who are the winners and losers in this. The main contractors in the original contract are the French Navel Group jointly with the US Lockheed-Martin, but they will have sub contracted out to hundreds of other contractors around the world. But we can assume mostly in the US ,EU, UK and Aus with construction being carried out by ASC in Australia.

As yet there is now no contract to build anything, only an aspiration to eventually have a nuclear fleet. There is a possibility just to lease Virgina class subs from the US, but the US yards have a slow rate of completion. Or a build by ASC but using Rolls Royce nuclear units with the project supervised by General Dynamics which could involve BAE and Thales.

 

[Ashtree]

You are missing the point - but whether it's deliberately or not I don't know...

Nobody is looking at regime change inside the PRC, that would be as impossible and stupid as the Chinese thinking they could do the same in the USA. What we are doing, at last, is stopping the unchallenged expansion of China and helping to defend those Chinese who did choose and fight for their freedom, i.e. the Taiwanese, as well as others that China is eyeing further down the road.

For reasons I don't know, many - left and right - seems to have written off the US because they have had two duff Presidents in a row, one left and one right. Their election doesn't really matter, long term strategy is pan / super-presidential.

Of course the UK can't do anywhere near as much as it once could, or may do in the future; but bringing in Australia to SSN capability, along with India's steady progress and, ultimately, Canada too, will mean that there is a credible check to China. And that is not including the ever-growing list of other regional powers such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia etc. who also have very real and justified concerns about China.

Make no mistake, if China is not stood up to it will keep pushing and pushing - study history.



There may come a point when you realise that you sulk just a wee bit too much. Delighted to read your post nonetheless, the more you whine, the more we have to smile about.


And STILL no comment about the EU's awful record in re migrants and law-breaking?

And here’s the thing. The EU’crats and the French in particular, have their lingerie in a rather painful knot over this affair.
Paddy Biden will need to throw a bone in the general direction of EU. Boris it so happens, is popping over to have tea with Biden in a couple of weeks. Expect Biden to whisper “encouragingly”, in the ear of Boris, that he would appreciate “full and transparent” implementation of the NI Protocol. Take it of course that the famed Irish political lobby in USA, is already pushing that little chat right up to the top of the running order between our man in the Whitehouse and your man in the garishly refurbed flat.

 

[Danllan]

There you go again utterly delusional. All the USA is doing is flogging arms. They don’t care about the Taiwanese anymore than they care about the Afghans, Iraqis, Lybians, Vietnamese or Syrians. Indeed they have no intention of upsetting the Chinese too much, their trillion dollar tech companies are underpinned by Chinese manufacturing.

Right you are, we'll just have to agree to differ in the short-term and then see who is right later.

If you know anything about the defence industry it will take a while to work out who are the winners and losers in this. The main contractors in the original contract are the French Navel Group jointly with the US Lockheed-Martin, but they will have sub contracted out to hundreds of other contractors around the world. But we can assume mostly in the US ,EU, UK and Aus with construction being carried out by ASC in Australia.

As yet there is now no contract to build anything, only an aspiration to eventually have a nuclear fleet. There is a possibility just to lease Virgina class subs from the US, but the US yards have a slow rate of completion. Or a build by ASC but using Rolls Royce nuclear units with the project supervised by General Dynamics which could involve BAE and Thales.

My guess is that they'll go for the Astute sub's but with many more internal US systems than we use. The US needs to keep building as it is or even ramp up production just to reach its own declared requirements, let alone to cope with 'exports', whether building stuff or sending staff as advisors.

We are coming to the end of the Astute run and have everyone ready to help Oz, so it would be a full production force ready and waiting. Of course I could be entirely wrong, it will be interesting to see what happens.

Interesting that you mention the RR nuclear units, I saw an interview with a US admiral a few years ago and, when he was asked what he thought about our SSNs, he said something along the lines that he was very happy with his own but wouldn't mind having our reactors in them - which I found rather intriguing. I'll confess to general ignorance on this subject beyond the basics.

And here’s the thing. The EU’crats and the French in particular, have their lingerie in a rather painful knot over this affair.
Paddy Biden will need to throw a bone in the general direction of EU. Boris it so happens, is popping over to have tea with Biden in a couple of weeks. Expect Biden to whisper “encouragingly”, in the ear of Boris, that he would appreciate “full and transparent” implementation of the NI Protocol. Take it of course that the famed Irish political lobby in USA, is already pushing that little chat right up to the top of the running order between our man in the Whitehouse and your man in the garishly refurbed flat.

Hmm...

 

[Muck Spreader]

Right you are, we'll just have to agree to differ in the short-term and then see who is right later.

My guess is that they'll go for the Astute sub's but with many more internal US systems than we use. The US needs to keep building as it is or even ramp up production just to reach its own declared requirements, let alone to cope with 'exports', whether building stuff or sending staff as advisors.

We are coming to the end of the Astute run and have everyone ready to help Oz, so it would be a full production force ready and waiting. Of course I could be entirely wrong, it will be interesting to see what happens.

Interesting that you mention the RR nuclear units, I saw an interview with a US admiral a few years ago and, when he was asked what he thought about our SSNs, he said something along the lines that he was very happy with his own but wouldn't mind having our reactors in them - which I found rather intriguing. I'll confess to general ignorance on this subject beyond the basics.


Hmm...

I can tell you for certain they won't be built in the UK. But in reality that's the cheap bit of warship construction, the expensive bit is all the advanced technology that goes in them which all comes from the US, EU or UK. However, the US can be very protectionist as they did by invoking their legal right block the UK's proposed sale of nuclear engines to Canada in the late 1990's, in order to prevent the Canadians having a nuclear fleet of submarines.

 

[Danllan]

I can tell you for certain they won't be built in the UK. But in reality that's the cheap bit of warship construction, the expensive bit is all the advanced technology that goes in them which all comes from the US, EU or UK. However, the US can be very protectionist as they did by invoking their legal right block the UK's proposed sale of nuclear engines to Canada in the late 1990's, in order to prevent the Canadians having a nuclear fleet of submarines.

Not saying they'll be built in the UK, in fact it's already been stated by the Oz and the UK PMs that they will be built in Oz. Rather, the Astute 'team' will be free to get the Ozzies up and running and help out with the ongoing builds.

I know for fact that we are giving serious consideration to having more than the original four planned Dreadnoughts - as general platforms with the obvious other option, and have heard fairly well sourced rumours that extra Astutes may be coming as well - prices decreasing as production has gone on and them being a very good value-for-money asset relative to other choices. I can't see the real point of another Dreadnought, more so when one can pay for two more Astutes; so I think more SSNs is the likely end decision.

I think that this fairly easily transferable 'production line', along with the easier movement of staff will be a major factor regarding choice of vessel. We are already planning our next generation SSNs - as is France - whereas the US is planning to keep their Virginias going for some time, I think this will mean that they need every man they can to stay and work there.

The operational systems fall into two classes, those tied to specific class of vessel, and those independent of it. My money is on the overwhelming number being of stand alone systems being from the US, they are good and will be probably be cheaper than anything comparable on offer.

I think that the US DoD will be nigh on begging Canada to have a nuclear fleet in the coming years...

 

[fudge]

Honestly what rubbish. These things don’t represent “good value” for money as far as British and Australian taxpayers are concerned because they cannot be used without American support. Total white elephants.

 

[Bongodog]

Honestly what rubbish. These things don’t represent “good value” for money as far as British and Australian taxpayers are concerned because they cannot be used without American support. Total white elephants.

You are getting confused between SSN's and SSBN's
Our Astute class are nuclear powered but conventionally armed. this is the technology we will be selling to Australia, these submarines are entirely UK controlled and the US have no "last say or technological hold over them.
The present Vanguard SSBN's however and their Dreadnought class replacements are dependent on US supplied Trident missiles and they do have a hold over those.

 

[fudge]

I’m not confused. Any military campaign would require on going American support. We do not have the capability on our own to mount any operation anywhere near China.

 

[Bongodog]

Australia have decided to go down the nuclear powered route, at this point they only had three choices for the power plant, USA, UK or France and everyone knows that the French reactor is a poor 3rd performance wise. USA has been building these subs since 1955 and the UK since 1960, Australia will need a lot of technical help to shorten their learning curve.

 

[Bongodog]

I’m not confused. Any military campaign would require on going American support. We do not have the capability on our own to mount any operation anywhere near China.

You are confused, these are virtually invisible vessels that are only constrained by the crews food supply, once built they are relatively easy to operate have an endurance of approx 100 days and can travel 800 miles a day every day albeit it probably half that in stealth mode.

 

[fudge]

You are confused, these are virtually invisible vessels that are only constrained by the crews food supply, once built they are relatively easy to operate have an endurance of approx 100 days and can travel 800 miles a day every day albeit it probably half that in stealth mode.

But to do what where? Britannia no longer rules the waves or has an empire to protect and service. What are the possible military objectives of this endless spending?

 

[Danllan]

But to do what where? Britannia no longer rules the waves or has an empire to protect and service. What are the possible military objectives of this endless spending?

Which is why we choose to work with people we trust and can rely on. We know you don't want the UK anywhere but in the EU and doing what it's told, but that's over and done with now. So, please tell us, what is your ideal situation in re China? (I'll be interested to read of your greater world view too, and the UK's role / non role in it too, if you're willing to share these.)

It occurs to me to ask, are you an advocate of unilateral nuclear disarmament?

 

[Ashtree]

Which is why we choose to work with people we trust and can rely on. We know you don't want the UK anywhere but in the EU and doing what it's told, but that's over and done with now. So, please tell us, what is your ideal situation in re China? (I'll be interested to read of your greater world view too, and the UK's role / non role in it too, if you're willing to share these.)

Ah, you put a value on trust! As in you would have it that you sign up to deals where the other party actually honours and implements their side of the said deal.
If only Boris was of the same upstanding nature. His deals, are mere fig leafs to be worn to temporarily cover his many immodesties. Hoping of course the other side will fall asleep at the wheel, whilst he unilaterally changes the terms and conditions to his advantage. Perfidious Boris.

 

[Danllan]

Ah, you put a value on trust! As in you would have it that you sign up to deals where the other party actually honours and implements their side of the said deal.
If only Boris was of the same upstanding nature. His deals, are mere fig leafs to be worn to temporarily cover his many immodesties. Hoping of course the other side will fall asleep at the wheel, whilst he unilaterally changes the terms and conditions to his advantage. Perfidious Boris.

Ha! Trust your Maters in Brussels do you? Trust them to consult and not to ignore the ROI's dearest interests, and trust them to follow their own national and EU laws, do you...? (You know, the ones you're scared to comment about)

 

[Bongodog]

But to do what where? Britannia no longer rules the waves or has an empire to protect and service. What are the possible military objectives of this endless spending?

Fortunately for UK PLC Australia seems to see some value in this particular technology unlike you

 

[fudge]

Fortunately for UK PLC Australia seems to see some value in this particular technology unlike you

More fool them.

Which is why we choose to work with people we trust and can rely on. We know you don't want the UK anywhere but in the EU and doing what it's told, but that's over and done with now. So, please tell us, what is your ideal situation in re China? (I'll be interested to read of your greater world view too, and the UK's role / non role in it too, if you're willing to share these.)

It occurs to me to ask, are you an advocate of unilateral nuclear disarmament?

The EU? Where did I mention the EU. Non of the military misadventures we have embarked on with the USA have had anything to do with the EU. When faced with an argument you have no answer to you inexplicably return to the irrelevant and settled Brexit debate. As an aside I do think our long term goal militarily should be to make any nuclear deterrent we have independent of the USA. If it’s not independent what’s the point of it?

 

[nivilla1982]

France to recall ambassadors in US and Australia after AUKUS submarine deal snub

On Wednesday, the UK, US and Australia announced they will establish a security partnership called AUKUS that will help Australia get nuclear-powered submarines.

news.sky.com

 

[nivilla1982]

Deal Struck at G7 side-lines apparently, French Intelligent failure?