Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 24567891011121314 LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 326
  1. #276
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    23,218
    Quote Originally Posted by David48atTD View Post
    This has naught to do with the Convicts Sub Deal.

    The Subs will be nuclear powered, not nuclear armed.
    As the agreement has yet to be agreed and published what, if anything, is eventually is delivered or who will command them is unknown.

    What weapons to be carried - unknown

    What foreign basing rights in OZ ports - unknown

    What defensive/attack missiles/subs deployed in OZ ports - unknown

    What sub types - unknown

    What propulsion system - unknown

    What foreign subs utilising OZ ports - unknown

    What .... - unknown

    US will share nuclear submarine technology with Australia in new defense partnership-zhou-enlai-jpg
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  2. #277
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    81,320
    But the chinkies have got nukes and they've got subs, so they can't really moan can they hoohoo?

    US will share nuclear submarine technology with Australia in new defense partnership-images-jpg

  3. #278
    Thailand Expat panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:35 PM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    30,446
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    If you had first hand experience of both methods of propulsion, you would not have made such a contrary statement.
    I probably have more than you . . . but keep going.



    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    I lived and worked oin various parts of the EU, and the UK was until recently, a member.
    I worked in the UK - once had an English girlfriend. This qualifies me to make comment according to your criteria.



    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    Macron’s idiocy has obviously escaped your notice.
    One would think you'd have more than enough on your plate with Boris' idiocy to even have the chance of looking at others.

    Ok, pray tell - what are Macron's idiocies vis-a-vis the subs?

  4. #279
    Member Ennis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Last Online
    26-11-2021 @ 08:05 PM
    Location
    Paradise, near Lamphun
    Posts
    227


    A bit of banter by "thejuicemedia" on topic....

  5. #280
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    5,638
    It will have zero effect on proliferation. It’s a propulsion system, not a nuclear weapon system.

  6. #281
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    5,638
    Nuclear propulsion means that boats can travel further, submerge for longer and maintain higher speeds, while remaining undetected.
    Diesel electric subs need refueling more often, need to surface more frequently, and they are slower. Limited capability to run quietly because batteries require re-charging, and diesel power Is noisy. Greater susceptibility to sonar detection.

    The fact that nuclear powered subs can carry a greater payload, may not apply because weapons are not part of the deal.

  7. #282
    Thailand Expat panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:35 PM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    30,446
    Keep telling yourself that, switch . . . the point discussed was silence. Keep on keeping on

  8. #283
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    25,208
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    But the chinkies have got nukes and they've got subs, so they can't really moan can they hoohoo?
    China only has 12 nuclear subs, and they aren't very good, so there is that. Only 6 of those are attack subs, in contrast the US has 68 nuclear subs, 54 of which are attack subs.


  9. #284
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    23,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    It will have zero effect on proliferation. It’s a propulsion system, not a nuclear weapon system.
    Which will utilise highly enriched uranium for non-peaceful use. Supplied by NaGastan/UK.

  10. #285
    Elite Mumbler
    pickel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Isolation
    Posts
    6,585
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Which will utilise highly enriched uranium for non-peaceful use. Supplied by NaGastan/UK.
    The US imports uranium from Australia, so no.

  11. #286
    Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by pickel View Post
    The US imports NATURAL uranium from Australia.
    Corrected that for you. The US imports the NATURAL Uranium, in the form of yellow cake.

    And yes it is a proliferation as due to the compact size of these submarine PWR's they have to be fueled with HEU (U235).

    Could you imagine the response if the North Koreans were supplying the Iranians with HEU fueled nuclear subs.

  12. #287
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    25,208
    Quote Originally Posted by Listerman View Post
    Could you imagine the response if the North Koreans were supplying the Iranians with HEU fueled nuclear subs.
    The North Koreans do not have nuclear subs, and I doubt they have the capability to build one.

  13. #288
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    5,638
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Which will utilise highly enriched uranium for non-peaceful use. Supplied by NaGastan/UK.
    In sealed units, providing for US/UK refueling capabilities.

  14. #289
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    23,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    In sealed units, providing for US/UK refueling capabilities.
    Will there be US/UK personnel on board managing the sealed units' operation?

    Suggesting foreign control of the sub. Without an engine the sub doesn't move very far, other than up and down.

    Or will the OZ sailors be trained on the operations of the sealed units, not having such skills/ knowledge currently?

    Suggesting OZ control after, of course, having, the nuclear technology proliferated or "transferred" to, the newly trained OZ citizens by the foreign supplier.?
    Last edited by OhOh; 04-10-2021 at 12:10 PM.

  15. #290
    Thailand Expat panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:35 PM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    30,446
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Will there be US/UK personnel on board managing the sealed units' operation?
    Ask them . . . or make up some shit like you always do.
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Suggesting foreign control of the sub. Without an engine the sub doesn't move very far, other than up and down.

    Or will the OZ sailors be trained on the operations of the sealed units, not having such skills/ knowledge currently?

    Suggesting OZ control after, of course, having, the nuclear technology proliferated or "transferred" to, the newly trained OZ citizens by the foreign supplier.?
    Ah, you have
    Last edited by panama hat; 04-10-2021 at 03:44 PM. Reason: edit sp.

  16. #291
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    5,638
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Will there be US/UK personnel on board managing the sealed units' operation?

    Suggesting foreign control of the sub. Without an engine the sub doesn't move very far, other than up and down.

    Or will the OZ sailors be trained on the operations of the sealed units, not having such skills/ knowledge currently?

    Suggesting OZ control after, of course, having, the nuclear technology proliferated or "transferred" to, the newly trained OZ citizens by the foreign supplier.?
    Pose questions - jump to wrong conclusions. Well done how very Chinese of you.

  17. #292
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    23,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    Pose questions
    Of which you fail to address.

    No opinion of your own?



    As I have previously posted

    Awaiting the 18 months for the "announcement" to be discussed, agreed and acted upon.

    If the three advocating leaders, are still in their current positions.



    Unfortunately, NaGastan and vassals have a history of failing to deliver on their "promises".

    Which leaves all opinions or suggestions equally valid.
    Last edited by OhOh; 05-10-2021 at 09:35 AM.

  18. #293
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    5,638
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Which leaves all opinions or suggestions equally valid.
    Except for yours, on this subject, even your questions show how irrelevant to you are.

    Most of the deal has been worked out, bar costs and logistics. You are so far behind the curve on this. Ask about a subject you understand. That should keep you quiet for a while.

  19. #294
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    81,320
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post

    No opinion of your own?

    Coming from the snivelling chinky sycophant most of whose posts are simply cut and pasted chinky or russian propaganda without comment, that is quite amusing.


  20. #295
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    34,964

    Asean can live with Quad and Aukus

    The current strategic situation is not quite the same as Asean faced in its early days, but there are several similar characteristics. The rivalry between the two then superpowers -- the US and the former Soviet Union -- was visible and rising incrementally and would soon reach its peak. Fuelling the enmity was their ideological differences -- free world versus orthodox communism. Today, the fight is about technological supremacy and governance.

    Another feature was the grouping of friends and allies. Not much has changed today in terms of the divide we last witnessed seven decades ago. The West is still the West and the East is still the East. The US continues to be the dominant power without any challengers in the West. Europe, under the banner of the European Union (EU), has spent the seven decades since World War II ensuring that there will be no more wars between them and that "One Europe" including unified Germany can live in peace and prosper together. Their unity and ability to retain power was not in question until Britain voted to leave the EU in 2016.

    Meanwhile in the East, after the Cold War, the power configuration has changed. Major Asian powers are cooperative in the economic sphere but remain assertive and still in confrontational mode with their security posture and buildups. Regional countries respond differently to this emerging strategic environment they seem fit. In Southeast Asia, both the US and China have their close allies and friends.


    Replacing the former Soviet Union is China, with all its economic and political might alongside demeanour derived from 5,000 years of history. For the West, China's rise is not only unprecedented but also unpredictable. Quite frankly, even the 1.4 billion Chinese themselves never thought their country would come this far so fast. Since President Xi Jinping took over the helm, the Middle Kingdom has been transformed into a different China, at least from the Western perspective. Their narrative on the rising China has slowly changed in colour and tone. Today, officially it has turned brown and demonic.

    From now on, with or without the residue of Covid-19, China will be the eminent power and the biggest challenge for all countries, big or small, to engage with, just like the US and former Soviet Union were not so long ago. The onus would fall on us, as any ramifications, real or imagined, will be felt very severely within Southeast Asia because it is situated at the heart of US-China competition. Physically, Asean is also in the centre of the Indo-Pacific theatre. Failure to respond to their struggles for influence in timely and appropriate ways will further hamper the integration of the 670-million strong Asean Community.

    The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) and the newly launched trilateral military pact between Australia, UK and US (Aukus) is a barometer that the US-China rivalry is no longer the perspective of strategic planners or think-tanks. Both the Quad and Aukus are racing against time to quickly institutionalise and create an impactful new strategic environment. It is still too early to say what the unintended consequences would be.

    After more than five decades of peace and prosperity, Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) now has to ponder how to live with new Western fortress established in its front-yard. The 2,074-word statement by the Quad leaders on 24 Sept was somewhat reassuring as they pledged to strongly support Asean's unity and centrality and work in practical and inclusive ways for the bloc. It would be an insult to state otherwise as three of the Quad are situated in this part of world. In fact, without the US, three member of Quad -- Japan, India and Australia can also initiate impactful cooperation.

    Asean must learn how to live with the Quad following the latest in-person summit in Washington. The region's "new normal" together with the Quad's purposes and objectives can complement various existing development frameworks in Asean including the Asean Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). Proposed areas of Quad cooperation are quite comprehensive, focusing on the anti-Covid-19 campaign, economic recovery, climate change, infrastructure, education, critical and emerging technology and others.


    Thanks to India and Japan as they have already linked up with the AOIP, their intentions and preferences in the Indo-Pacific are in line with those advocated by Asean. They also have held discussions with Asean on the specific programmes to be synergised. Last year Japan issued a joint statement with Asean on its cooperation within the AOIP framework.

    However, Australia is a tough nut to crack. Just as Asean was in the process of considering Canberra's request for an upgrade of its dialogue status to a comprehensive strategic partner later this year, the country gave the bloc a big slap in the face. No Asean member expected its oldest dialogue partner to behave in such a disrespectful manner. The Aukus pact should have been brought to the fore -- if not for Asean as a whole, then at least for Indonesia, which is one of the closest neighbours. Jakarta's quick and rough reaction was understandable. So was that of Malaysia. Other members were disappointed but did not show it. It remains to seen if the upgrade would be further delayed.

    In a similar vein, after all of Asean's support and enthusiasm for admitting the United Kingdom as its 11th dialogue partner after three-decade of moratorium, London did not bother to utter a word about Aukus to Asean. From now on, Asean will shift focus toward Europe and expand its external relations by awarding additional strategic or full dialogue partners to more EU members such as France and Germany. This year, Asean will have to be proactive in the upcoming East Asia Summit and rein in the future trajectory.

    The UK and Australia's manner would have negative impacts on their future relationship and cooperation with Asean. Obviously, it will further push Asean to reinforce its Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (SEANWFZ) of 1995. Asean wishes to see all the big five to accede to its no-nuke protocol. One cannot help but wonder what will happen later this month when the Asean-Australia summit takes place when it will be institutionalised as an annual event. Earlier, it was hoped that all Asean-Australian leaders would be meeting in-situ to commemorate this special occasion, However, at this juncture, the stabbing in the back pain felt in the region has yet to subside. Some of the Asean leaders are probably not be in the mood to meet Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison in person.

    Granted the ever-changing international landscape, both the Quad and Aukus could further consolidate Asean unity and centrality, not weaken it as many doomsayers in the West are predicting. Asean will not be a bystander. Each Asean member will have additional different cards to play depending on the timing and circumstances. Past experiences over the last five decades show that certain members' actions, which were often perceived as divisive due to national interests and role played, have had little effect in denting Asean centrality and consensus. Asean is an adaptive organization with a long-haul vision. That helps explain why Asean will co-exist competitively with the Quad and Aukus even sans nuclear-backed driving forces.

    Asean can live with Quad and Aukus (bangkokpost.com)


    I suppose Asean will not be sharing many secrets with Australia anymore.


  21. #296
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    81,320
    Quote Originally Posted by sabang View Post
    I suppose Asean will not be sharing many secrets with Australia anymore.

    No-one is interested in ASEAN. It is a complete waste of fucking space, as its impotence (or sucking up to Chinkystan) on Myanmar demonstrates.

  22. #297
    Chinese spy sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    34,964
    Thus Spake ZaraAukus.

  23. #298
    still dealing with idioms
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:20 AM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    3,344
    Quote Originally Posted by russellsimpson View Post
    That about tells the entire story Helge.

    You've got to remember that the Americans gained their nation threw war, not like civilized countries such as Denmark and Canada, eh.
    Did you not war with ze froggies mon ami? Now all you have is a rogue state and two languages. Should've kicked their asses back to frog land.
    You Canadians are too nice. No wonder it takes you guys so long to make up your mind. Your military must have a hell of a time. Half of them say charge! with the other half saying je me rends!

  24. #299
    still dealing with idioms
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:20 AM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    3,344
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Which will utilise highly enriched uranium for non-peaceful use. Supplied by NaGastan/UK.
    Just like China but without WMDs. Why is China even commenting? I thought they didnt comment on a countries internal affairs and get upset when countries comment on theirs. They complain about Australias potential nuclear proliferation yet build nuclear weapons and nuclear submarines. Whats that called? Hypocrisy I think.

  25. #300
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:37 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    23,218
    China and weapons of mass destruction

    "The first of China's nuclear weapons tests took place in 1964, and its first hydrogen bomb test occurred in 1967."

    China and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia

    Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)


    "The Treaty represents the only binding commitment in a multilateral treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States. Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970.

    The Treaty promotes cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology and equal access to this technology for all States parties, while safeguards prevent the diversion of fissile material for weapons use."


    https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/

    Which suggests China was a nuclear weapon country prior to the NPNW Teaty.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Cow View Post
    yet build nuclear weapons and nuclear submarines.
    As do other countries, except Iran, with access to highly enriched uranium.

    One factually and another allegedly, who has actually used them against a foreign country.

    Neither being China.

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 24567891011121314 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •