Australia nuclear submarine deal: Aukus defence pact with US and UK means $90bn contract with France will be scrapped

[shlomo]

11 hours ago, reddog said:

I heard the exact opposite, I heard due to demographics China has a 10 year window to attack Taiwan, after that the country will start to lose its willingness to fight due to a generally aging population.

 

This is why everyone is worried about an imminent Chinese attack on Taiwan.

The reason I think that is wrong is western thinking, western philosophy dictates that others think the same way, Eastern thinking is different, not saying one is better, The Chinese armed forces have never invaded a country and let’s be honest they might not have what it takes, the world watched the Taliban Blitzkrieg and every one of those well paid and students of the art of war called it wrong 

How would the Chinese armed forces perform in a real war situation, no one knows not even the German General Staff 

The Chinese army might cut and run or they might crush the US, 

Edited September 18, 2021 by shlomo

[Staffsknot]

22 minutes ago, shlomo said:

The reason I think that is wrong is western thinking, western philosophy dictates that others think the same way, Eastern thinking is different, not saying one is better, The Chinese armed forces have never invaded a country and let’s be honest they might not have what it takes, the world watched the Taliban Blitzkrieg and every one of those well paid and students of the art of war called it wrong 

How would the Chinese armed forces perform in a real war situation, no one knows not even the German General Staff 

The Chinese army might cut and run or they might crush the US, 

Your history is quite off

China invaded Korea and pushed back the UN forces.

China invaded Tibet

China tried to invade Vietnam post reunification but aborted it. They kept those small reef islands

China invaded and annexed parts of India.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Staffsknot

[Staffsknot]

@thecrashingisles @debtlessmanc @spyguy you 3 really have a special club of selective memories don't you.

 

[zugzwang]

8 hours ago, shlomo said:

The reason I think that is wrong is western thinking, western philosophy dictates that others think the same way, Eastern thinking is different, not saying one is better, The Chinese armed forces have never invaded a country and let’s be honest they might not have what it takes, the world watched the Taliban Blitzkrieg and every one of those well paid and students of the art of war called it wrong 

How would the Chinese armed forces perform in a real war situation, no one knows not even the German General Staff 

The Chinese army might cut and run or they might crush the US, 

 

The Anglo-Saxon imperialists may have forgotten the atrocities and enduring insults inflicted on China in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the Rape of Nanking.

The Chinese never have.

When this scene (from Fist of Fury) was first shown in Chinese cinemas the film would have to be stopped for minutes on end until the pandemonium subsided.

No dogs and Chinese allowed? The cravens, patsies, milquetoasts and quitters in the US and British armed services will shit themselves hollow at the first confrontation.

[Staffsknot]

6 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

The cravens, patsies, milquetoasts and quitters in the US and British armed services will shit themselves hollow at the first confrontation.

Calm yourself you are making as much drivel as the other folks spouting guff lad. There's enough ******** being spouted on here by the Call of Duty experts but stuff as ****** as this doesn't help. You are making yourself look as pathetic as them and tbh I'd expect a lot better. Insulting people I have personally witnessed do daily acts most folks would shat themselves at the thought of is arseholery of the highest order.

Having witnessed a guy get shot, get up and refuse to leave the battlefield only to be wounded again by grenade fragments and still continue, suggest you reconsider your seriously ill-considered and uniformed rhetoric

[slawek]

54 minutes ago, Staffsknot said:

Calm yourself you are making as much drivel as the other folks spouting guff lad. There's enough ******** being spouted on here by the Call of Duty experts but stuff as ****** as this doesn't help. You are making yourself look as pathetic as them and tbh I'd expect a lot better. Insulting people I have personally witnessed do daily acts most folks would shat themselves at the thought of is arseholery of the highest order.

Having witnessed a guy get shot, get up and refuse to leave the battlefield only to be wounded again by grenade fragments and still continue, suggest you reconsider your seriously ill-considered and uniformed rhetoric

This looks like a scene from a Mel Brooks' film.

Apologies if someone finds this offensive but a war is a tragicomedy.

[Staffsknot]

40 minutes ago, slawek said:

This looks like a scene from a Mel Brooks' film.

Apologies if someone finds this offensive but a war is a tragicomedy.

He was rightly decorated. All soldiers have dark sense of humour. When cas-evac'd post action the joke was if he'd got the hat trick he got to keep the match ball, instead he'd won a toaster.

Bloke did Kili with missing a leg said - saves on blister plasters and his 2 tours in Afghanistan were paralympics training.

There is always a Mel Brooks joke when bacon & beans ratpacks appeared

That said lot of people give the dark humour joke to hide mental scars / any perception of weakness.

I just find it a little depressing we have the Call of Duty watchers talking crap on one side and people thinking anything in a uniform outside of the CCP is a cowardly Nazi.

For reference btw when peacekeeping in Juba the Chinese abandoned their positions and fled back to base letting aid workers and civilians be killed and gang raped in buildings less than 100m away. Ethiopian troops were left outnumbered trying to defend another UN base against drunk soldiers and rebels as China suffered 2 soldiers killed and promptly refused to send help to them. The Ethiopians complained, China moaned, the UN report was changed to be less damning. One for you to think about @zugzwang when you make sweeping statements.

Personally I find there's a lot of individuals who act very bravely with or without uniform and nationality rarely has any part in that.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Staffsknot

[zugzwang]

12 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

He was rightly decorated. All soldiers have dark sense of humour. When cas-evac'd post action the joke was if he'd got the hat trick he got to keep the match ball, instead he'd won a toaster.

Bloke did Kili with missing a leg said - saves on blister plasters and his 2 tours in Afghanistan were paralympics training.

There is always a Mel Brooks joke when bacon & beans ratpacks appeared

That said lot of people give the dark humour joke to hide mental scars / any perception of weakness.

I just find it a little depressing we have the Call of Duty watchers talking crap on one side and people thinking anything in a uniform outside of the CCP is a cowardly Nazi.

For reference btw when peacekeeping in Juba the Chinese abandoned their positions and fled back to base letting aid workers and civilians be killed and gang raped in buildings less than 100m away. Ethiopian troops were left outnumbered trying to defend another UN base against drunk soldiers and rebels as China suffered 2 soldiers killed and promptly refused to send help to them. The Ethiopians complained, China moaned, the UN report was changed to be less damning. One for you to think about @zugzwang when you make sweeping statements.

Personally I find there's a lot of individuals who act very bravely with or without uniform and nationality rarely has any part in that.

 

Peacekeeping? That's what you shitting, pissing cowards were doing in the ME when you weren't hiding behind Uncle Sham's skirts?

Do f**k off, Corporal Jones. You never were a contender but the greatest military humiliation since Suez?

Cravens, patsies, milquetoasts and quitters the lot of you.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/17/us-airstrike-in-kabul-last-month-killed-10-civilians-including-seven-children-pentagon-says.html

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon admitted Friday that a U.S. drone strike in Kabul, Afghanistan last month killed as many as 10 civilians including up to seven children.

“As the combatant commander, I am fully responsible for this strike and its tragic outcome,” U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, told reporters.

“I offer my profound condolences to the family and friends of those who were killed,” McKenzie said.

This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake,” McKenzie said.

The U.S. is considering reparation payments to surviving family members, the general said. However, McKenzie said making such payments could prove difficult because the U.S. no longer has a presence in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon originally said the strike, which was launched Aug. 29, killed two ISIS-K fighters believed to be involved in planning attacks against U.S. forces in Kabul. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[shlomo]

13 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

He was rightly decorated. All soldiers have dark sense of humour. When cas-evac'd post action the joke was if he'd got the hat trick he got to keep the match ball, instead he'd won a toaster.

Bloke did Kili with missing a leg said - saves on blister plasters and his 2 tours in Afghanistan were paralympics training.

There is always a Mel Brooks joke when bacon & beans ratpacks appeared

That said lot of people give the dark humour joke to hide mental scars / any perception of weakness.

I just find it a little depressing we have the Call of Duty watchers talking crap on one side and people thinking anything in a uniform outside of the CCP is a cowardly Nazi.

For reference btw when peacekeeping in Juba the Chinese abandoned their positions and fled back to base letting aid workers and civilians be killed and gang raped in buildings less than 100m away. Ethiopian troops were left outnumbered trying to defend another UN base against drunk soldiers and rebels as China suffered 2 soldiers killed and promptly refused to send help to them. The Ethiopians complained, China moaned, the UN report was changed to be less damning. One for you to think about @zugzwang when you make sweeping statements.

Personally I find there's a lot of individuals who act very bravely with or without uniform and nationality rarely has any part in that.

Just out of interest were you a Soldier or an Officer?

[Staffsknot]

1 hour ago, zugzwang said:

 

Peacekeeping? That's what you shitting, pissing cowards were doing in the ME when you weren't hiding behind Uncle Sham's skirts?

Do f**k off, Corporal Jones. You never were a contender but the greatest military humiliation since Suez?

Cravens, patsies, milquetoasts and quitters the lot of you.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/17/us-airstrike-in-kabul-last-month-killed-10-civilians-including-seven-children-pentagon-says.html

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon admitted Friday that a U.S. drone strike in Kabul, Afghanistan last month killed as many as 10 civilians including up to seven children.

“As the combatant commander, I am fully responsible for this strike and its tragic outcome,” U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, told reporters.

“I offer my profound condolences to the family and friends of those who were killed,” McKenzie said.

This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake,” McKenzie said.

The U.S. is considering reparation payments to surviving family members, the general said. However, McKenzie said making such payments could prove difficult because the U.S. no longer has a presence in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon originally said the strike, which was launched Aug. 29, killed two ISIS-K fighters believed to be involved in planning attacks against U.S. forces in Kabul. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are an utter bellend as usual trying to provoke people as you are bored

Edited September 19, 2021 by Staffsknot

[shlomo]

1 hour ago, Staffsknot said:

You are an utter bellend as usual trying to provoke people as you are bored

You seem to have anger issues if people do not accept your version of events.

[Staffsknot]

1 hour ago, shlomo said:

You seem to have anger issues if people do not accept your version of events.

Nope I just view you as piss poor considering said incident is the endpoint of that Over The Horizon no boots policy you were lauding about 4 weeks ago before you flip flop again. Because you just need attention.

Back to ignoring the resident attention seeker. Guess you will have to start another thread whingeing about your account being closed or Sony cameras.

[shlomo]

32 minutes ago, Staffsknot said:

Nope I just view you as piss poor considering said incident is the endpoint of that Over The Horizon no boots policy you were lauding about 4 weeks ago before you flip flop again. Because you just need attention.

Back to ignoring the resident attention seeker. Guess you will have to start another thread whingeing about your account being closed or Sony cameras.

As the Resident Armchair General on HPC do you think France will withdraw from the Sahel region in the next 2 months 

[reddog]

I get the impression the French are taking this worse than expected.  Am I wrong?

 

It sounds like France and Australia probably got into a mess with procurement due to Australia's intial requirement for no nuclear power in Australia, so a diesel submarine based on a nuclear submarine was never going to be ideal.

 

However I still would have expected just a diplomatic complaint, not a full on meltdown.

 

Could this mean the end for the independence of France's defence industry?  I imagine developing a nuclear sub from scratch might be too much for France to bare, but I can't see them wanting to have the same subordinate relationship that the UK has with American defence contractors.

[shlomo]

7 minutes ago, reddog said:

I get the impression the French are taking this worse than expected.  Am I wrong?

 

It sounds like France and Australia probably got into a mess with procurement due to Australia's intial requirement for no nuclear power in Australia, so a diesel submarine based on a nuclear submarine was never going to be ideal.

 

However I still would have expected just a diplomatic complaint, not a full on meltdown.

 

Could this mean the end for the independence of France's defence industry?  I imagine developing a nuclear sub from scratch might be too much for France to bare, but I can't see them wanting to have the same subordinate relationship that the UK has with American defence contractors.

They are not used being the bitch, France has been a Superpower for a good few hundred years and they just got Bitch slapped and they also have an election in 7 Months...

[Freki]

1 hour ago, reddog said:

I get the impression the French are taking this worse than expected.  Am I wrong?

 

It sounds like France and Australia probably got into a mess with procurement due to Australia's intial requirement for no nuclear power in Australia, so a diesel submarine based on a nuclear submarine was never going to be ideal.

 

However I still would have expected just a diplomatic complaint, not a full on meltdown.

 

Could this mean the end for the independence of France's defence industry?  I imagine developing a nuclear sub from scratch might be too much for France to bare, but I can't see them wanting to have the same subordinate relationship that the UK has with American defence contractors.

France produce its own nuclear submarines. They initially offered to build those for the Ozzies, but Oz wanted conventional propelling. 

Naval group is in a healthy position and not gonna go bankrupt anytime soon despite this.

[Gigantic Purple Slug]

2 hours ago, reddog said:

I get the impression the French are taking this worse than expected.  Am I wrong?

 

It sounds like France and Australia probably got into a mess with procurement due to Australia's intial requirement for no nuclear power in Australia, so a diesel submarine based on a nuclear submarine was never going to be ideal.

 

However I still would have expected just a diplomatic complaint, not a full on meltdown.

 

Could this mean the end for the independence of France's defence industry?  I imagine developing a nuclear sub from scratch might be too much for France to bare, but I can't see them wanting to have the same subordinate relationship that the UK has with American defence contractors.

If you look at it historically France have been pretty poor at defence mega project collaborations.

The UK collaborated with the Italians on the Tornado and a euro consortium (excluding France) on the eurofighter. The collaborated with the US on the Astute class (although the US helped drag the project out of the mire might be a better description). They collaborate with the US on the F35 and on the Trident missile program.

Whereas France are pretty much on their own with the nuclear subs (as well as the ICBM technology which takes massive development costs) and developed their own fighter jet instead of Typhoon. In a world where military tech of this type is getting increasingly expensive, it's getting difficult for countries the size of France and the UK to go it alone on these sorts of projects. Franch do of course collaborate with other countries on a lot of different stuff. But it tends to be the smaller projects rather than the large ones.

You can ask why France doesn't have that megaproject collaboration history, and I'm sure lots could speculate. But one reason might be the fact that French workers are more aggressive than UK ones and push the government for greater workshare proportion that make collaboration impossible.

I read somewhere that the French-Aus deal was still subject to some workshare negotiation. It may be that the French were overplaying their hand on that because they thought it was a done deal, making the Aus choice easier.

Ultimately they are in a diffifficult position. Probably not wanting to collaborate with the US, but having no alternative partner that brings US tech and financial muscle to their projects. Germany are probably the only realistic possible partner, but don't seem to want to pony up to their share of defence spending and I am sure they would not be too keen or have too much to offer in nuclear military tech.

Some interesting reading on why France could have seen it coming :

https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-its-french-sub-deal/

Edited September 19, 2021 by Gigantic Purple Slug

[shlomo]

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-australia-trade-deal-runs-aground-over-submarine-furor/

Clément Beaune, France's European affairs secretary, told POLITICO that Europe could hardly continue talks for a free-trade agreement after such a breach of trust. Brussels has held 11 rounds of talks with Canberra to date, and Australia originally hoped to conclude the accord before the end of the year.

 

In theory, the European Commission has exclusive powers to conduct trade talks on behalf of the 27 member countries. But it would be impossible for Brussels to plow on in the face of outright French opposition.

Indeed, France has a highly successful track record of killing the EU's trade agenda through outspoken hostility. In 2016, then-President François Hollande effectively torpedoed the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership talks with Washington, and Macron is similarly making clear that he will not allow the Mercosur agreement with South American countries to come into force.

Lange said the response should be to "expand the EU's open strategic autonomy and define our own economic, political and security interests."

But the French criticism is unlikely to go down well with more free-trading EU countries such as Sweden, Ireland or the Netherlands. 

Irish Minister for Trade Promotion Robert Troy told POLITICO he wanted to see progress in the EU’s negotiations with Australia, regardless of the Indo-Pacific deal reached between Australia, the U.S. and the U.K. 

“I’m sure this will play a role, it will influence future discussions,” Troy said

[spyguy]

On 18/09/2021 at 12:02, Staffsknot said:

@thecrashingisles @debtlessmanc @spyguy you 3 really have a special club of selective memories don't you.

 

 

[reddog]

19 minutes ago, spyguy said:

 

Does France actually have anything that Australia needs that can't be procured from other countries?

 

I imagine France will now start acting like it is the EU, and attempt to poison the whole EU's relationship with Australia.

[Staffsknot]

10 hours ago, spyguy said:

 

Oh dear here you go again. France backed Italy's decision. Australia then threw a tantrum and Rupert's news channel claimed they should retaliate against France.

Veran only ever said 'we could do the same' when pressed on does Italy have the right to do it.

https://www.ft.com/content/999f20d3-105f-4b15-b382-8f5ef9882e73

Here you go from actual news. Sky News Austalia is like GBeebies or FoxNews. 

I'm sure you have fun scouring Twitter though.

[Staffsknot]

14 hours ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

If you look at it historically France have been pretty poor at defence mega project collaborations.

The UK collaborated with the Italians on the Tornado and a euro consortium (excluding France) on the eurofighter. The collaborated with the US on the Astute class (although the US helped drag the project out of the mire might be a better description). They collaborate with the US on the F35 and on the Trident missile program.

Whereas France are pretty much on their own with the nuclear subs (as well as the ICBM technology which takes massive development costs) and developed their own fighter jet instead of Typhoon. In a world where military tech of this type is getting increasingly expensive, it's getting difficult for countries the size of France and the UK to go it alone on these sorts of projects. Franch do of course collaborate with other countries on a lot of different stuff. But it tends to be the smaller projects rather than the large ones.

You can ask why France doesn't have that megaproject collaboration history, and I'm sure lots could speculate. But one reason might be the fact that French workers are more aggressive than UK ones and push the government for greater workshare proportion that make collaboration impossible.

I read somewhere that the French-Aus deal was still subject to some workshare negotiation. It may be that the French were overplaying their hand on that because they thought it was a done deal, making the Aus choice easier.

Ultimately they are in a diffifficult position. Probably not wanting to collaborate with the US, but having no alternative partner that brings US tech and financial muscle to their projects. Germany are probably the only realistic possible partner, but don't seem to want to pony up to their share of defence spending and I am sure they would not be too keen or have too much to offer in nuclear military tech.

Some interesting reading on why France could have seen it coming :

https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-its-french-sub-deal/

Notice you were super selective on those projects to make your case. Funny you missed MILAN off there, SCALP / Storm Shadow ( Anglo-French), anything involving Eurocopter / Airbus, EADS / Airbus ( A400m perhaps) and a host of things.

US is trying to tie-up the defence contracts as part of its China shift so it makes on the investment.

An AIP version of its nuclear subs is very quiet, has great endurance and is a damn site more cost effective and practical than nuclear for most potential clients.

France also traditionally does well in exports.

But you know lets play the striking worker card and stereotypes.

ACS were getting arsey because when they bought the Collins kit Kockums screwed up the welds as the Australians changed requirements every 5 mins. It also had noise issues as the Aussies went and demanded a different sonar and comms package which needed hull redesign. They are bricking it that the constant chop and change will do the same.

They were getting a modern AIP diesel electric and though details classified their existing one managed to 'kill' one of the modern US SSNs in exercises of the type they are looking at.

For ref Sweden has a home grown kit policy and they are smaller than France. Bofors BILL AT, JAS Gripe and the Viggen and Drakken before it. France will be fine especially in Africa where their lightweight kit like VBLs go down a treat.

Its all about getting more US support and access to kit.

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Staffsknot

[debtlessmanc]

Now this is getting really interesting - apparently France is offering the EU it's place on the UN Security Council!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2021/09/21/emmanuel-macron-may-offer-un-seat-push-eu-army/

Lots of issues here, but the most obvious is that macron feels that the EU army is more important than Frances seat at the un !

[Big Orange]

^Without moderately big/powerful and idiosyncratic Britain at the EU table and putting the brakes on a pan-EU military, France is throwing its weight around much more.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Big Orange

[shlomo]

27 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Now this is getting really interesting - apparently France is offering the EU it's place on the UN Security Council!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2021/09/21/emmanuel-macron-may-offer-un-seat-push-eu-army/

Lots of issues here, but the most obvious is that macron feels that the EU army is more important than Frances seat at the un !

i am not sure Germany and Poland and Sweden and others want to break up with the US