Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bush Lawyer, Sep 15, 2021.
Sinking the ships carrying the invasion force. How hard is that to figure?
Don't need a "nuclear" sub to do that
Nuclear subs have far, far, far greater range, speed, and endurance than conventional ones.
What does Australia trade?
Xinese Numba ONE! I'm surprise Australia hasn't adopted the name Australianese
Which would not be needed for defending Australia. The whole point of a nuclear powered sub is that they can stay submerged for many many months and can travel unnoticed. They are not really a defensive measure to protect a country.
Conventional subs can be used to defend Australia from any chance of invasion (which is negligible)
Great take! I'm a subscriber!
They're also quiet. If you want to know a bit about our fraught history with submarines, Google "Collins class submarines noise"
Perhaps we want to do a bit more than just defend. A little surveillance might be useful as well.
Resources, power, strategic snd political dominion, why does any country invade another?
Invasion/occupation requires lots and lots of personel. Boats are the best way to achieve that on an island. Air assault or pre-infiltration are the other options, and historically those options are a lot riskier and more expensive.
I was providing an example of abandoning allies as requested.
The US was in Syria to assist the Kurds and other forces to fight ISIS.
All spilled out from the illegal war in Iraq.
The US is very good at going in and breaking things but not so good at dealing with the consequences.
That's what I just said.
Properly working conventional subs are quieter, smaller & harder to detect, which is arguably better suited to defending our immediate maritime approaches. Nuclear subs can stay underwater for much longer, which can make them harder to detect under some circumstances, but they can't run completely silent and they tend to be larger, which is less useful in the relatively shallow water to our north. However, they do have a longer range and can stay submerged for months.
Of course, nuclear submarines can still be a very powerful weapon to defend our territory, but they are more useful for operations farther from home.
We really aren't worth it the risk & expense. Landing a large force in the north or West of Australia is a bit like invading the lower 48 by landing in Alaska - you are a long way away from the important bits in territory not well suited to sustaining your military force. Trying to land on the east coast requires a longer & more vulnerable journey.
While it is techincally possible for a force of the right size & strength to invade Australia, in practical terms it costs way more than it could ever be worth. There are other ways to get anything anyone could want from us.
Australia to acquire nuclear submarine fleet as part of historic deal with US & UK to counter China.
Sounds like a sensible plan for a country separated from every other country by ocean. You may want to beef up your air force as well. China is pretty well equipped.
They are not safe .. which is why you have to spend lots of money to have proper storage - and then is safe. Obviously that safe location is in your State
You said they don't leak. How is that not safe?
To be sure, Aussies are our closest allies after the Brits and they've always stood tall with us.
Well, even though you get no nukes, maybe it's not such a bad idea to draw some Chinese attention to yourself.
K - Nuclear waste is not safe .. say just lying around. It can however be safely stored.
In the minority in California. That's an important caveat, don't you think?
You're being offered the naval equivalent of an F-22 and you sound like you're saying, in essence, "no thanks, we're good with F-4s"
Nope. Completely irrelevant to the claim that nuclear powered subs are to be used defensively
Welcome to 60 years ago.
This is great news in case people get tired of being locked down and try to leave by boat!
When he said that I was like...
What has that got to do with Orwell's 1984.
I commented on the line you highlighted RED in US Conservative post you quoted..
Can a force of conventional submarines enter Chinese waters and plant mines in their ports? Not likely.
Then bit in red was just silly baseless rhetoric. Not factual.
Separate names with a comma.