- Reaction score
- 2,048
- Points
- 1,260
So under this logic we should be protecting ourselves from the Americans?Reminder and explanation of Australian Defence policy.
So under this logic we should be protecting ourselves from the Americans?Reminder and explanation of Australian Defence policy.
That would be the grand Australian tradition of "taking the piss".So under this logic we should be protecting ourselves from the Americans?
In fairness to the Aussies, at least they’re not giving aid money to China…So under this logic we should be protecting ourselves from the Americans?
Hey Defence just found 14.2M more in the budget
That’s assuming we don’t increase aid in grateful and deferential appreciation of China working with us to help bring the Two Michaels(TM) home…Hey Defence just found 14.2M more in the budget
You won't have to worry about transitioning. My point being that any GoC - no matter what political stripe - will ever propose it. There are too many "no nukes" environmentalists, peace activists and those in the employ of a foreign nation.When I said ‘our favour’ I was referring to the collective west KevinB is right, baby steps will be needed when transitioning from a non-nuclear navy to a nuclear one.
You won't have to worry about transitioning. My point being that any GoC - no matter what political stripe - will ever propose it. There are too many "no nukes" environmentalists, peace activists and those in the employ of a foreign nation.
We are also influenced by a nation who appears to be friendly but in reality want this nation - Canada - for its natural resources because that nation cannot sustain itself without our resources.
You mean, to be crude but to the point, being their bitch?I'm not sure I agree with the natural resources angle being the prime motivator but, rather, the desire to have a weak but compliant ally/neighbour who buys their stuff. And we have been historically and consistently happy in that role.
I think you've hit a nail directly on the head. Come to think of it what is preventing "that nation" from sending their agents to us then those agent slipping across the border illegally into the USA? Just my paranoid thinking.....You mean, to be crude but to the point, being their bitch?
You won't have to worry about transitioning. My point being that any GoC - no matter what political stripe - will ever propose it. There are too many "no nukes" environmentalists, peace activists and those in the employ of a foreign nation.
We are also influenced by a nation who appears to be friendly but in reality want this nation - Canada - for its natural resources because that nation cannot sustain itself without our resources.
I'm not sure you are both talking about the same nation...I'm not sure I agree with the natural resources angle being the prime motivator but, rather, the desire to have a weak but compliant ally/neighbour who buys their stuff. And we have been historically and consistently happy in that role.
Totally agreed. This is an issue I don’t think any of us will see seriously discussed in our lifetimes.You won't have to worry about transitioning. My point being that any GoC - no matter what political stripe - will ever propose it. There are too many "no nukes" environmentalists, peace activists and those in the employ of a foreign nation.
We are also influenced by a nation who appears to be friendly but in reality want this nation - Canada - for its natural resources because that nation cannot sustain itself without our resources.
The fact that we pay foreign aid money to China HAS to be criminal somehow. Or at least against whatever formulas & rules are used when calculating who gets that money, and how much.Hey Defence just found 14.2M more in the budget
Agreed. Heck, I’m reminded of that CBC ‘Special’ about CSOR training/mentoring activities in Africa.You won't have to worry about transitioning. My point being that any GoC - no matter what political stripe - will ever propose it. There are too many "no nukes" environmentalists, peace activists and those in the employ of a foreign nation.
I learned something new about submarine warfare from every single line of your post here. Thanks OGBT.To answer your question, CBH99, you have to consider what modern non-nuc submarines are good at: ASW barrier operations. There is nothing better than a non-nuc boat loitering at slow speed to impersonate a hole in the water. That is why they are good at barrier ops: that is loitering near the centre of a defined corridor where other submarines who want to break out must pass. In such scenario, the "classic" boat has an advantage on the nuke as a hunter.
There are countless such areas either in or around the SCS, so such submarines could contribute very nicely to both prevention of break out from the CSC or in guarding the flank of the nuke boats hunting area. Such mission and contribution is not insignificant.
But for Canada to contribute that effect, we would have to forward base the subs somewhere else for the duration, likely in Northern Australia.