Nuclear submarines and regional security.

[Dave70]

And I replied. Scroll back. Interesting that you allow that China makes mistake. So enlighten us, what are some or the CCP's seriously bad mistakes and intrigues as we all agree are often made by western countries and democracies. Or does the CCP only make minor errors of judgement while intending to do good?

I did see your reply, thanks.

Well, it's you who said that "China can do no wrong", not me.

As I said, humans make mistakes which results in bad judgement. China had acknowledged that the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution were mistakes of the past. Originally, the intentions were good, but it went disastrously wrong. China has no bad intentions towards another country, on the other hand, it is a fact that some Western countries have bad intentions against China. If you are not aware of that, then the Western media had already shaped your opinion.

I recommend all Australians to watch the below video "How the US sold Australia a China war" by Cyrus Janssen, an American geopolitical analyst. He reveals the truth about how the Western media shapes public opinion on important world matters. At 6:22, hear what University of Chicago Prof. John Mearsheimer has to say. He famously predicted the Russia-Ukraine war. In the video, he can be heard saying "don't underestimate how nasty we (the USA) can be". At 10:16, don't miss the hilarious scene from a political sketch.

 

[Bob]

Tibet and Xinjiang are not their own country, they never were. So it’s not like they were colonized by China. Of course, if you talk to Tibetans/Uyghurs living abroad, they are probably anti-government exiles, and they will bad-mouth China. But if go to China and talk to them, it’s completely different. You may say that they are just afraid of speaking out. No, use your common sense, hear how they say it, and look at their body language. It’s sincere, and they are telling you the truth. Actually, some are angry and frustrated with the disinformation spreading in the Western media.

Yes they were until invaded by China in the 20th century.

Now, Vietnam. China regarded its southern neighbor as a province, and it remained part of China for a thousand years. Read > https://newint.org/features/1991/02/05/simply

So which country was the first to colonize Vietnam? Answer: France. Read > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Indochina

No, it was China way back around CE 1,000. PRC also invaded in 1979.

And finally, the Philippines. China never colonized the Philippines. The Philippines was a Spanish colony before becoming a US colony.

Stealing, or illegally occupying, and then militarizing Philippine territory counts as imperialist.

Where and how are they expanding?

See above.

The PCA tribunal verdict is not legally binding for China. Why? Read this > https://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-06/10/content_25667142.htmhttps://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-06/10/content_25667142.htm

The cited article is from China Daily (not objective) and quotes one professor using specious reasoning to support his position.

BTW, did you know that the PCA is not part of the UN? The UN even made a statement stressing its separation from the PCA. The PCA just happen to rent space in the same building as the UN’s ICJ in the Hague, but the 2 organizations are not related.

Moreover, China and the Philippines were resolving the issue through bilateral negotiations, and while these negotiations were on-going, it is inappropriate to push this issue into arbitration.

The PCA is after all the recognized resolution mechanism for such disputes. The Philippines requested the arbitration, which was their right, because PRC was not negotiating in good faith. That article you cited is based on one person's opinion and not on

Did China grab any territory which is not theirs? NO. Disputed territory mean 2 or more countries are claiming the same territory. In other words, China believe its theirs, while the other party believe they own it. Was the territory occupied when China took control? The answer is also NO. Nobody was there at that time. But historically, China is saying the island is theirs. There is another island which China is saying is theirs but occupied by the Philippines. How come? Once there was an island with Taiwan troops stationed there. Then came a typhoon which destroyed their facilities, so the Taiwan troops left. After abandoning the island, the Philippines stationed their troops there. Since Taiwan is part of China, China is saying the island is theirs too. So it’s a disputed territory as well.

But they did, as noted elsewhere. In this post even.

China is chasing away unauthorized foreign navy ships coming too close to their island facility, the same way the US will chase away unauthorized foreign navy ships from any of their military bases around the world. Nothing out of ordinary.

They haven't really chased any ships away, just gave warnings. But since it's international waters the warnings are generally not heeded.

 

[harryopal1]

So according to Dave there are no contemporary misdeeds of China? 'Amazing. And details of the Tiananmen Square massacre is just another example of western propaganda? If that is so why is the CCP so touchy that it is determined to suppress any mention or discussion about what actually happened?

 

[Dave70]

Yes they were until invaded by China in the 20th century.

Wrong, cite the article if you can. I repeat, Tibet and Xinjiang have never been a country before.

No, it was China way back around CE 1,000. PRC also invaded in 1979.

Wrong, Vietnam was never a colony of China. Cite the article if you can which says otherwise.

Even Wikipedia say France is the first to colonize Vietnam. Didn't you read the link I provided?

The war in 1979 was a border conflict, it was not an invasion. It was a war to teach Vietnam a lesson, but that's another story.

Stealing, or illegally occupying, and then militarizing Philippine territory counts as imperialist.

As I said, if you say China is stealing, or illegally occupying, then the Philippines is doing the same.

China believes the island belongs to them, they can do whatever they want, including militarizing it.

Imperialist? Doesn't fit my description, but up to you, whatever you want.

The cited article is from China Daily (not objective) and quotes one professor using specious reasoning to support his position.

It's China's position, not the Philippines. Just to let you know why China think the verdict is not legally binding, that's all.

 

[Dave70]

So according to Dave there are no contemporary misdeeds of China? 'Amazing. And details of the Tiananmen Square massacre is just another example of western propaganda? If that is so why is the CCP so touchy that it is determined to suppress any mention or discussion about what actually happened?

Yes, Tiananmen was another dark chapter in China. I heard both sides of the story, and I have my own conclusions. What else? My memory is not that good about China's past, I have been pro-American for most of my life. I even contributed donations for the benefit of American war veterans before, including returning soldiers from the 2nd Iraq war. So naive of me. I have only been pro-China recently, I think sometime around 2019 or 2020.

 

[Bob]

Wrong, cite the article if you can. I repeat, Tibet and Xinjiang have never been a country before.



Wrong, Vietnam was never a colony of China. Cite the article if you can which says otherwise.

Even Wikipedia say France is the first to colonize Vietnam. Didn't you read the link I provided?

The war in 1979 was a border conflict, it was not an invasion. It was a war to teach Vietnam a lesson, but that's another story.



As I said, if you say China is stealing, or illegally occupying, then the Philippines is doing the same.

China believes the island belongs to them, they can do whatever they want, including militarizing it.

Imperialist? Doesn't fit my description, but up to you, whatever you want.



It's China's position, not the Philippines. Just to let you know why China think the verdict is not legally binding, that's all.

I'd suggest that you do your own research on the points you dispute, and from sources which are impartial. It's well established that the two territories in question have not always been part of China, and that China had invaded and ruled parts of Vietnam.
Your comment 'China believes the island belongs to them, they can do whatever they want, including militarizing it.' is telling. Might makes right in other words.

 

[Balifrog]

One should read a bit about the domestic situation of Tibet before China "liberated" them.
A theocratic, feudal regime with 95% of the population being serfs to the 5%...
The 5% being

• lama priests with the Dalai Lama being at same time the political and religious ruler
• land owners
• government officials

The people of Tibet are way better of now.
Note also that the Dalai Lama signed the agreement with China, although probably a bit under pressure.....

History of Tibet (1950–present) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Note also that the Dalai Lama and his gurus are obviously living a confortable life in exile nowadays and travel the world...

 

[Balifrog]

Back to the Pacific.
Unnoticed by many, the independandist party just won the territorial elections in French Polynesia....

French Polynesia set for pro-independence president after election

French Polynesia's pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira party has won the election for a new 57-member territorial assembly, paving the way for Moetai Brotherson to become president.

www.rnz.co.nz

We can expect China (already a very important diaspora present there) to start to lobby and offer economic assistance to that territory.

Note that nearly the same happened recently in French Caledonia, but let's say that the rules.concerning who could vote were a bit "biaised" towards "pro France"

Those 2 territories represent the vast majority of our maritime domain, you can be sure that many are.looking to put their hands on it.

 

[fastpitch17]

Yes, Tiananmen was another dark chapter in China. I heard both sides of the story, and I have my own conclusions. What else? My memory is not that good about China's past, I have been pro-American for most of my life. I even contributed donations for the benefit of American war veterans before, including returning soldiers from the 2nd Iraq war. So naive of me. I have only been pro-China recently, I think sometime around 2019 or 2020.

I believe you stated that you fel in love with China with your trips their pre 2019 when discussing how great china was with the dealing of covid. Your post indicate with your love of all things china and your anti covid vax that you fall right into being a trump loyalist type of person too. As for saying you were naive for supporting returning soldiers from Iraq, what does that no mean? Do you regret supporting US soldiers who go into harms way by orders of others above them?

Your post strongly imply you are pro communists china and no matter what others may tell or show you, you are stuck on that. Hopefully you can return to china and feel at home there soon. You can probably easily find a position in their propaganda agency.

 

[Marcel123]

I believe you stated that you fel in love with China with your trips their pre 2019 when discussing how great china was with the dealing of covid. Your post indicate with your love of all things china and your anti covid vax that you fall right into being a trump loyalist type of person too. As for saying you were naive for supporting returning soldiers from Iraq, what does that no mean? Do you regret supporting US soldiers who go into harms way by orders of others above them?

Your post strongly imply you are pro communists china and no matter what others may tell or show you, you are stuck on that. Hopefully you can return to china and feel at home there soon. You can probably easily find a position in their propaganda agency.

Trump is screaming from the rooftops that he made it happend that there where vaxs.

 

[harryopal1]

One should read a bit about the domestic situation of Tibet before China "liberated" them.
A theocratic, feudal regime with 95% of the population being serfs to the 5%...
The 5% being

• lama priests with the Dalai Lama being at same time the political and religious ruler
• land owners
• government officials

The people of Tibet are way better of now.
Note also that the Dalai Lama signed the agreement with China, although probably a bit under pressure.....

History of Tibet (1950–present) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Note also that the Dalai Lama and his gurus are obviously living a confortable life in exile nowadays and travel the world...

This reminds me of the Monty Python film "The life of Brian" where one of the two underground Jewish groups are bent on trying to overthrow the Romans. "What did the Romans ever do for us?" one of them growls. A voice feebly responds "Roads." A pause and another voice timidly suggests "Education" and so it continues until "Yes yes. Roads, education, sanitation, water, but what did the Romans ever do for us?"

Amusing but the point being most people prefer to be ruled by their own tyrants than being ruled by a foreign power. And so with the people of Tibet. It doesn't follow that had the Chinese not taken over then the feudalistic system would have remained unchanged. Ideas zip around the world now with lightning speed and shake things up. A fact that seriously worries the CCP which moves to block internet access to sites that are deemed threatening

 

[centurion]

Amusing but the point being most people prefer to be ruled by their own tyrants than being ruled by a foreign power

If that was the case, there would be no flock of immigrants, legal and illegal to Europe and the US.
Nobody immigrates to China, and whoever has money tries to run out.

Only useful idiots and CCP apologists in foreign countries support these kinds of dictatorships but from a safe distance and comfort of their homes, where they can live more or less free.

 

[Dave70]

Do you regret supporting US soldiers who go into harms way by orders of others above them?

You are right, soldiers are only following orders. But supporting them is akin to supporting the war, which by the way I used to support (until the 2nd Iraq war). Later, I felt disgusted when I found out that the WMD was all lies. Millions died, you know.

Hopefully you can return to china and feel at home there soon.

Don't be a Karen, you don't know who you are talking to. Reminds me of a white female American telling a male Native American to "go back to Mexico" in a viral video.

 

[Dave70]

A fact that seriously worries the CCP which moves to block internet access to sites that are deemed threatening

Millions are now using VPN, in case you don't know. Even Indonesia has strict censorship law to maintain peace and security. Media disinformation is still getting through, nonetheless.

 

[Dave70]

If that was the case, there would be no flock of immigrants, legal and illegal to Europe and the US.
Nobody immigrates to China, and whoever has money tries to run out.

Only useful idiots and CCP apologists in foreign countries support these kinds of dictatorships but from a safe distance and comfort of their homes, where they can live more or less free.

To say that "nobody immigrates to China" is inaccurate.

Some have even become famous https://www.echinacities.com/expat-life/7-Foreigners-Who-Made-a-Name-for-Themselves-in-China. Nevertheless, China is not "immigration country" as China already has huge population.

"Whoever has money tries to run out" is also inaccurate. Some, yes. Not whoever.

Anyone speaking out in favor of China is a CCP apologists, even if they were just saying the truth. Must be hard for people like Jeffrey Sachs and Seymour Hersh or even Cyrus Janssen to live in America these days.

 

[centurion]

To say that "nobody immigrates to China" is inaccurate.

Some have even become famous https://www.echinacities.com/expat-life/7-Foreigners-Who-Made-a-Name-for-Themselves-in-China. Nevertheless, China is not "immigration country" as China already has huge population.

"Whoever has money tries to run out" is also inaccurate. Some, yes. Not whoever.

Anyone speaking out in favor of China is a CCP apologists, even if they were just saying the truth. Must be hard for people like Jeffrey Sachs and Seymour Hersh or even Cyrus Janssen to live in America these days.

Sure, China is hard to get in, but also hard to get out. You will need exit visa soon.

China's exit bans multiply as political control tightens under Xi

HONG KONG (Reuters) -China is increasingly barring people from leaving the country, including foreign executives, a jarring message as the authorities say the country is open for business after three years of tight COVID-19 restrictions. Scores of Chinese and foreigners have been ensnared by...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Dave70]

To many online, Maureen A Huebel almost doesn’t seem like a real person.

The vociferously anti-American Twitter account posts a constant stream of pro-China — and more recently, pro-Russia — messages to her 3000 followers, with an unusual focus on debunking claims of Uyghur repression in Xinjiang.

In one viral tweet over the weekend that sparked particular backlash, Mrs Huebel — whose bio lists a series of academic qualifications from universities including Monash — claimed she was planning to travel to the troubled northwestern region to study the “happiness” of the local population.

“I am travelling to Xinjiang in 2024 to study how the Uighurs have contributed to the substantial growth in the Xinjiang GDP and look at their population growth,” she wrote, adding, “Analyse their happiness and expression through dancing.”

Author Idrees Ahmad, associate editor of New Lines Magazine, replied, “You are a cheap propagandist. And it would be useless to say that you should be ashamed of yourself since you clearly have no shame.”

At times almost comically pro-Beijing — regularly retweeting Chinese Communist Party officials while decrying American “propaganda” about everything from the Ukraine war to Taiwan — Mrs Huebel has in the past been accused of being an elaborate fake account, part of China’s sophisticated online influence operations.

“I’m very much a real person — I’m not a bot,” the 75-year-old said in a phone interview on Tuesday from her home in the affluent beachside Melbourne suburb of Brighton. “I’m bona fide and a lot of people don’t like it that I’m bona fide. I’ve got a lot of qualifications, they’re all real.”

Mrs Huebel, a mother-of-four who said she is not retired but has “passive income so really I can do what I like”, denied being a “propagandist” for Beijing. “Everyone’s a propagandist — everyone’s got their propaganda in their own self-interest,” she said.

“I don’t care. I would have died a long time ago if I got upset because someone called me a Chinese bot on Twitter. We have a lot of anti-China propaganda that’s not true and it doesn’t serve us. It might serve the oligarchs, it might serve the military-industrial complex and their profits.”

Click below to read the full story:

https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/im-not-a-bot-melbourne-scholar-behind-probeijing-twitter-account-plans-to-debunk-xinjiang-claims/news-story/b99b0cf4ede9709283dd3e564ef42f5d

Be sure to read till the end where she was asked why she appears to have such strong feelings about China.

 

[harryopal1]

Returning to the original theme of this thread "nuclear submarines and regional security", the more I hear from military strategists the more I am inclined to think Australia has embarked upon an ill advised and impossibly expensive program. I can understand the political attractiveness of announcing Australia will have a future fleet of eight powerful nuclear submarines. But this will be into the 2050s if all goes to plan. Evidently Britain has a history of running late with completion of such programs with major cost blowouts. There are also serious doubts about meshing British built submarines with American built weapons systems. In the meantime Australian has just one operational Collins Class submarine and it may be another four years before several more can be put back into service. We have an interim arrangement to possibly obtain 3 used nuclear Virginia Class, American submarines some time in the next ten years. I gather we would be looking at upwards of $3billion per unit.

There are rapid advances being made with underwater drones which are hardly comparable to a submarine but evidently can prevent operation of submarines. No doubt there will be immense strides in underwater drone capabilities over the next 30 years.

All this while Australia is undergoing a major economic crisis of unaffordable rentals of units and houses and ever increasing numbers of even middle class people finding it difficult to cope. Homelessness and poverty are stark issues confronting us now.

My inclination would be to settle on 10 Virginia class submarines for an outlay of $30billion and have these well in advance of the questionable availability of 8 nuclear submarines at cost of $368 billion by around 2050. The difference in expenditure would enable us to better deal with domestic poverty and homeless issues.

 

[Balifrog]

Returning to the original theme of this thread "nuclear submarines and regional security", the more I hear from military strategists the more I am inclined to think Australia has embarked upon an ill advised and impossibly expensive program. I can understand the political attractiveness of announcing Australia will have a future fleet of eight powerful nuclear submarines. But this will be into the 2050s if all goes to plan. Evidently Britain has a history of running late with completion of such programs with major cost blowouts. There are also serious doubts about meshing British built submarines with American built weapons systems. In the meantime Australian has just one operational Collins Class submarine and it may be another four years before several more can be put back into service. We have an interim arrangement to possibly obtain 3 used nuclear Virginia Class, American submarines some time in the next ten years. I gather we would be looking at upwards of $3billion per unit.

There are rapid advances being made with underwater drones which are hardly comparable to a submarine but evidently can prevent operation of submarines. No doubt there will be immense strides in underwater drone capabilities over the next 30 years.

All this while Australia is undergoing a major economic crisis of unaffordable rentals of units and houses and ever increasing numbers of even middle class people finding it difficult to cope. Homelessness and poverty are stark issues confronting us now.

My inclination would be to settle on 10 Virginia class submarines for an outlay of $30billion and have these well in advance of the questionable availability of 8 nuclear submarines at cost of $368 billion by around 2050. The difference in expenditure would enable us to better deal with domestic poverty and homeless issues.

Australia has been dragged in a "coalition" by the US.
It is one of the US favorite strategies, drag "allies" into their stupid ideas (like invading an country for no reason), so that they can claim it is not the USA vs "X" but a "coalition of democratic countries figthing against evil"
What a joke. V.N., Afhganistan, Irak.....

Concerning the subs, the US naval industry can barely keep up with their own needs.
What will likely happen,.is that Australia will be handed over 2nd hand (20y old) nuclear powered by the US, and the US will build for themselve a new generation of them.
And as Australia has ZERO experience with nuclear energy, let alone marine nuclear energy, the sub will be manned with a partial US crew for the propulsion part.
And then there is the onshore maintenance part to organize.....
Good luck.

 

[fastpitch17]

You are right, soldiers are only following orders. But supporting them is akin to supporting the war, which by the way I used to support (until the 2nd Iraq war). Later, I felt disgusted when I found out that the WMD was all lies. Millions died, you know.



Don't be a Karen, you don't know who you are talking to. Reminds me of a white female American telling a male Native American to "go back to Mexico" in a viral video.

That Karen thing better fits your type. It was you that stated in a post in a different thread that you liked to visit china and really enjoyed it. Not me. I'm sure I would not be welcomed there. I still believe in democracy.