AUKUS

Remove this Banner Ad

It
You glossed over the million plus uighurs in concentration camps for the crime of wanting independence from a country they have nothing in common with. Not ethnically, not linguistically, not genetically.
Over a million? Don't think so.As if Dutton and Albanese give 2 shits for the Uighurs.it's just a handy tool for their criminal defence spending.
We have children in jails and refugees locked up and all our money goes to the top 5%.
They don't have homeless people in China. We use more fossil fuels per capita than anyone in the world and we are a racist country with racist political parties.
 
It
Over a million? Don't think so.As if Dutton and Albanese give 2 shits for the Uighurs.it's just a handy tool for their criminal defence spending.
We have children in jails and refugees locked up and all our money goes to the top 5%.
They don't have homeless people in China. We use more fossil fuels per capita than anyone in the world and we are a racist country with racist political parties.
They dont give a shit about them personally no.

They just understand that’s how the chinese treat those who oppose them.



No homeless in china? You havnt been there have you.

 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm with you except for the Korean war, which was a case of the US committing unimaginable war crimes.

They were depopulating the North of the country, via use of incendiary explosives, chemical and biological weapons, in a way few states ever have.

There is a reason the "forgotten war" narrative is pushed so aggressively. Truly behaviour that would have been worthy of the axis powers.
You might be getting confused with vietnam here bud.
 
Be a bit more honest. A lot are there for supporting jihadist movements, not all Uyghurs want an independent state (the East Turkestan movement is a tiny minority group), and it just so happens that it's happening in a key region of the nation that if it became independent would cut off the majority of China's population in the East from the Silk Road land trade routes to the East, further boxing the nation in. Obviously some neocons would love for Xinjiang to break off from China for their own geopolitical goals.
Well either theres a lot of uighurs want independance, or the chinese have locked up a million people for nothing.

Which shit sandwich would you like to take a bite of?

What about that behaviour says “these are the guys im looking forward to taking over from the us as the hegemonists”
 
So how do the countries who share our part of the world feel about our sub announcement?

Reckon that's something our media should have put front and centre of its assessment of the deal.

Did a quick run around of the major dudes and here's the verdict:

Malaysia - opposed

Indonesia - opposed but want more details. Currently opposed to allowing nuclear powered vessels in Indonesian waters

Singapore - supports

Japan - Supports

Fiji - supports

Japan - supports

Phillipines - supports

NZ - no comment but reiterates existing policy to not allow nuclear powered subs in NZ waters


Fill in more as you find them.
 
So how do the countries who share our part of the world feel about our sub announcement?

Reckon that's something our media should have put front and centre of its assessment of the deal.

Did a quick run around of the major dudes and here's the verdict:

Malaysia - opposed

Indonesia - opposed but want more details. Currently opposed to allowing nuclear powered vessels in Indonesian waters

Singapore - supports

Japan - Supports

Fiji - supports

Japan - supports

Phillipines - supports

NZ - no comment but reiterates existing policy to not allow nuclear powered subs in NZ waters


Fill in more as you find them.
Interesting contribution, thanks for including it.
 
They dont give a s**t about them personally no.

They just understand that’s how the chinese treat those who oppose them.



No homeless in china? You havnt been there have you.

3 million out of 1.4 billion is a far far lower % than any other major country.
There's 20,000 social workers to aid them as well.
Still not good enough reasons to provoke WW3, you can't ram your own dogma down the throats of sovereign nations.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

3 million out of 1.4 billion is a far far lower % than any other major country.
There's 20,000 social workers to aid them as well.
Still not good enough reasons to provoke WW3, you can't ram your own dogma down the throats of sovereign nations.
You said there was no homeless - i simply corrected that falsehood.
 

100% this - Australians are being completely fleeced with this deal

"The tragedy is exacerbated by the realisation that the submarines deal – possibly priced at about $368 billion – constitutes the biggest transfer of wealth from Australia to another country in its history. You have to go back to times of colonial exploitation to discover an arrangement so uneven. And ironically, it is the result of Australia pleading for it."
 
If I'm getting this right. the deal was set in play by the Coalition after they cancelled the French subs contract

If Labor pulled out of the deal, that would be Australia ****ing over France, the US and the UK in the space of two years which would have looked terrible on the world stage

These subs seem to be mostly to appease the US and don't really help much with the defence of our nation. Plus we've angered the Chinese even more who are a major trading partner

If we truly wanted to defend our nation there are cheaper and more effective options available

Is that the gist of it?
 
If I'm getting this right. the deal was set in play by the Coalition after they cancelled the French subs contract

If Labor pulled out of the deal, that would be Australia ******* over France, the US and the UK in the space of two years which would have looked terrible on the world stage

These subs seem to be mostly to appease the US and don't really help much with the defence of our nation. Plus we've angered the Chinese even more who are a major trading partner

If we truly wanted to defend our nation there are cheaper and more effective options available

Is that the gist of it?
Cheaper AND more effective.

Probably faster too.

The holy triumvarate.
 
If I'm getting this right. the deal was set in play by the Coalition after they cancelled the French subs contract

If Labor pulled out of the deal, that would be Australia ******* over France, the US and the UK in the space of two years which would have looked terrible on the world stage

These subs seem to be mostly to appease the US and don't really help much with the defence of our nation. Plus we've angered the Chinese even more who are a major trading partner

If we truly wanted to defend our nation there are cheaper and more effective options available

Is that the gist of it?
Yes, it is just another Morrison screw up.

That man is truely exceptional at spending and ultimately wasting other peoples money.
 
So how do the countries who share our part of the world feel about our sub announcement?

Reckon that's something our media should have put front and centre of its assessment of the deal.

Did a quick run around of the major dudes and here's the verdict:

Malaysia - opposed

Indonesia - opposed but want more details. Currently opposed to allowing nuclear powered vessels in Indonesian waters

Singapore - supports

Japan - Supports

Fiji - supports

Japan - supports

Phillipines - supports

NZ - no comment but reiterates existing policy to not allow nuclear powered subs in NZ waters


Fill in more as you find them.

Great post.

However, I have wondered what stance Hutt River Province (or Principality of) would take, but seems it no longer exists. Not only are we wiping out species on our continent at a rate of knots, we've also wiped out the only other 'nation' we share this land mass with. Having visited in the days of the rule of Prince Leonard, and met him personally, it is disappointing we no longer have his perspective as a counterbalance to what is disappointingly, an ALP government implementing conservative policy. Oh well, back to sprucing up the fallout shelter.
 
If I'm getting this right. the deal was set in play by the Coalition after they cancelled the French subs contract

If Labor pulled out of the deal, that would be Australia ******* over France, the US and the UK in the space of two years which would have looked terrible on the world stage

These subs seem to be mostly to appease the US and don't really help much with the defence of our nation. Plus we've angered the Chinese even more who are a major trading partner

If we truly wanted to defend our nation there are cheaper and more effective options available

Is that the gist of it?
Missiles would be better. If an invading army was en route to Australia, we could bomb the sh!t out of them as soon as they entered our territorial waters. A small supply of nukes would be good too. Just as a deterrent to other nuclear powers. Sure the likes of China & others could nuke us into oblivion, but if the price they had to pay to do that was to get hit 10 nukes from us, would they be prepared to pay it? I don't think so.
 
Missiles would be better. If an invading army was en route to Australia, we could bomb the sh!t out of them as soon as they entered our territorial waters. A small supply of nukes would be good too. Just as a deterrent to other nuclear powers. Sure the likes of China & others could nuke us into oblivion, but if the price they had to pay to do that was to get hit 10 nukes from us, would they be prepared to pay it? I don't think so.

Invading army, why would China want to control Australian cities like Melbourne, Sydney etc ?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

AUKUS

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top