On 9/16/2021 1:13 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (Thu, 16 Sep 2021 11:43:37 -0400) it happened bitrex
> <
us...@example.net> wrote in <JCJ0J.55834$Dr....@fx40.iad>:
>
>> The Biden administration is as as right-wing as Thatcher but it will
>> insist all attack submarines it sells are given soothing
>> progressive-friendly nicknames like "The Rainbow Connection", "Disco
>> Inferno", "Cotton Candy Crush", "10 Megatons of Pride Up Your Ass", "A
>> Mine is a Terrible Thing to Waste", etc.
>
> There are several problems.
> First if it is anything like the F35 fiasco then Aussies will have to pay more and more.
> Second the hardware and nukes will be 100% under US control, perhaps even via a build in hack.
The US has never given nuclear weapons to anybody other than to the UK
temporarily, way back in the late 50s. It's likely the US provided some
technical support and supplies to the UK and Israeli weapons programs,
the latter probably through the UK as an intermediary, as the official
US stance on Israeli nuclear weapons since after Kennedy has always been
one of miffed indifference whenever the topic comes up, or "Ask me no
questions, and I'll tell you no lies."
There were American nukes based in Canada, but they were under US
command authority, the Canadians called this "incineration without
representation." Same thing elsewhere in the world to this day
> Third the Aussies will be forced to join US in its silly wars, or even join UK.
Probably not.
> And they lost goodwill with the EU.
> Do not forget US policy changes every few years, sometimes 180 degrees due to elections.
> The US military industrial complex is a sucker for your purse.
The constant lately despite election and policy changes is that defense
spending always goes up. The "joke" is that US military personnel almost
never get left behind, as the US almost never actually leaves anywhere.
When they do like in the case of Afghanistan they just tend to pop up
somewhere else.
> If Aussies have to join US in a war to say 'protect' or 'defend' Taiwan and it escalates
> then the nukes will land on the few cities there are down under.
> What s left will be taken by China .
> It is all too obvious.
> On top of that US is bankrupt.
>
Loud patriotism abounds, but support for taking real losses in even a
brief war with China over Taiwan in the US is probably lacking. I expect
similar among Australians. Compared to the tens of thousands of
civilians that were killed 20 years in Afghanistan was an easy tour for
US troops compared to Vietnam, with IIRC fewer than 3,000 killed. In a
fight with China over Taiwan that number could be lost in a week, or a day.
And the most likely result is that China will take the island eventually
if they're determined to do so and nobody wants to escalate the fight
nuclear, which surely nobody does. The chances are it will amount to a
strategic loss for the US is pretty good despite whatever short-term
pummeling we give them, and a lot of Americans (many of whom definitely
don't give a shit about the difference between one Chink and another
day-to-day) will surely wonder what the point was.