Play Nice Random Chat Thread V

[Val Keating]

Hmmm...

The Empire strikes back...

Redirect Notice

www.google.com.au

Aren’t they planning on being the biggest military force by 2049?

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Aren’t they planning on being the biggest military force by 2049?

And by coincidence, our shipbuilding program lasts until 2055...

 

[Val Keating]

And by coincidence, our shipbuilding program lasts until 2055...

Sorry mate, do you mean our own ships or do we have a contract with them?

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Sorry mate, do you mean our own ships or do we have a contract with them?

My bad.

We are expanding our own navy in response to China’s naval expansion along similar timeframes. Our naval program, whilst much smaller, is designed to help oppose China’s naval supremacy by 2050.

 

[Snake_Baker]

My bad.

We are expanding our own navy in response to China’s naval expansion.

I dunno why they bother.

Land based medium range nukes's and a shitload of subs armed with ICBM's would do the job.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I dunno why they bother.

Land based medium range nukes's and a shitload of subs armed with ICBM's would do the job.

The yanks wouldn’t pull the nuclear trigger and we are very anti-nuclear here. We are re-engineering a French nuclear submarine into a conventionally-powered submarine just to avoid using nuclear tech. It is arguable whether China has such qualms as the yanks or us.

 

[Val Keating]

I dunno why they bother.

Land based medium range nukes's and a shitload of subs armed with ICBM's would do the job.

It’s about aircraft carriers I reckon

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

It’s about aircraft carriers I reckon

Best way to project conventional force. US naval task groups have been the bedrock of US maritime strategy since 1941.

Spoiler: Current US Approach

The JAM-GC is an operational approach formally outlined in 2016, which shaped American force structure and capability development towards creating a maritime-centric joint force. Replacing and building upon the Air-Sea Battle concept, the new doctrine stressed integrating land, sea, air, cyber and space capabilities to preserve freedom of action in contested environments against anti-access threats.[1] US commanders had initiated the change because they believed that the Air-Battle doctrine placed too much emphasis on systemically attacking area denial technologies, like missile batteries, which “could only be dismantled at high levels of risk”.[2] The new posture instead concentrates on protecting freedom of action to allow American forces to defend from a position of strength to deter attack, thereby enabling operational access to project power anywhere around the globe.[3] JAM-GC incorporates aspects of three maritime strategies, including power projection, sea denial and sea control. Denial is based on preventing enemies the use of a sea zone through a defensive posture, whilst control describes when a force has complete freedom of action in a specific sea area.[4] Through sea control, a nation can project force through landings, cruise missiles or bombers. Similar to the Air-Sea doctrine, JAM-GC’s effectiveness relies on integrated drones, naval task groups, submarines, stealth fighters, marines, long-range PGM’s and assisting Australian maritime forces.[5]

​

[1] Michael Hutchens et al., “Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons: A New Operational Concept,” Joint Force Quarterly, no. 84 (2017): 135.
[2] Hutchens et al., “Global Commons,” 136.
[3] Hutchens et al., “Global Commons,” 135.
[4] Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Maritime Strategy, 8-9.
[5] Hutchens et al., “Global Commons,” 136-39.

 

[Snake_Baker]

It’s about aircraft carriers I reckon

Why bother with the ridiculous expense? If they arrive with intent in our waters then just vaporise them.

 

[DesertRoo]

war is a racket, nothing to do with winning and losing, it’s how much money you can make along the way..

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

 

[Val Keating]

Why bother with the ridiculous expense? If they arrive with intent in our waters then just vaporise them.

****ed if I know. That’s a conversation you’re better off having with K4E. They’d probably rock up in subs these days. Let’s just hope all this stuff is just flexing because a hot war with nuclear powers would change the planet for ever.

 

[Del191229]

The yanks wouldn’t pull the nuclear trigger and we are very anti-nuclear here. We are re-engineering a French nuclear submarine into a conventionally-powered submarine just to avoid using nuclear tech. It is arguable whether China has such qualms as the yanks or us.

These would be the Yanks who have used nuclear weapons against civilian targets twice?

This is the kind of stuff that folks talk about re unconscious racism/bias.

Why exactly would the Chinese have less "qualms" than the US - which has already proven it will use nuclear weapons repeatedly against civilian targets.

(BTW - to be clear I am NOT saying you're racist, I'm very keen to know why you reckon China might be more likely to use nukes than the US tight now.)

 

[Del191229]

f’ed if I know. That’s a conversation you’re better off having with K4E. They’d probably rock up in subs these days. Let’s just hope all this stuff is just flexing because a hot war with nuclear powers would change the planet for ever.

The Chinese have a second strike nuclear capability. If you have a second strike capability, you're basically immune from nuke attacks via MAD.

If the Chinese did tock up and we nuked them, you can be guaranteed that within us of us going hahahahahahahahha cop that CCP wokester virus merchants every major city on this continent would be vaporised too.

Was someone bagging AOC for having an international relations degree the other day?

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Why bother with the ridiculous expense? If they arrive with intent in our waters then just vaporise them.

It is about Command, Control, Communications, Computer, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Electronic Warfare (C4ISREW) and air supremacy. Dominate those spheres and you annihilate a conventional military within a few days. They can then park their carriers anywhere they want after that. Until China gets its island bases in the Pacific, aircraft carriers will have to deliver said air power.

 

[krakouers]

These would be the Yanks who have used nuclear weapons against civilian targets twice?

This is the kind of stuff that folks talk about re unconscious racism/bias.

Why exactly would the Chinese have less "qualms" than the US - which has already proven it will use nuclear weapons repeatedly against civilian targets.

(BTW - to be clear I am NOT saying you're racist, I'm very keen to know why you reckon China might be more likely to use nukes than the US tight now.)

Are we able to nominate areas to be nuked?
I mean, Port Hedland might actually be improved if we want a test area

 

[Val Keating]

These would be the Yanks who have used nuclear weapons against civilian targets twice?

This is the kind of stuff that folks talk about re unconscious racism/bias.

Why exactly would the Chinese have less "qualms" than the US - which has already proven it will use nuclear weapons repeatedly against civilian targets.

(BTW - to be clear I am NOT saying you're racist, I'm very keen to know why you reckon China might be more likely to use nukes than the US tight now.)

In defence of the yanks they warned everyone in those cities that they were going to bomb them and to evacuate, by radio, by dropping thousands of leaflets from planes telling them to leave. The Japanese government told their citizens that it was fake. The Japanese are just as at fault for that as the Americans.

 

[Del191229]

It is about Command, Control, Communications, Computer, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Electronic Warfare (C4ISREW) and air supremacy. Dominate those spheres and you annihilate a conventional military within a few days. They can then park their carriers anywhere they want after that. Until China gets its island bases in the Pacific, aircraft carriers will have to deliver said air power.

Mate, if there was ever anything approaching a proper hot war between the US and China, aircraft carriers and the like would be secondary to the US falling into chaos and China shuts down its power, and internet.

 

[Del191229]

In defence of the yanks they warned everyone in those cities that they were going to bomb them and to evacuate, by radio, by dropping thousands of leaflets from planes telling them to leave. The Japanese government told their citizens that it was fake. The Japanese are just as at fault for that as the Americans.

No man, the Yanks dropped the nuclear bombs.

The Japanese didn't.

The United States is the only nation on Earth to ever use nuclear weapons.

And they used them on civilian targets.

The Russians never have, the Chinese never have.

 

[Val Keating]

[

The Chinese have a second strike nuclear capability. If you have a second strike capability, you're basically immune from nuke attacks via MAD.

If the Chinese did tock up and we nuked them, you can be guaranteed that within us of us going hahahahahahahahha cop that CCP wokester virus merchants every major city on this continent would be vaporised too.

Was someone bagging AOC for having an international relations degree the other day?

Do we even have nukes?

 

[Val Keating]

No man, the Yanks dropped the nuclear bombs.

The Japanese didn't.

The United States is the only nation on Earth to ever use nuclear weapons.

And they used them on civilian targets.

The Russians never have, the Chinese never have.

Did Japan leave them a choice? I’m not so sure. If Japan had the capacity they 100% would’ve nuked civilians. They didn’t even care about their own people, let alone other nations.

 

[BogBot]

Was listening to a podcast a while back that reckons the Chinese will blow up enough satellites to start a chain reaction in space, wiping out all communications. Drones etc become useless.

It then becomes more of a ground war.

 

[Del191229]

[Do we even have nukes?

Not formally, but I think we can pretty quickly have one ready if we really need it.

We also have nuclear armed US assets here.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

These would be the Yanks who have used nuclear weapons against civilian targets twice?

This is the kind of stuff that folks talk about re unconscious racism/bias.

Why exactly would the Chinese have less "qualms" than the US - which has already proven it will use nuclear weapons repeatedly against civilian targets.

(BTW - to be clear I am NOT saying you're racist, I'm very keen to know why you reckon China might be more likely to use nukes than the US tight now.)

I was discussing the contemporary context after the raft of nuclear non-proliferation policies and treaties. If Washington did not pull the trigger during the Cuban Missile Crisis, or during the Reagan years, then they are unlikely to pull it in regards to China. US nuclear stockpile reductions also lend credence to this view.

I said it was arguable as we do not fully understand Chinese intentions, strategy or nuclear strength. As I said earlier, some of Beijing's strategists view US actions within the Cold War lens of containment and we know from history that country's do not respond well to nationalist feelings of being isolated. You add that strategic lens, and the escalating China-US rivalry, to a (small) expansion of nuclear capabilities and you start to at least think about China's actions. I personally think it is an added deterrence measure, but that's just me guessing.


Also: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0096340211426630 (2011)

Today, China is the only one of five original nuclear weapon states that is increasing its nuclear arsenal. According to some estimates, the country could “more than double” the number of warheads on missiles that could threaten the United States by the mid-2020s. Earlier this year, China published a defense white paper, which repeated its nuclear policies of maintaining a minimum deterrent with a no-first-use pledge. Yet China has yet to define what it means by a minimum deterrent posture. This, together with the fact that it is deploying four new nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, invites concern as to the scale and intention of China’s nuclear upgrade. The authors estimate that China has a total inventory of approximately 240 nuclear warheads.


Playing devil's advocate here, but why would you expand your nuclear arsenal whilst your geostrategic rival in the US continues to reduce its nuclear arsenal and is committed to nuclear non-proliferation. I'm not suggesting anything, but Chinese actions are open to interpretation.

Funnily enough, this discussion reminds me of the Sino-Soviet split over Mao's desire to establish a nuclear program, but that's another discussion.

 

[Del191229]

Did Japan leave them a choice? I’m not so sure. If Japan had the capacity they 100% would’ve nuked civilians. They didn’t even care about their own people, let alone other nations.

The US chose to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in a few hours for its own strategic goals.

That's all there is to it.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Mate, if there was ever anything approaching a proper hot war between the US and China, aircraft carriers and the like would be secondary to the US falling into chaos and China shuts down its power, and internet.

A modern conventional war would be vastly different to the Second World War. The tools available to strategists, government's and militaries have expanded exponentially.