Where's Twiggy and Gina and all the others who live off the natural resources of Australia? What about the multi nationals? They need to be working together for a better future of manufacturing for domestic production of military and civil needs. Don't waste time because when the SHTF it's too late.
i would like to bring tariffs back to reboot manufacturing here. But it would require sacrifice and I don't think young Aussies would be onboard with it?
@@BearHumphries466 That's the Globalists worldview I don't buy it. We made everything in Australia once,now we make virtually nothing. Economic Nationalism terrifies the Globalists as it reduces their control. It's the real reason Trump is vilified so much by Liberals as they are nothing but lackeys of the Globalists and Globalisation.
Excellent leadership by Senator David Fawcett. Is there a reason why the lifting docks in South Australia can't handle Virginia Class or is South Australia a Nuclear Free Zone? Ultimately of course all the Virginia are duds because there won't be Stealth Cruise Missiles. The torpedoes can be heard running and will never have super cavitation and they might run an hour before hitting a target. Which gives away the position of the submarine and allows every sort of countermeasure, including the enemy launching anti submarine helicopters and even firing ballistic missiles from mainland China or Chinese submarines that will be able to lift their own multiple small homing torpedoes onto the close vicinity of any Australian submarine Virginia or Collins. The option of just sharing the Uk Dreadnought program including individual ICBM tubes and the future American Boomers was important. Part of any future conflict will be a war over satellites, and has always been since the Space Race and the emphasis of Star Wars. It is true that the old generation of US aircraft with long range missiles were capable of targeting satellites but a reason for IICBM Boomer submarines also. The US Navy has a total of 18 Ohio-class submarines which consist of 14 ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), and four cruise missile submarines (SSGNs) that were previously SSBNs. It might be evidence just how weak Cruise Missile capability is compared to Ballistic Missiles capability that it is the four Cruise missile submarines that are being retired. The power of the American torpedoes was always envisaged from 1948 that the Arctic battle including the short distance between the USA and the Soviets would became US Attack submarines intercepting and trailing all Soviet Boomers in cold water. It is the ability of the US torpedoes to dive under the cold margins that bounce back sound and sonar and then pop up to destroy anything that made them powerful. Those cold margins do not exist north of Adelaide. Having high-spped submarines that are capable of intercepting and following Soviet submarines was reasonable with the expectation that US Commanders would fire on them if it looked as if they were going to launch ICBMs against the continental USA. Uk and Australian Oberons sitting off Soviet ports might have performed some function but essentially the USA was always tracking and intercepting Soviet submarines at high-speed and to the extent that refuelling the reactors became an issue. There are not going to be enough Australian submarines to follow Chinese nuclear ICBM submarines and there won't be any political ability to disable Chinese submarines before or after firing either conventional or nuclear missiles for fear it will then create nuclear strikes. A situation similar to Imperial Japan where they had no idea how many more normal firestorms or how many more Hiroshimas and Nagasakis were on the way. The secret clauses of NATO always included distributing nuclear weapons. Possibly everyone and there are large numbers of customers buying Himars thinks that they will be given tactical nuclear weapons in some situation with that as the launch system instead of normal aircraft bombs capable of being used strategically as a partial deterrent or revenge escalation. At least the Senator Fawcett Plan is the only realistic and practical step that should be naturally supported by everyone as practical and possible and with no downsides. And hopefully every politician can take credit for it being implemented immediately, and the only opponent will be Paul Keating. The pretence that Collins Class was ever adequate because of US Torpedoes or Harpoon or Stonefish and all of the lies as politically convenient for South Australian politicians has been a huge disservice to the rest of Australia. All the lies about sovereign capability when there has never been an Independent Nuclear deterrent and now a total conventional inferiority with the PLA Chinese Navy able to wipe out the RAN in every port from far away using conventional ballistic missiles. Any tactic of thinking that the Air Warfare Destroyers will be able to stop that doing laps of Sydney Harbour or the Swan River or the Yarra or Moreton Bay is a big gamble with a large number of keen observers and spectators ready to post everything to social media and messaging. At least Senator David Fawcett is the only South Australian ever to see just how poor the conventional situation is. I do not know the Senators previous or current perspective on Collins Class or if anyone is still pretending Collins Class was anything except always totally wrong in doctrine for not being able to intercept anything. Even past and current Collins proponents are able to see that the proposal of refitting US submarines is not an attack on them or Collins or the South Australian tradition of pork-barreling parochialism and vote-buying so often comically mocked by the great Bert Kelly of South Australia. The Chinese ICBM submarines regardless of how loud and slow compared to other nuclear submarines are half the cost of the Australian Hunter Class ships currently under construction and will be in far greater numbers and firing far away from where the Hunter Class will be. Just on a conventional inferiority so bad for Australia that it is no deterrent and with no nuclear deterrent, the only reasonable measure beyond the lazy mutually convenient Lib Lab bipartisanship of the AUKUS plan is the brilliant and timely proposal of Senator Fawcett. Proper wargaming of the situation and given the vast Chinese satellite, merchant fleet and fishing fleets throughout the world it's not as if any survivors from the Royal Australian Navy can flee somewhere that would accept them. There is a lot to be said for Senator Fawcetts plan. The existing situation is so bad that the RAN should be based where it can't be attacked although Honolulu Pearl Harbour is tempting fate too much and the UK and East Coast USA would be fine. If there was ever such a thing as a valid Mahan Fleet-in-Being strategy for inferior naval forces that wasn't totally dispelled by British destruction of Bolshevik ships it certainly was during the many attacks on ships in port during WW2. The number of Ballistic missiles and other hypersonics and The Sovereignty argument and refusal to fully integrate to the US Navy or the Royal Navy and Sovereignty and Australian sailors might as well just base themselves in every Chinatown and casino in the capital cities while their ships burn and sink tied up at the docks. So the refurbishment of even one let alone several US submarines has more deterrent and combat power than the entire Royal Australian Navy. In every way Senator Fawcett is pleasant and affable and sensible and reasonable and a genius and a proven success across so many aspects, and also kind and honest which are the most important things. It's just that the 'Sovereignty' and 'Sovereign Capability' buzzwords have been so heavily polluted by the ulterior motives and bloody-mindedness and mercenary profiteering of others the term is a faucet urinating into the ears of the listeners. The Fawcett Plan is admirable for not digging up the past or discussing the Dud Subs or holding up the carcasses and bones of old Pink Elephants as if they are multiple winners of the Melbourne Cup and it doesn't offend anyone except maybe Paul Keating. I could never diminish my admiration for Bert Kelly by liking Senator Fawcett but I can understand why everyone else does and why he is actually loved by large numbers of South Australian voters. The Sir Humphrey Appleby Optimistic and Brave appellation should not be applied, and it's not even very dramatic and just good sense no different from going through a checklist and following procedures and protocols of good governance. I don't know what politicians do before they spend taxpayers money or what any Admiral does before pouring the rum and flogging with the Lash. Plenty of people kick the tires before driving away in a car and some might wash their hands and say Grace before dinner. Surely this plan is less controversial than driving a car and having dinner or does it need Paul Keating to have an opinion?
Senator Fawcett is a national treasure and his intellect, experience and expertise should be utilised to its fullest extent. Unlike some other ‘Flunkies’ who purport to be government experts in any particular subject matter, Senator Fawcett has a proven track record of being able to intelligently speak to any number of military technical fields. The current government would be well served by involving Senator Fawcett in the procurement process as his aim is to have the best available resources for our Armed Services; as opposed to trying to curry favour in the factional quagmire known as the Australian Labor Party.
So we signed up for Britain and America to service there subs here.nothing else.we are an island nation and a continent but have no shipbuilding capacity. Absolutely pathetic and beyond.
Now we need to cease our dependence on outside manufacturers. Build it here, if there is a war, we should be able to build virtually everything at home or be like Russia and paying off lend lease for 80 years.
Its called having a good relationship. Or as even tsun tzu said the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Is tsun tzu an idiot? Be very careful how you answer. 8:31
And more.. should be the title. Just because the horse has a useless jockey doesn't mean the horse can't. The horse certainly can and the horse looks a little disappointed to me.
I wish more politicians had this much common sense!
Far too logical for the current government. It might hurt their back pocket
Brilliant approach to a conplicated program. Hope this gains traction across the AUKUS partners!
The million dollar question with the billion dollar answer.
they dont know how many zero"s in a biwwion"albo accent" as its not their money
Where's Twiggy and Gina and all the others who live off the natural resources of Australia? What about the multi nationals? They need to be working together for a better future of manufacturing for domestic production of military and civil needs. Don't waste time because when the SHTF it's too late.
i would like to bring tariffs back to reboot manufacturing here. But it would require sacrifice and I don't think young Aussies would be onboard with it?
@@Westyrulztarrifs hurt all parties
@@BearHumphries466 That's the Globalists worldview I don't buy it. We made everything in Australia once,now we make virtually nothing. Economic Nationalism terrifies the Globalists as it reduces their control. It's the real reason Trump is vilified so much by Liberals as they are nothing but lackeys of the Globalists and Globalisation.
I'm glad there's optimism.
Prime Minister David Fawcett !
Excellent leadership by Senator David Fawcett. Is there a reason why the lifting docks in South Australia can't handle Virginia Class or is South Australia a Nuclear Free Zone? Ultimately of course all the Virginia are duds because there won't be Stealth Cruise Missiles. The torpedoes can be heard running and will never have super cavitation and they might run an hour before hitting a target. Which gives away the position of the submarine and allows every sort of countermeasure, including the enemy launching anti submarine helicopters and even firing ballistic missiles from mainland China or Chinese submarines that will be able to lift their own multiple small homing torpedoes onto the close vicinity of any Australian submarine Virginia or Collins. The option of just sharing the Uk Dreadnought program including individual ICBM tubes and the future American Boomers was important.
Part of any future conflict will be a war over satellites, and has always been since the Space Race and the emphasis of Star Wars. It is true that the old generation of US aircraft with long range missiles were capable of targeting satellites but a reason for IICBM Boomer submarines also. The US Navy has a total of 18 Ohio-class submarines which consist of 14 ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), and four cruise missile submarines (SSGNs) that were previously SSBNs. It might be evidence just how weak Cruise Missile capability is compared to Ballistic Missiles capability that it is the four Cruise missile submarines that are being retired.
The power of the American torpedoes was always envisaged from 1948 that the Arctic battle including the short distance between the USA and the Soviets would became US Attack submarines intercepting and trailing all Soviet Boomers in cold water. It is the ability of the US torpedoes to dive under the cold margins that bounce back sound and sonar and then pop up to destroy anything that made them powerful. Those cold margins do not exist north of Adelaide. Having high-spped submarines that are capable of intercepting and following Soviet submarines was reasonable with the expectation that US Commanders would fire on them if it looked as if they were going to launch ICBMs against the continental USA. Uk and Australian Oberons sitting off Soviet ports might have performed some function but essentially the USA was always tracking and intercepting Soviet submarines at high-speed and to the extent that refuelling the reactors became an issue.
There are not going to be enough Australian submarines to follow Chinese nuclear ICBM submarines and there won't be any political ability to disable Chinese submarines before or after firing either conventional or nuclear missiles for fear it will then create nuclear strikes. A situation similar to Imperial Japan where they had no idea how many more normal firestorms or how many more Hiroshimas and Nagasakis were on the way. The secret clauses of NATO always included distributing nuclear weapons. Possibly everyone and there are large numbers of customers buying Himars thinks that they will be given tactical nuclear weapons in some situation with that as the launch system instead of normal aircraft bombs capable of being used strategically as a partial deterrent or revenge escalation. At least the Senator Fawcett Plan is the only realistic and practical step that should be naturally supported by everyone as practical and possible and with no downsides. And hopefully every politician can take credit for it being implemented immediately, and the only opponent will be Paul Keating.
The pretence that Collins Class was ever adequate because of US Torpedoes or Harpoon or Stonefish and all of the lies as politically convenient for South Australian politicians has been a huge disservice to the rest of Australia. All the lies about sovereign capability when there has never been an Independent Nuclear deterrent and now a total conventional inferiority with the PLA Chinese Navy able to wipe out the RAN in every port from far away using conventional ballistic missiles. Any tactic of thinking that the Air Warfare Destroyers will be able to stop that doing laps of Sydney Harbour or the Swan River or the Yarra or Moreton Bay is a big gamble with a large number of keen observers and spectators ready to post everything to social media and messaging. At least Senator David Fawcett is the only South Australian ever to see just how poor the conventional situation is. I do not know the Senators previous or current perspective on Collins Class or if anyone is still pretending Collins Class was anything except always totally wrong in doctrine for not being able to intercept anything. Even past and current Collins proponents are able to see that the proposal of refitting US submarines is not an attack on them or Collins or the South Australian tradition of pork-barreling parochialism and vote-buying so often comically mocked by the great Bert Kelly of South Australia.
The Chinese ICBM submarines regardless of how loud and slow compared to other nuclear submarines are half the cost of the Australian Hunter Class ships currently under construction and will be in far greater numbers and firing far away from where the Hunter Class will be. Just on a conventional inferiority so bad for Australia that it is no deterrent and with no nuclear deterrent, the only reasonable measure beyond the lazy mutually convenient Lib Lab bipartisanship of the AUKUS plan is the brilliant and timely proposal of Senator Fawcett. Proper wargaming of the situation and given the vast Chinese satellite, merchant fleet and fishing fleets throughout the world it's not as if any survivors from the Royal Australian Navy can flee somewhere that would accept them. There is a lot to be said for Senator Fawcetts plan.
The existing situation is so bad that the RAN should be based where it can't be attacked although Honolulu Pearl Harbour is tempting fate too much and the UK and East Coast USA would be fine. If there was ever such a thing as a valid Mahan Fleet-in-Being strategy for inferior naval forces that wasn't totally dispelled by British destruction of Bolshevik ships it certainly was during the many attacks on ships in port during WW2. The number of Ballistic missiles and other hypersonics and The Sovereignty argument and refusal to fully integrate to the US Navy or the Royal Navy and Sovereignty and Australian sailors might as well just base themselves in every Chinatown and casino in the capital cities while their ships burn and sink tied up at the docks. So the refurbishment of even one let alone several US submarines has more deterrent and combat power than the entire Royal Australian Navy.
In every way Senator Fawcett is pleasant and affable and sensible and reasonable and a genius and a proven success across so many aspects, and also kind and honest which are the most important things. It's just that the 'Sovereignty' and 'Sovereign Capability' buzzwords have been so heavily polluted by the ulterior motives and bloody-mindedness and mercenary profiteering of others the term is a faucet urinating into the ears of the listeners. The Fawcett Plan is admirable for not digging up the past or discussing the Dud Subs or holding up the carcasses and bones of old Pink Elephants as if they are multiple winners of the Melbourne Cup and it doesn't offend anyone except maybe Paul Keating. I could never diminish my admiration for Bert Kelly by liking Senator Fawcett but I can understand why everyone else does and why he is actually loved by large numbers of South Australian voters. The Sir Humphrey Appleby Optimistic and Brave appellation should not be applied, and it's not even very dramatic and just good sense no different from going through a checklist and following procedures and protocols of good governance. I don't know what politicians do before they spend taxpayers money or what any Admiral does before pouring the rum and flogging with the Lash. Plenty of people kick the tires before driving away in a car and some might wash their hands and say Grace before dinner. Surely this plan is less controversial than driving a car and having dinner or does it need Paul Keating to have an opinion?
Senator Fawcett is a national treasure and his intellect, experience and expertise should be utilised to its fullest extent.
Unlike some other ‘Flunkies’ who purport to be government experts in any particular subject matter, Senator Fawcett has a proven track record of being able to intelligently speak to any number of military technical fields.
The current government would be well served by involving Senator Fawcett in the procurement process as his aim is to have the best available resources for our Armed Services; as opposed to trying to curry favour in the factional quagmire known as the Australian Labor Party.
Good thinking
Spot on 4:26
So we signed up for Britain and America to service there subs here.nothing else.we are an island nation and a continent but have no shipbuilding capacity. Absolutely pathetic and beyond.
Its so simple. Yet we have to complicate matters. 4:56
One correction. Return to our normal way of business. 10:04
Now we need to cease our dependence on outside manufacturers. Build it here, if there is a war, we should be able to build virtually everything at home or be like Russia and paying off lend lease for 80 years.
Its called having a good relationship. Or as even tsun tzu said the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Is tsun tzu an idiot?
Be very careful how you answer. 8:31
Brilliant let’s do I tell duttom
And more.. should be the title.
Just because the horse has a useless jockey doesn't mean the horse can't.
The horse certainly can and the horse looks a little disappointed to me.
and a taxpeyer wedding at the liars lodge and a 3 ship navy sail by? the last freebie
This is common sense so Labor won't support it