How do our Australian members feel about the new AUKUS plan to buy nuclear subs from America?

[+and-then]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/13/aukus-australian-submarine-nuclear-loophole-proliferation-fears

While I think these moves - in theory - are a positive move against the coming hegemony of the CCP, it does concern me that it will set a precedent that other nations will use to get a backdoor entre for the bomb.  What do you Strayans think?

[+Grim Reaper 6]

13 minutes ago, and-then said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/13/aukus-australian-submarine-nuclear-loophole-proliferation-fears

While I think these moves - in theory - are a positive move against the coming hegemony of the CCP, it does concern me that it will set a precedent that other nations will use to get a backdoor entre for the bomb.  What do you Strayans think?

I think if the United States are going to supply Nuclear Technology to any Nation Australia is the right country to trust. But, I don’t believe that trust will be given out freely to just anyone.

[psyche101]

The loophole is a real concern. But I understand the need for security

in this day and age can't inspection of a specific system be done remotely or by proxy? 

China has overstated these subs as a threat from day one. AUKUS clearly makes them nervous.

[openozy]

We already have Orcas doing a fine job.

[Alchopwn]

Oh, I thought they said Orcus...

Not a bad demon lord, Undeath and all, but I wouldn't want to be his ally.

[Unusual Tournament]

On 3/15/2023 at 11:21 AM, and-then said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/13/aukus-australian-submarine-nuclear-loophole-proliferation-fears

While I think these moves - in theory - are a positive move against the coming hegemony of the CCP, it does concern me that it will set a precedent that other nations will use to get a backdoor entre for the bomb.  What do you Strayans think?

I think it’s a wrong move. We should have stayed with the French subs and I’ll tell you why. Nuclear submarines without nuclear weapons is counterproductive. 
 

Australia is paying too much for a capability we cannot effectively use since we cannot crew 6 subs with 60 personnel each now we are gonna somehow 12 nuclear submarines with a compliment of 130 sailors each.

Australia will now need a disposal unit for the nuclear reactors on the submarines and refueling will require nuclear generating capabilities we don’t have at a cost of close to a trillion dollars.

Just the submarines and their life cycle costs is gonna cost 400 billion and add the nuclear power plant and storage facilities PLUS future nuclear missiles (yes this is what the deal is really all about) will make this a duplication of a capability our allies already have.

This deal brings nothing new to the table for Australia. 
 

Australia would have been better off buying into the B-21 nuclear bomber programme instead if it wanted to go nuclear … as it stands we choose to subsidise American and British defence industries 

Edited March 19 by Unusual Tournament

[Unusual Tournament]

On 3/15/2023 at 11:52 AM, psyche101 said:

The loophole is a real concern. But I understand the need for security

in this day and age can't inspection of a specific system be done remotely or by proxy? 

China has overstated these subs as a threat from day one. AUKUS clearly makes them nervous.

C’mon, this is an unnecessary capability that’s already duplicating what our allies can already do. 400 billion dollars Plus all the sundries is not money well spent