Biden announces nuclear-powered submarines for Australia

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By ZEKE MILLER and DARLENE SUPERVILLE 26 minutes ago

SAN DIEGO (AP) — President Joe Biden and the leaders of Australia and the United Kingdom on Monday announced that Australia will purchase nuclear-powered attack submarines from the U.S. to modernize its fleet amid growing concern about China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific.

Biden flew to San Diego to appear with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak as they hailed an 18-month-old nuclear partnership given the acronym AUKUS — for Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The partnership, announced in 2021, enables Australia to access nuclear-powered submarines, which are stealthier and more capable than conventionally powered vessels, as a counterweight to China’s military buildup.

Biden, appearing sensitive to tensions with China and its criticism of the deal, stressed that the submarines are “nuclear powered, not nuclear armed.”



Read more: https://apnews.com/article/biden-australia-united-kingdom-submarines-nuclear-cf330037f9e6befdec0f6c1658601462?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_08

[LudwigPastorius]

1. Golly Xi...

China's not going to dig that.

[DemocraticPatriot]

2. I am surprised to learn that they did not have them

already

[Zipgun]

9. Australia had a contract with France for subs. The French were pretty pissed that we replaced them

but apparently there were issues with things like delays and cost overruns from the French manufacturer. The ones the French were producing were not nuclear so the ability to get nuclear subs as an alternative to the ones under contract likely sealed the deal.

[ancianita]

3. Now one of our strategic Pacific partners is empowered to keep the seas stable.

Last edited Mon Mar 13, 2023, 11:11 PM - Edit history (1)

The combined navies of the wider world have less than one-tenth the power projection capacity of the U.S. Navy. And Joe's going to keep it that way.


China won't seethe because China is a vacuum of everything everyone's got, and it also knows it has the longest supply lines in the world, from 5,000 to 7,000 miles long, for imports and exports.

East Asia never developed a regional system of cooperation, or even diplomatic pressure release valves that fall short of military exchange.

And though China hates Japan, Japan wants to colonize Korea, Taiwan wants a nuclear deterrent, and South Korea trusts no one -- they all have had near-complete dependence upon American strategic naval overwatch. And now it's tightening up.

If hostilities disrupted trade in that region, China would have to punch through the waters of multiple hostile combatants, including all the countries of "the Chain" (aka supply chain) as well as a half dozen more choke points to reach any market or resource points that matter to it, since China only has a navy capable at best of coastal operations.

[former9thward]

4. The Chinese navy is the biggest in the world.

They have 350 ships and submarines, most of them very new. The U.S. has 290 or so, many very aged. Your views on Chinese naval capabilities are not shared with U.S. military experts.

Bigger Fleets Win
In naval warfare, a smaller fleet of superior quality ships is not a way to victory. The side with the most ships almost always wins.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2023/january/bigger-fleets-win

[EX500rider]

5. Compare tonnages of the two fleets

In all, the U.S. fleet weighs in at around 4.5 million tons. The Chinese fleet might slightly exceed 2 million tons.

And Chinese submarines are still noisy and primitive compared to the American ones.

The US has a vast blue navy fleet.

The Chinese are working on one.

[former9thward]

6. In a war centered around Taiwan which side is going to have supply problems?

[EX500rider]

7. We'd keep our surface combatants way east of Taiwan

And unleash our attack subs on the Chinese.
And mine the straights. IMO

Plus we have air launched versions of the harpoon naval attack cruise missile with a range of 120 plus nautical miles

[MarineCombatEngineer]

10. China doesn't have near the experience of operating a blue water navy,

power projection nor combat experience as the US Navy does, they're working on it, but in a war, China's navy would fare very badly.

Being the biggest doesn't equate to being the best.

Also, combined with our allies, Australia, Japan, the UK, China's navy would stand no chance.

[Happy Hoosier]

14. If the fight is in Taiwan?

My money is on the U.S. owning the skies and the seas.

The chinese have some capability, to be sure, but it pales in comparison to what we have. And it's not just about hardware, it's about training, experience, and the ability to rapidly adapt to emerging conditions, which is key, as we've seen in Ukraine. Te U.S. is MILES ahead of China there.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

15. +100.

[ancianita]

8. Wow, it's grown faster than I thought.

Not sure if this constitutes all our fleets or just the Pacific fleet. But for sure, China's been cranking out its navy.

[Zeitghost]

11. China does not have a functional blue water navy

that can project force. Full stop.

Their "advantage" comes mostly by way of small coastal patrol vessels.

They have zero functioning carrier groups. Zero.

We have twice the tonnage (a good indicator of combat force) and more than twice the amount of ship carried missiles and that does not count our naval air capacities.

[former9thward]

12. China does not need that.

They are not invading San Francisco. The U.S. navy is spread all over the world since it has self appointed itself as world cop.

[Zeitghost]

13. It will

If the US decides to stop keeping the world's oceans free and safe for commercial shipping traffic as it has since the end of WWII.

But that was not the point of the article you seemed to agree with...