Did Australia make the right move in cancelling French submarines?

Did Australia make the right move in cancelling French submarines?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, Frick the french.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thirded.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fpbp

      Yes. Australia needs nuclear submarines.

      spbp

      frick frogs

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fpbp, the french are duplicitous and have dragged half the world into wars constantly while honking about their greatness. As bad as germans.
      Also US subs are better and Aussies have way more in common with burgers than the french.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. Australia needs nuclear submarines.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >trusting anglo state
    and they say takes one to know one, guess some never do

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They are part of the Anglo state you mong

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        thus my seconde sentence dummy

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Arguable at this point. The Chinese colony-effort has been doing good work these past few decades

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >imagine trusting the frogs over anyone

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Unless you are American, they have a larger MIC than you.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They'll never have complete control since Australia isn't going to be involved in the nuclear reactors required to build and operate the subs.

    They never planned to be involved in that aspect though, so this shouldn't really shock anyone.

    The US/UK agreed to give Australia sealed box reactors and training to use them, but they didn't give Australia permission to build the reactors or the blueprints to the reactor itself.

    There are probably some other systems that Australia won't have full control over (IE we won't share the blueprints or how it works exactly, but we'll sell it to them for use)

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Insider here, part of the deal to get the US subs was a commitment by Australia to join in any potential future American conflict against China. This was seen as necessary as the US would be weakening their own submarine forces to provide them to Australia

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the ANZUS treaty isn't new

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's well established that it wouldn't apply to Taiwan. Only a consultation would be **needed**

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            this deal more closely binds our supply and operation of military hardware to the US. F35's are entirely dependent on the US supply chain, the subs will be even more dependent. I doubt the US extracted a secret non-legally-binding promise from the australian government as part of a deal that gives them the kill switch for our long range force projection

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Weakening
        We don't physically have enough sailors to man additional submarines. If the Australians want to pitch in, that's only for the better. IIRC we have ships that are effectively crewed by the Philippines with only the officers being red-blooded Americans, and that was into the era Duterte sucked off the Chinese.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Their anti-nuke bullshit was contrived by ComIntern agitation, same story in New Zealand (see Trevor Louden for more).

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >but they didn't give Australia permission to build the reactors or the blueprints to the reactor itself.
      This is why we can’t have cheap nuclear power. Political paranoia over proliferation. Pathetic really.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the virginia-class's reactor runs on 95% enriched uranium. that's not paranoia, that's entirely reasonable to be worried about.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Worried about fricking what ?
          Russia, China, Best Korea, Pakistan all have nukes, Iran could makes nukes in a few months
          Who are they worried about ? Australia doesn't want nukes pretty sure they signed a treaty. African nations would blow themselves up trying to make a reactor
          ISIS ? lol , The Taliban ? They want to be left alone and not have a repeat of 2001

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you are brown

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >This is why we can’t have cheap nuclear power. Political paranoia over proliferation. Pathetic really.
        I'm half convinced they bribed the anti-nuclear lobbyist to prevent CIVILIAN NUCLEAR to take a hold, or they would eventually be asked to make civilian nuclear power plant.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Don't worry, I'm sure the Aussies will find a way to give it to the Chinese somehow.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not much point of that when Israel already would have.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Absolutely. The delays were bad enough to consider cancelling the program without a replacement. Naval Group is just unreliable.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they made the wrong move in
    >investing a shitload of money and effort into developing the tech and infrastructure to design and build the collins-class and then letting all of it rot away to nothing
    >getting friendly with the chinese
    >being anti-nuke
    >demanding more local production share than they could actually manage to deliver due to point 1

    they made the right move in
    >eventually acknowledging that nukes are what they need and taking necessary steps to get them
    >telling naval group to frick off

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      IN their defense its the do nothing Kiwis that are anti-nuke. Forcing them to plan around that.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yeah of course. we shouldn't have bought french originally, the japanese option was better.

    assuming we can count on being allied with the US over the long term, nuclear subs are obviously the best choice for australia's situation.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why do aussies accept being privately owned by an inbred living on the other side of the globe.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Indian?

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anglo recognizes Anglo.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no, but being a servile vassal state they didn't really have a choice

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yes, France has never been part of a successful military alliance.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >yes, France has never been part of a successful military alliance.
      While I'm also skeptical of France's ability to work with allies, I think you have to allow that they were part of the winning alliance in WWI. WWII also, though obviously there's a big asterisk next to the W.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        France won WW1, you illiterate moron.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >France won WW1, you illiterate moron.

          Read

          >yes, France has never been part of a successful military alliance.
          While I'm also skeptical of France's ability to work with allies, I think you have to allow that they were part of the winning alliance in WWI. WWII also, though obviously there's a big asterisk next to the W.

          again and then we can talk about who's illiterate.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >thinks he can imply then hide behind literal

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Arguably the British won WW1.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            lol
            yeah bro, British won WW2, WW1, Crimean

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              frick auto post
              * War, Napoleonic Wars and every other war they participated in, because you are just that good.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              frick auto post
              * War, Napoleonic Wars and every other war they participated in, because you are just that good.

              WW2 was the soviets. Everything else is true.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      NATO?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        who's gonna tell him?.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        France left NATO from 1966 to 2009 summer child

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          holy moron

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          France left NATO's integrated command structure from 1966 to 2009.
          France never left NATO.
          You're a worthless moron.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Wasted quads on a fricktarded post anon this is pretty embarrassing tbh

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >NATO?
        lmfao, nato's hair is currently on fire incase you havent noticed

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thirty years war

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >BRO WHAT ABOUT <some irrelevant medieval bullshit no one cares about>
        typical frog lmao,
        >we USED to be important!!!!

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          lmfao moron

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We fricked up taking signing the French deal in the first place.
    We'll frick up the nuke boats too because we won't develop domestic fuel processing.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      virginia-class doesn't require refueling

      politically it's probably not even desirable for australia to be able to open the reactor because the fuel is like 95% HEU

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Politically the deal is the reactor unit stays on the sub for its lifecycle without needing a refuel, then it gets cut out as a hull section and buried innadesert.
        It saves the Yanks holding one extra lump of rad-waste, and Australia has to start a rad-waste depository by then for the stack at Lucas Heights anyway.
        >the Greens and Abos will still be fighting every potential site in the Courts when the Virginias are fully rusted out.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The reactors last for the service life of the sub. It's a sealed box as far as Australia is concerned.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. Why woud a landlocked country need submarines?

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Did your mother make the right move not aborting you?

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >would build between 50 and 70 percent of the subs in Australia under the French deal
    >would service them in Australian ports under the French deal
    >would gain invaluable experience and skills by building and operating these subs under the French deal
    but
    >minimal input in the development
    >no input in the construction
    >no input in the servicing
    >subs manufactured by the same people who had to call on Americans to rescue their last project that was stuck in development hell and about whom Americans wrote a paper that is basically "what not to do when building a sub"
    >will have to wait until late 2040's to get half a century old submarines
    >and now no input on even operating their subs
    AHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHA
    I guess you can do whatever you want with Australians if you simply know how much to put into what pocket

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >paper that is basically "what not to do when building a sub"
      Link?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        RAND - Learning from Experience

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >RAND
          >revealing anything critical to submarine development in a book
          As if.
          It's just PR stunt to save face from AUKUS failures in that domain.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >50 and 70 percent of the subs in
      It was meant to be 90+% wtf did you Frogs do

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        combination of australian industry plain not being able to reach 90% and the french national industry practice of wheedling away at deals to bring more money home

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Naval Group brought it down to 70% immediately, then after extensive investigation of Australian industrial capabilities, they brought it down to 50%.
        Naval Group insisted that Australia is incapable of producing most of the complex systems for a reasonable price.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This whole thing has been a complete shit show since 2013 when the bilateral captains pick to buy Japan's subs was shut down and had to be turned into an open bid.
    11 years of fricking shit up. 11 years of successive PMs fricking around with defense policy so they can leave their mark.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >get nuke subs
      >look inside
      >no nukes
      Haha our country is a joke

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I am happy that even so-called 1st World nations frick up their military procurement.
      t. 3rd worlder.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's all an irrelevant waste of money anyway. Australia is never going to war.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Dumb take. Anglos will need more naval assets in that area.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >11 years of fricking shit up
      Those a rookie number. Bulgaria has been replacing it's BTRs since 2006.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Australia say it will get sovreign control
    >America say Australia will get sovreign control
    >AHHHHHH WHAT ABOUT THIS moronic SPECIFIC EXAMPLE I WANT YOU TO ANSWER

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Caused some of the biggest french seething this decade, so good decision

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >haha get owned frogs, we are so corrupt that a stack in the right pocket is enough to kill tens of thousands of high-tech jobs in our open air mine of a state ... ha ha ! YOU MAD HAHAHAHA

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >cancelling SSK for SSN

    It's a massive upgrade. Also they wanted a mini Nato club, then get ready to be treated like a Nato club members

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anything that gives the French massive butthurt is the right move. Even if that wasn't true, yes, it was the right move. Australia gets an entire military nuclear engineering academy out of it. France can't even compete with thyat.

    additionally, Australia will get submarines. Under the French agreement, France fricked off for a decade and a half, took billions, asked for more billions, and didn't have a workable, finalized plan to build even the first (diesel) sub in less than two more decades.

    tl;dr - Frick France. They should have delivered the first hull in about five years. Incompetent turds gonna grift.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Australia gets an entire military nuclear engineering academy out of it.
      No it doesn't.
      >France can't even compete with thyat.
      Naval Group is the largest company/conglomerate in the submarine business by a wide margin.
      >additionally, Australia will get submarines.
      Holy shit!
      >France fricked off for a decade and a half
      No they didn't.
      3 different governments asked for 3 different ways to approach this, from nuclear to diesel and then back to nuclear.
      This is literally only on the Aussie government.
      >asked for more billions
      No they didn't.
      >and didn't have a workable, finalized plan to build even the first (diesel) sub in less than two more decades
      They did.
      >Incompetent turds gonna grift.
      Even Brazil managed to aquire nuclear know-how via the French and everything went smoothly.
      So Australia is even more backwards than fricking Brazil.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Even Brazil managed to aquire nuclear know-how via the French and everything went smoothly.
        >So Australia is even more backwards than fricking Brazil.
        Everyone knows that only happened because france saw the US essentially greenlight the behaviour since they offered it to Australia, and also just as a stab at Australia for no going with france.

        Had the US not offered Australia nuclear subs I have no doubt france never would've put nuclear subs on the table for Brazil.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/fJT6Me2.png

          >Australia gets an entire military nuclear engineering academy out of it.
          No it doesn't.
          >France can't even compete with thyat.
          Naval Group is the largest company/conglomerate in the submarine business by a wide margin.
          >additionally, Australia will get submarines.
          Holy shit!
          >France fricked off for a decade and a half
          No they didn't.
          3 different governments asked for 3 different ways to approach this, from nuclear to diesel and then back to nuclear.
          This is literally only on the Aussie government.
          >asked for more billions
          No they didn't.
          >and didn't have a workable, finalized plan to build even the first (diesel) sub in less than two more decades
          They did.
          >Incompetent turds gonna grift.
          Even Brazil managed to aquire nuclear know-how via the French and everything went smoothly.
          So Australia is even more backwards than fricking Brazil.

          Categorizing it as help with nuclear subs is a bit much to be honest.

          France has committed to helping with the sub EXCEPT for the nuclear reactor segment, which is the portion brazil needs the most help with.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Mate, the Franco-Brazilian contract was signed in 2008.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >24 years to get their first nuclear sub, sure the other subs were a lot quicker but jesus

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Naval Group is the largest company/conglomerate in the submarine business by a wide margin.
        Naval Group is an arm of the French Government. You're comparing apples and oranges.

        Also, always remember this anon is an unironic extreme French nationalist and everything he says/lies about is biased that way. You will have no objectivity listening to this frog.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Naval Group is an arm of the French Government. You're comparing apples and oranges.
          This argument again.
          It functions like a conglomerate.
          >Also, always remember this anon is an unironic extreme French nationalist and everything he says/lies about is biased that way. You will have no objectivity listening to this frog.
          I'm not even Western nor do I live in France.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It functions like a conglomerate.
            >66% owned by the French Government
            I'm quite sure your career is not anywhere near the corporate world.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It's a corporation.

              >24 years to get their first nuclear sub, sure the other subs were a lot quicker but jesus

              10 years.
              Nooklear is handled by Brasil.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It's a corporation
                which is controlled by the French Government; it's de facto a component of the Government.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Funny you don't have a word for it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you don't have a word for it.
                As we've established, you're just ignorant.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprise

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It stopped being a true SOE half a century ago but whatever, even if it is a SOE, this won't make your c**ts naval industry inferior (unless you are American).

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It stopped being a true SOE half a century ago
                [citation needed]
                >but whatever, even if it is a SOE, this won't make your c**ts naval industry inferior (unless you are American).
                right
                do you notice the "US" in the back of AUKUS?
                we've now established that by buying AUKUS, the RAN has indeed opted for the superior naval industry
                here endeth the lesson

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                AUKUS are mainly Bri'ish subs ... and we all know how Bri'ish subs go these days ...
                >https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1128z1.html

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                it's a tossup which is the better SSN, Astute or Virginia, and we're not likely to find the answers to the question for fifty more years due to classification
                either way, AUKUS is a partnership with the two best nuclear submarine builders in the world

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it's a tossup which is the better SSN, Astute or Virginia
                Here, I'll end your imaginary debate.
                It is the Virginia class, since the Astute had to be bailed out by Americans and it uses foreign (french btw) sensors and electronics.
                >either way, AUKUS is a partnership with the two best nuclear submarine builders in the world
                That is certainly your opinion.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it's a tossup which is the better SSN, Astute or Virginia

                Virginia is more versatile. With much greater missile capability.

                Astute is a bit better jn the traditional hunter-killer role. Being quieter and with better sensors.

                Astute is better for Australia for a reason outside of this though - it has lower crew requirement. This is a major deal as a small nation, as it makes the operation cost significantly lower over the long run. Although the versatility of the Virginia would be nice in a cosy neutral world. The reality is that the Australia doesn't need the level of offensive capability Virginia provides, Astute is a massive upgrade in capability anyway and it's cheaper.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Virginia is more versatile. With much greater missile capability.
                Due to the VLS farm, yes
                >Astute is a bit better jn the traditional hunter-killer role. Being quieter and with better sensors
                I don't think we know enough about both subs to judge.
                Regardless, it's well known that the US and UK are top of the game as far as sub tech is concerned
                >Astute is better for Australia for a reason outside of this though - it has lower crew requirement. This is a major deal as a small nation, as it makes the operation cost significantly lower over the long run
                This is the clincher in my opinion.
                A British design, even if it's not Astute, would generally be more suitable than American for this reason.

                We also know that Astutes have better crew accommodations which also counts towards recruitment and retention. Cause frankly the US Navy treats their crews like shit in this regard.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Nooklear is handled by Brasil.
                Which is the entire point of working with france, if they aren't sharing nuclear then it isn't at all
                "nuclear know-how via the French" as claimed here

                https://i.imgur.com/fJT6Me2.png

                >Australia gets an entire military nuclear engineering academy out of it.
                No it doesn't.
                >France can't even compete with thyat.
                Naval Group is the largest company/conglomerate in the submarine business by a wide margin.
                >additionally, Australia will get submarines.
                Holy shit!
                >France fricked off for a decade and a half
                No they didn't.
                3 different governments asked for 3 different ways to approach this, from nuclear to diesel and then back to nuclear.
                This is literally only on the Aussie government.
                >asked for more billions
                No they didn't.
                >and didn't have a workable, finalized plan to build even the first (diesel) sub in less than two more decades
                They did.
                >Incompetent turds gonna grift.
                Even Brazil managed to aquire nuclear know-how via the French and everything went smoothly.
                So Australia is even more backwards than fricking Brazil.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Australia gets an entire military nuclear engineering academy out of it.
      They don't because their US sub use military-grade nuclear fuel the US won't tell them anything about.
      >France can't even compete with thyat
      France would have sold them sub using civilian-grade nuclear fuel if they asked and cheaply if they told France they were approached by US lobbyist.
      If Australia wanted to try themselves at nuclear anything, France was their best opportunity.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >France would have sold them sub using civilian-grade nuclear fuel
        >this is a good thing
        homosexual

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't matter what they do, China will conquer them either way.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The dumb fricks in government didn't learn anything from the Collins procurement shitshow, and at the time of the French sub fiasco we happened to have the dumber side of dumbfricks (Libs, who would sell their own grandma to the Chinese) in parliament. Those c**ts deserve to have their heads displayed on pikes out the front of parliament house.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, Diesel subs are 19th century technology and need to surface every few days to refuel.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Should have bought Swedish or something.
    What's the point of a nuclear submarine if you don't have nuclear missiles to arm them with? The entire point of having a nuclear sub is absurd range and stealth for unkillable deterrence. Diesel-electric is the better choice for any other purpose.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      australia is in the pacific ocean, which is very large

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Attack submarines don't need to stay concealed at all times like a nuclear submarine, since they don't have a nuclear strategic purpose. They can be refueled by surface ships in a hot conflict.
        Covert Shores reports a 10k nm range on the extended range Blekinge, which is available for export. Unless Australia is planning on mustering the balls to develop nuclear weapons anytime soon, nuclear is a fricking insane decision (costs over an order of magnitude more per-unit) for a glorified attack submarine.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Attack submarines don't need to stay concealed at all times like a nuclear submarine, since they don't have a nuclear strategic purpose
          yes, it's okay for them to expose themselves to enemy ASW

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          when you have to sail five thousand kilometers to get to your patrol area, endurance becomes a serious issue

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >10k nm range on the extended range Blekinge
          >spend one third of that getting to the South China Sea
          >another third coming back
          >minimum 2 week passage both ways, maybe less
          >typical SSK endurance is 7 weeks, of which about 3 weeks submerged
          >spend more than half your war patrol merely getting to the fricking target
          >also have to surface just before entering the SCS in order to fill up oxygen reserves just before commencing the useful part of the war patrol
          fricking idiot

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        also the indian ocean, quite large

        Should have bought Swedish or something.
        What's the point of a nuclear submarine if you don't have nuclear missiles to arm them with? The entire point of having a nuclear sub is absurd range and stealth for unkillable deterrence. Diesel-electric is the better choice for any other purpose.

        australias sub bases are all to the south of the country. getting from there to somewhere of strategic interest (near china) and back means the diesel electric options had a station time of something like 10-20 days max

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why can't they just build sub bases to the north with the third of a trillion dollars they'd spend on the sub?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the semi-indefinite mission time adds strategic value either way. it changes china's visibility from 'we're confident this sub will be headed home by x date' to 'we don't know, they'll surface sometime in the next 3 months'. diesel-electric subs in the north would have longer station time but don't offer that.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >just build sub bases to the north with the third of a trillion dollars they'd spend on the sub?
            it would solve a lot of problems if they could just expand Darwin by essentially paying people to live there

            but if you pay say 100,000 people to live there, going by the Australian federal budget per capita of about 27,000 AUD a year, the defence budget would have to fork out 2.7 billion AUD every year to maintain that, out of a defence budget of 55 billion AUD
            and that's a conservative estimate which assumes the Government merely gives perks and builds infrastructure to entice people to live there. if we use GDP per capita instead, ie straight up hiring people to live there, the estimate goes all the way up to 10 billion AUD.

            the real answer probably lies somewhere between these two figures, but regardless, that is a significant expenditure just to solve the problem of basing the Australian Armed Forces.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Because nobody fricking lives there.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/Zd5o31o.png

            >10k nm range on the extended range Blekinge
            >spend one third of that getting to the South China Sea
            >another third coming back
            >minimum 2 week passage both ways, maybe less
            >typical SSK endurance is 7 weeks, of which about 3 weeks submerged
            >spend more than half your war patrol merely getting to the fricking target
            >also have to surface just before entering the SCS in order to fill up oxygen reserves just before commencing the useful part of the war patrol
            fricking idiot

            The cheap option:
            A couple of Billion to carpet-bomb Jakarta into Indonesia being our next Colonial Territory and we can put a RAN Base on a tropical island "Bali Mk2" somewhere just below the Phillipines.
            Great for retention and free Treemonkey housemaids.
            Cut transit-time to missile-spam Beijing down to hours.
            >Simples.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >you need nuclear missiles to have absurd range and stealth
      look at this moron

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You’ve got that backwards my friend.
      If you can afford it, there isn’t a single reason to go for diesel over nuclear

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >If you can afford it, there isn’t a single reason to go for diesel over nuclear
        did someone tell this to the uk ?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ofc they did they have the best hunter sub in the world and the vangaurd is bretty good, if i couldnt choose the US subs the UKs would be a very close second.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Since when does UK have Seawolfs?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Seawolf
              >Older than astute
              >Older tech than astute
              >Worse torpedos than astute
              UK doesnt want the Seawolf lol

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the UKs would be a very close second.
            untill you needed to launch a trident

            Since when does UK have Seawolfs?

            >Since when does UK have Seawolfs?
            is that what they call the HSwMS Gotland in bonglandia?

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it would be funny if internal chink spies managed to cancel it and force australia to buy indian subs

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >REASON: NOT late delivery, but BACKDOORED ISRAELI SPYWARE in the electronics

    Seeing as Neo-Palestine has a 15% population of literally fake right of returner USSR Russians still jabbering in the mother tongue doing this sort of seditious shit, yeah, I'd say so.

    France bankrolled the P4 labs in China (and the one in Winnipeg with the spy Chinamen couple July 2019 up to no good as well). Turns out making friends with stolen valor Resistance Reds to maintain nominal independence with Indochina then Algeria lost without a no holds barred fight wasn't as preferable to the outright US transition administration as planned after all. Go watch the Sub Brief videos on it (and recall that FAT LEONARD was extradited from Venezuala despite the political alignment of the two countries' heads of states). It's not all pinko capitulation bad news.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Propaganda thread to save a bad idea.
    US is already late and they promised much less.

    If Aussie wanted nuclear now all they had to do is ask France, the submarine model wouldn't even change.
    Better, they could have used their own civilian nuclear fuel instead of becoming dependent on US military nuclear fuel.

    Australia is a pretty corrupt countries, just pay the right lobbyist and they'll do choice that go against their own interest.

    You know everything of it goes against global Australian interest because they did it in secret until it was too late.
    If it was in their interest, they would have told France they were in negotiation with the US and perfectly able to trigger the exit clause.

    The US don't even care to make good on their offer because they've already accomplished their real objective: Frick Aussies with a choice they'll have an hard time fixing, Frick China with more nuclear SUB in range, Frick France industries who are their biggest competitors.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they'll do choice that go against

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they promised much less
      wrong
      >If Aussie wanted nuclear now all they had to do is ask France
      who wouldn't give them nuclear tech, only sell them finished goods
      >they could have used their own civilian nuclear fuel
      Australia doesn't have nuclear fuel, frickwit
      >instead of becoming dependent on US military nuclear fuel
      and merely be dependent on French military nuclear fuel
      >Australia is a pretty corrupt
      projecting
      >countries, just pay the right lobbyist and they'll do choice that go
      ESL opinion ignored
      >it goes against global Australian interest because they did it in secret
      holy fricking turdie logic, Batman!!
      >and perfectly able to trigger the exit clause
      they already are able to trigger the exit clause
      >Frick China with more nuclear SUB in range
      based

      frick you winnie xi the pooh

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Australia doesn't have nuclear fuel
        Australia have big mines of uranium moron.
        Given that Russia is out of the game they could make a fortune investing into that, would probably anger the oil lobbies.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Australia have big mines of uranium moron.
          So does Kazakhstan.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            australia is a big uranium ore miner, the issue is the lack of onshore processing and refining. it can be done but it'd be decades of construction, supply chain, and training and education before we were able to produce what's required.

            Now would be the best time for Australia to go full nuclear, with Russia out of the game there's not a lot of countries who can process and refine it.
            A guaranteed market they could even use internally.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Australia and australian governments have been running on heavy anti-nuclear postures for several decades now, there is no appetite for it in the population. Even if we did it in a wasteland in the NT/northern WA near the mines where nobody lives. Attitudes are slowly changing but even saying 'we'll have nuclear subs but we will not do anything nuclear with them on australian soil' was huge by our standards.

              Could they import CANDU reactors, which use natural uranium as their source of power?
              The expertise problem would still exist, but at least enrichment facilities wouldn’t need to be prioritized, and you can just use a design already exported to other countries.
              If China, Pakistan, India, Argentina, Romania, and South Korea can run a CANDU reactor, I don’t see how Aussies couldn’t.

              I'm not sure, but what does that have to do with submarines?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm not sure, but what does that have to do with submarines?
                No clue either, but you can make enriched plutonium from the spent fuel. Best for Aussies to have that capability too.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          australia is a big uranium ore miner, the issue is the lack of onshore processing and refining. it can be done but it'd be decades of construction, supply chain, and training and education before we were able to produce what's required.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Could they import CANDU reactors, which use natural uranium as their source of power?
            The expertise problem would still exist, but at least enrichment facilities wouldn’t need to be prioritized, and you can just use a design already exported to other countries.
            If China, Pakistan, India, Argentina, Romania, and South Korea can run a CANDU reactor, I don’t see how Aussies couldn’t.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >having mines = having nuclear fuel
          not true, in the same way that just because your secret crush has a pussy, it doesn't mean you're getting laid

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anything that pisses off the fr*nch is always morally correct. They are the biggest c**ts on the planet.
    Imagine an entire nation of millions still seething so much 80 years later about getting their asses beat by nazis and half their women getting knocked up with german babies (willingly) that they purposely torpedo any efforts of their so called allies out of pure contrarianism to compensate for their bruised egos.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You are mentally ill.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        t. seething frog

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          t. mentally ill

          [...]
          reminder that the only reason fr*nce got on the UN national security council was because Stalin agreed to it after correctly predicting that the fr*nch would be a contrarian thorn in the side of the western allies for decades due to their crippling inferiority complex from being rolled by hitler.

          Still the same as it ever was today, frog Black folk desperately trying to claw their way towards any scrap of international prestige they can solely for their own vanity, regardless of the consequences for anyone else. You know they're fricked in the head when their president is married to the teacher that molested him in grade school.

          you too

          This is a weapons board, France has the second largest MIC on the planet, you are just seething and coping at/with this fact.
          Pathetic, really.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        t. seething frog

        reminder that the only reason fr*nce got on the UN national security council was because Stalin agreed to it after correctly predicting that the fr*nch would be a contrarian thorn in the side of the western allies for decades due to their crippling inferiority complex from being rolled by hitler.

        Still the same as it ever was today, frog Black folk desperately trying to claw their way towards any scrap of international prestige they can solely for their own vanity, regardless of the consequences for anyone else. You know they're fricked in the head when their president is married to the teacher that molested him in grade school.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          French are based, frick off

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            still upset about the fact that most of your cousins have german blood?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Less worse than being a soviet rapebaby, actually

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            t. mentally ill
            [...]
            you too

            This is a weapons board, France has the second largest MIC on the planet, you are just seething and coping at/with this fact.
            Pathetic, really.

            mad about finally getting a taste of your own medicine? sucks when someone who is supposed to be your ally cuts deals to frick you over behind your back doesn't it?
            Then remember that this particular deal is simply to provide subs to another strong western ally, Australia. Very much unlike the colossally fricked up shit france has gotten up to in the past like selling nuclear reactors to fricking saddam hussein. You gays are crying your eyes out over losing out on a few bucks but didn't bat an eye when doing shit that massively destabilized an entire region of the fricking planet. Don't even get me started on the suez crisis.

            It's a good thing you got knocked down a peg by aukus, no one needed it more than you did.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >nuclear reactors to fricking saddam hussein
              Disingenuous traitor spotted.
              A civilian nuclear reactor is far, far away from military use.
              You are the ones throwing dictatorships into the arms of Russia&China instead of getting some control over what they do.
              The US are among the countries who try to destabilize others the most.
              Go ahead and find excuse for Drump stabbing Iran and ensuring they sided with Russia as a revenge.
              All orange man wanted was a distraction from his own frick up.

              An US company is the reason the Brexit passed with just a few voice and made UK economically weaker and desperate for AUKUS.
              The US bribed some Australian politician in order to keep control of their naval industries.
              Can't have Australia break free of US domination by buying from a country who were treating them better than the US do now.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >sperging
                >brexit
                >bribes
                Are you French

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >deflecting

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >frog sperging about USA Australia and fricking Brexit
                Hey uh news flash champ, the UK left the EU and still has a better Economy than France...higher per capita too kek

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                French are richer than the British.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ofc they are, thats why they are crying about the British buying up all the houses in the countryside and lobbying the EU to let the British stay in France for longer than 90 days. Stay mad number 3.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                French are richer than the British and they pay less for same things.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >posts reddit tier image from 2017
                Lets get the facts right frogger

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >real-estate
                Yeah, I'm sure paying 2 million for 30m squared in North London is what I would call "rich".

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >But whatabout xyz
                >gets obliterated with every post
                Youve tried to shift the posts multiple times now frog, posting gaurdian articles and reddit images doesnt stop the cold hard truth.
                Also, your submarines are shit.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >conflating two different posters
                newbie.
                Black person, you mentioned the economy first.
                have a nice day, you deranged animal.
                You are the most pathetic generation in your country's history.

                Tell me you don't know what median means without telling me.

                tard

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >crying frenchman
                Its ok mate, we also work less hours than you...for more money.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                jfc just end yourself
                weapons board, france has more than twice the size of your MIC, kys, frick off, in this order

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >bruh look at my mic bribing all the turdies woooo
                >economy still worse than UKs
                Hey, whats the French defence budget? Its smaller than Germanys lmao

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                France doesnt even meet NATOs 2%. Kind of a joke really.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yeah and after they got browbeaten into supposedly committing to increasing their spending to meet 2% when trump put europe on blast, they later admitted they were gonna put it all into nukes and fricking "cyberdefense", aka some domestic tech subsidies they can disguise as being defense related lmao.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Hey, whats the French defence budget? Its smaller than Germanys lmao
                French MIC is larger than the British and German MICs combined, keep seething, I'm sure your dilipated shithole will get better if you call a non-Westerner "frog" few more times.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Brags about MIC
                >still doesng bring economy above the UKs
                >Brags about MIC
                >has a pathetic defence budget of €47.2 billion to the UKs €70
                >Brags about MIC
                >has 0 strat lift and operates legacy jets
                Lol
                Lmao

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Seething.
                Absolutely seething.
                Ring me up when you successfully test "your" ICBMs, till then, I'm out.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ill accept your concession pierre try comparing to Poland or something next time...maybe Belgium

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Ring me up when you successfully test "your" ICBMs, till then, I'm out
                no refunds!
                shoulda got the extended warranty!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Paris: A French ballistic missile test has ended in failure after the missile destroyed itself just minutes after its launch from a nuclear submarine off the coast of Brittany.
                https://basicint.org/blogs/2013/06/m51-missile-failure-where-does-leave-french-nuclear-modernization

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/11/france-successfully-test-fires-new-m51-3-slbm/
                Subhuman.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >UK test fire fails :O
                >French test fire fails 😐
                Lel

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm a tard because you didn't realise people at one end of a series of numbers don't impact the median?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Tell me you don't know what median means without telling me.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                supply and demand, homosexual
                more people want to live in London, simple as

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >2 million for 30m squared in North London
                https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/146144729#/
                It just gets worse and worse for this seething frog

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >8k for 1sqm for the cheapest he could find
                >he thinks this a good price

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                what happened to your
                >2 million for 30m squared in North London
                ?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >bout 50% more expensive than Paris on average
                I wasn't far off tho

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >wasn't far off
                8,333 is very far from 66,666, homosexual
                and it's fricking NOTTING HILL, just outside Zone 1
                if you want "cheap", that would be places like Bromley which is about half that price (~4k per sqm)
                >bout 50% more expensive than Paris
                probably because you're comparing the very desirable, very high value properties in central London vs the more standard suburbs like aforesaid Bromley

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >People pay more to live in London than Paris
                Proof is in the pudding Piere, Paris is less desireable than London kek

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >still
                >it's okay guys we didn't hit rock bottom after accepting trade deal we no longer have the upper hands on.
                You have to applaud the UK giving up what was a tailor-made position for fiscal optimization into the biggest market of Europe.
                They didn't wanted to be an equal partner in Europe?
                Now they are a satellite state of the US and looked down by every of their previous commercial partners.
                https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/07/brexit-has-made-the-uk-a-lower-status-nation-says-david-miliband

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Now they are a satellite state of the US and looked down by every of their previous commercial partners.
                this could literally be any nation in europe, picked at random out of a hat

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Top 3 gdp in Europe
                >1.Ger
                >2.UK
                >3.France
                Astonishing, the UK managed to leave the EU with literally no effect whatsoever!
                >Noooooooo read my article from the gaurdian
                >Opinion piece by DAVID FRICKING MILIBAND
                Looooooool
                Staymad frog enjoy being number 3 at everything in Europe.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are deranged.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                what heavy industry does the uk have?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Token steel production and a few small heavy machinery producers

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Brexit didn't do shit, for better or worse.

                >shifting the goalposts

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Token steel production and a few small heavy machinery producers

                >but whatabout MANUFACTURING!
                Ohnononono, stop hurting yourself France. Dont make us start with the WW2 jokes...

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Bro I'm American. Britain does have token steel and heavy machinery production. They outsourced much of it well before you were born, but have kept a few alive. Britain's issues are matter of scale. Thats why they integrate with the USN so heavily

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Dont make us start with the WW2 jokes...
                As if you have anything else but stale jokes and lying.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >tried to flex on UK manufacturing
                >gets blown out of the water
                >desperately searches the internet for a different source
                >comes up with almost identical manufacturing value
                Lol
                Lmao
                Nice self own

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >says the guy who posted an ancient statistic to make his dilipated shithole look better
                Also, you are still conflating multiple posters lmfao, newbie.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >quoting The Guardian
                homosexual alert

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Australia deserves to be a nuclear power and to dominate the South Pacific.

    Inshallah it will be done

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nipped in the bud, Silex is US intellectual property now

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >intellectual property
        I pirate games. I will pirate nukes.

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Ask specific questions
    >Doesn't answer them due to NDA
    >THIS MEANS WE WONT CONTROL OUR OWN SUBS REEEE
    I hate you OP, I hate news articles like this, and I HATE Black folk who cut off the source.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Australia was all set to start with French Subs.
    But part of the 'local jobs' political deal was they had to use Australian steel.
    Naval Group went 'non' and insisted it had to be superior French steel.
    Canberra insisted on a comparison test to prove that the local Collins sub steel was equal to the Frog stuff.
    The french bought their samples out to be bend and crack tested against 'merde' Australian steel.
    >tfw the first frog steel plate split in half during the preparatory test, not even the full test.
    The Frogs shut down the tests and ran home.
    Canberra suddenly had to find a new sub plan.
    AUKUS subs will take too long and cost too much, but I'd rather wait than be a Frog in a current Frog navy submarine made of frog steel.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Source required

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >US/UK submarines best in the world
    Check
    >Trains with Royal Navy on a regular basis
    Check
    >Anglo
    Check
    >Upset the French
    Double Check
    Ofc they made the correct decision.

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We never should have worked with the French in the first place. They're probably the worst joint partners in the first world, it was inevitable.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      kys holy frick

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        T. stinky Frenchman

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You frog fricks have fricked up every project you've been in.
        >Concorde program was plagued with French bullshit and they had to be contractually locked into finishing it
        >Fricked over NATO because they can't put aside their independence for five minutes to hash out allied command protocols
        >Ditched the Eurofighter program because the other countries wouldn't redesign the whole thing just to work with the one (1) carrier that France has
        Every single fricking time you c**ts get into something, you try to make it all about you, and then get mad when nobody wants to shift the entire program to give you all the funding and none of the responsibility.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Fricked over NATO because they can't put aside their independence for five minutes to hash out allied command protocols
          lol, eu-thirdies are never getting their filthy hoofs on the frog-nukes
          if they want "le bomb" they can go make their own!

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's it lmfao?! That's all you got?
          1 example of France leaving a project just to build a superior product themselves, 1 bong head cannon wet dream and 1 unrelated thing?
          AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
          >none of the responsibility
          Shows how much you know.
          Won't even spell it out for you.

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are the reactors boxes designed to explode if someone takes a look into them?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Is if there is a person that can comprehend what is happening inside of it in that open air mine of a state.

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >You are now aware that French submarines, recently called shitty by some countries (which shall remain nameless), are equipped with an improved version of the Exocet missile, which can be fired from underwater.

    >You are now aware that this has been sold to several countries including Indonesia and Pakistan (allied with China).

    So we may see more of this Anglo punishment with French weapons in the future.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the delay of the Virginia class exposes the strains of the AUKUS defense pact as well. Together with the U.K., the arrangement seeks to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines. The U.S. has promised to sell Australia three Virginia-class submarines, in 2032, 2035 and 2038, with the option of providing two more. The idea is to strengthen deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region with key allies, but Navy officials have raised concerns about the impact AUKUS will have on shipyards.

      The two-boats-per-year pace only addressed U.S. demand. To cater to AUKUS, the U.S. needs to construct 2.33 submarines per year, according to the Congressional Research Service. The actual delivery rate has averaged 1.2 boats per year for the past five years.

      https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Defense/U.S.-cuts-key-submarine-order-for-2025-amid-shipbuilding-jam

      who knew backstabbing france to get promises from usa would backfire so hilariously

      the indons will get their scorpene faster than australia will get theirs let that sink in

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the indons will get their scorpene faster than australia will get theirs let that sink in

        no refunds!

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        When Australia gets her last Virginia, it will be a half a century old design.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >When Australia gets her last Virginia, it will be a half a century old design.
          thats like brand new by nato standards

          last abrams hull was produced in 1996

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Who are you lying to?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        As far as the US is concerned they've already accomplished what they wanted and the Aussies are now backed to a wall.
        They kneecapped their main competitors out of a deal and Australia cannot turn back without looking politically even weaker than they were before.
        Go ahead and try to buy Japanese submarine now! They sure won't add a surtax and special clauses for untrustworthy client who don't know what they want.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I'm sure that means something to those who use substandard (get it?) Boats. But US subs are the best in the world. There is no competition, not in endurance, not in capabilities and certainly not in design. They run better, longer, go farther and can kill more. Frog subs are at best 3rd or 4th class citizens and their choice of buyers shows that. The Aussies wanted a real design with nuke knowledge transfer and ability to spin up a first class training program. France can offer none of that and at beat can offer the Aussies about a 1/3 of what the US can in submariners with experience to train. Stop being tied up in a false belief and accept that the world's largest nuke Navy and solely nuke sub force knows more about the subject.
        >t worked on IMATX

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >with nuke knowledge transfer and ability to spin up a first class training program

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Damn so the USN has no ability to train sub crews? Let me go tell all the Blue/Gold teams that. Let me guess, you are an expert on subs but don't know about Blue or Gold teams?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Damn so the USN has no ability to train sub crews?
              does australia have sub crews to train?

              https://i.imgur.com/bAVMsEg.png

              Brexit didn't do shit, for better or worse.

              >shifting the goalposts

              >Brexit didn't do shit, for better or worse.
              it unlashed it from ursulas corpo-hell simulator at least

              I love Bri'ish, it is the most pristine display of degeneration that led to their Empire fall. Every successive generation is the most pathetic one in more than a millenia.

              >I love Bri'ish, it is the most pristine display of degeneration that led to their Empire fall. Every successive generation is the most pathetic one in more than a millenia.
              we toadaso back in 1776

              https://i.imgur.com/VGXcBLE.jpeg

              [...]
              >but whatabout MANUFACTURING!
              Ohnononono, stop hurting yourself France. Dont make us start with the WW2 jokes...

              Friendly reminder that the UK is now the 4th largest exporter of goods and services in the world, ahead of Japan and France.

              >Friendly reminder that the UK is now the 4th largest exporter of goods and ~~*services*~~ in the world
              may we see the goods?

              >tried to flex on UK manufacturing
              >gets blown out of the water
              >desperately searches the internet for a different source
              >comes up with almost identical manufacturing value
              Lol
              Lmao
              Nice self own

              can you show us what industrial products britain produced?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it unlashed it from ursulas corpo-hell simulator at least
                that's definitely a big plus

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >does australia have sub crews to train?
                Some, but not enough, nor any experienced with the sub they are buying. Good thing the USN has literally dozens of active crews, training Sims, exercises, manuals and existing support teams.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Good thing the USN has literally dozens of active crews
                ha yah, i bet the USN has tons of sub crews to spare these days

                yeah and after they got browbeaten into supposedly committing to increasing their spending to meet 2% when trump put europe on blast, they later admitted they were gonna put it all into nukes and fricking "cyberdefense", aka some domestic tech subsidies they can disguise as being defense related lmao.

                >aka some domestic tech subsidies they can disguise as being defense related lmao.
                sounds like france has a functioning brain,
                meanwhile im sure (insert eu-nation) will totally get their f35 order this year! promis!

                >Brags about MIC
                >still doesng bring economy above the UKs
                >Brags about MIC
                >has a pathetic defence budget of €47.2 billion to the UKs €70
                >Brags about MIC
                >has 0 strat lift and operates legacy jets
                Lol
                Lmao

                haha the uk economy identifies as the 2nd biggest gdp, and thats all that matters!
                >what do they produce??
                1's and 0's on computer screens in banks and ~~*finanical centers*~~
                thats it

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >muh sub crews
                >muh f35
                >muh uk
                Obsessed turdie detected

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >/k/oping firstie detected
                fully staffed military, when?

                >Paris: A French ballistic missile test has ended in failure after the missile destroyed itself just minutes after its launch from a nuclear submarine off the coast of Brittany.
                https://basicint.org/blogs/2013/06/m51-missile-failure-where-does-leave-french-nuclear-modernization

                >11 years ago, france could do what the uk does today!
                firsties lead the way!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Did you know that every US sub has two full time crews that each do six month uninterrupted deployments every year and have done so since we have had nuke subs? Did you know that USN sailors would give a kidney for an all expense paid trip to go teach c**ts how to use toys? I guess not since you seem blown away by a nation's ability to make basic man power reqs. BTW those are the Gold and Blue teams referenced earlier. Other fun facta for you the USN is actively already training the Aussies to use growlers. The Aussies are the only other nation on the planet with growlers and its a highly desirable post. I guess you must since you know so much about the USN? Did you ever figure out what IMATX is?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I guess not since you seem blown away by a nation's ability to make basic man power reqs
                >I guess you must since you know so much about the USN?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No argument

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the bot cant read the image
                good luck with those "man power req's"

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Stop being tied up in a false belief
    the fricking irony lmfao

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Little froggies getting heated when confronted with reality kek.
    Don't worry froggy, you can still dominate the stinky disgusting cheese and wine markets.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You are moron that doesn't know anything past your nationalism.
      Also, I ain't French.

  38. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I love Bri'ish, it is the most pristine display of degeneration that led to their Empire fall. Every successive generation is the most pathetic one in more than a millenia.

  39. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Friendly reminder that the UK is now the 4th largest exporter of goods and services in the world, ahead of Japan and France.

  40. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Did Australia make the right move in cancelling French submarines?
    Yes.

  41. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  42. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The amount of seething anything related to france triggers on PrepHole always blow my mind.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's because of the 1 or 2 French autists on the board
      there are others who are actually pretty cool

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >people don't like arrogant miserable c**ts who would frick over their own mother for one more minute of copium telling them they are still a world class empire.
      What a shock!
      The only people more mindbroken by WW2 than the french are the russians, and that's truly terrifying. Literally everything the french nation does is in service of escaping their humiliation in the war.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Be French
        >Make wild claims
        >Get btfod repeatedly

        fpbp, the french are duplicitous and have dragged half the world into wars constantly while honking about their greatness. As bad as germans.
        Also US subs are better and Aussies have way more in common with burgers than the french.

        Alright, that's funny as hell anyway

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Be French
      >Make wild claims
      >Get btfod repeatedly

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >be bong
        >tell wild lies
        >get btfo'd repeatedly
        like 2 peas in a pod

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >UK has bigger economy than France
          >UK citizens are better off than French
          >London is more expensive to buy than Paris
          >UK defence budget is bigger than Frances
          All points were addressed, fact checked and proven. Cry about it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            may we see the indigenous uk nukes?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >shift goalposts yet again

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                lmfao, Pakistan has nukes
                FRICKING PAKISTAN

                the absolute fricking state of bongs

                may we see the second French carrier?

                May we see the Independent French airlift to Mali?

                not a frog, literally not my problem
                however i will continue to laugh at bongs expense.

                least france controls its own destiny (has indigenous nukes)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >t.Indian

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >lmfao, Pakistan has nukes
                and india has rafales. the fact that pakistan's nukes could theoretically be launched from indian planes tells you all you need to know about france's MIC.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >tells you all you need to know about france's MIC.
                its the first choice of 2ndies to deliver their nukes?

                weird flex, but ok

                >t.Indian

                already told you im not a bong

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                t.ex colonial indian now independent indian

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >least france controls its own destiny (has indigenous nukes)
                Nta but do you have any idea how moronic french rules are on launching a nuclear strike?
                >Inb4 but they can do warning nook!
                No, no they dont

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                and? the fact is the french have their own bomb the brits dont (and never will)
                simple as

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it came to me in a dream

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >UK doesn't control their nukes
                you're a moron

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                UK got its territory seceded by the Americans, so no, no the do not.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ha, yah, they just have to ask US's permission first!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >they just have to ask US's permission
                you're a moron

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              may we see the second French carrier?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              May we see the Independent French airlift to Mali?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              may I have another, sir?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >may I have another, sir?
                no, its my game and theres only 1 disk to go around

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              May we see the non French surrender of ww2?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              may we see successful french ex colonies?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >may we see successful french ex colonies?
                no BBC-POCCNR owns those now,
                uno-reverse card got played

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Anon you forgot
            >UK/UK sub tech is better than Frog tech

  43. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    snowmonkeys are mentally ill

  44. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I dunno, but it was pretty funny.

    • 2 weeks ago
      CIA

      Op is running Canadian ip and on a terrorist watch list now.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *