I can see advantages and disadvantages to AUKUS, even advantages and disadvantages to a hypothetical Collins class redesign that Keating said. Advantages to AUKUS are that it's nuclear powered and it will be fitted with the latest technology in the 2040s. Disadvantages are that it will take so long to develop and it's expensive. Advantage to a redesigned Collins class is that it would be cheaper and could be made in larger numbers (to some degree of what Keating said). Disadvantage is that we don't have the numbers in personnel in Australia to man a large number of them.
About time we had some common sense. Australia should be moving to improving relations with China, not jumping into bed with the military focussed USA.
Keating has turned into his hero Jack Lang. No one remembers Lang's achievements, just the decades of bitterness that followed the end of his political career. 27 years out of parliament, Keating has become as a Statler and Waldorf character hurling abuse from the sidelines. No one gives a toss what he thinks except a few aging leftie journos who hope he will say something quotable about the Coalition. Keating is last month's man, the Lib who ended his rule now held in higher regard by many in Labor for his quiet dignity after politics.
It’s interesting how their all for blowing astronomical amounts of money on these things yet refuse POINT BLANK to endeavour in nuclear energy in general
If you look at the deal Australia had with the French, 1 Submarine was going to cost Australia 80 billion & it kept climbing in price too, so it might've gone over $100 billion. How is 8 high tech Submarines & a couple of 2nd hand ones for $368 billion a bad deal in comparison? The only thing bad about it is the waiting period. The French were going to deliver 1 by 2028, but Australia have to wait 20 years for these American Subs. Plus this was Morrisons deal, not Albo's. Just depends on how much better the American Subs are in comparison to the French ones. I just think that Australia should be prioritizing something that they can use now too.
That guy is full of it. Australia is 30 years behind in military and it needs to have the capability. Coming from an international perspective must admit this idea of Australia( is far away it will never happen to us or it will never reach us) they've used up all the excuses they are getting them now because the threat is alot larger then people realise. China has over a billion people and Australia's whole country has 25m with natural resources. Let that sink in
Stop fear-mongering. Billions of people in China, right? Who’s going to maintain their trade-dependent economy? As soon as the West stops buying all their products from China, how will the hundreds of millions of Chinese workers not starve?
I think AUKUS is good. It has some drawbacks such as the fact that it will take decades to develop, but a nuclear-powered submarine will be good for picking off convoys far from home. I did think we could've gone for alternatives to AUKUS such as the Japanese Taigei class or the already developing American Columbia class. In fact, the Columbia would've been less expensive than AUKUS since we could've procured it right off the bat. What I think Australia could've also done was procured more Hobart Class destroyers or reinstated the Anzac class line with a redesign in lieu of a second Canberra class LHD. The US redesigned the Nimitz class with a couple of the last ones, so we could've done so with the Anzac class, I reckon. Anyway, just my thoughts.
@@planetmikusha5898 It's not a strawman argument, its spot on. It's actually you point that is highly flawed. Did you learn nothing during covid taking medical advice from only 'experts' in the field.
Keating is out of touch with the 21st century, nuclear submarines are the only military assets that can't be taken out in a first strike, unlike Australia's Air Force, Army, and Naval surface vessels.
Excellent answer by Paul Keating. The whole interview (can be found on TH-cam) is worth watching. Many excellent points raised by Keating that should be debated. Australian taxpayers, who are the one paying for this, is being treated like 'mushrooms'. After 'covid' surely no one should have any confidence in the competence or integrity of 'government'.
Keating one of the most incompetent PMs in Australian history. Has no understanding of the current threat by the Chineses in terms of Pacific stablity.. the guy is out of his depth... a dinasaur
As a American firearm(s) owner,all I have to say is from the old saying:..."it's better to have a gun and not need it,than to need a gun and not have it".
Do you know the amount of manpower and oil it would take to conquer Australia? To run the logistics from the northern hemisphere and fight a war in the Southern Hemisphere? it’s never going to happen in a million years. We do not need these submarines. We are far more likely to endure damage through bushfires and flooding.
Nuclear subs don't rely on refueling stations to keep them running. There isn't a refueling station on every corner like gas stations. They make much less noise than conventional subs, easier to evade pursuit.
@@iamasmurf1122 what a joke. Diesel engines are NOT quiet. Nuclear fusion does NOT produce noise, only hot water. Diesels need constant refueling. Nuclear requires refueling about every 20 years.
I'm not an expert on any of this, this short clip seems right as far as defense of Australia goes, if however Australia needs access to global markets then they will need something more than a costal defense. This at a time when the U.S. is pulling back; everyone has grown up in the post war age of American world defense and those days are behind us, plus you can't just build nuclear subs/ships/powerplants when you decide to, it takes decades in come cases.
Blah blah blah, non proliferation only applies to nuclear weapons, not nuclear power. And in addition, the same NPT treaty says states with nuclear weapons agree to share nuclear power to those who would like it. You can argue over whether it should be in an attack sub. Ain't much difference on the business end of a diesel or nuclear sub though.
IMO, Australia needs an Australia First mentality which includes nuclear subs and a second amendment. China and Keating says 'no' which tells you all you need to know.
Australia needs the capability they are over 30 years behind. To be honest it's just scary that China is so close to Australia and Australia has a lot of natural resources and the country is hardly armed. Honestly surprised china hasn't tried to invade physically. Ohh wait they have through foreign investment and taking over ports, properties and infrastructure. Wake up Australia and act now
I think yes Australia needs to bolster its military in general. I say this as an Australian citizen. We don't need a massive military since we don't have the numbers in staff. But we could be stronger since we intercede in the South Pacific for countries like (especially) New Zealand, Malaysia, Fiji and New Guinea. This is just my opinion, but if I was in charge, I would've reopened the Anzac class frigate line and redesigned them just as the US redesigned the Nimitz class aircraft carriers with the USS Ronald Regan and the USS George HW Bush which were redesigned from scratch upon construction. Anyway, possibly also more F-35s would be another option since Australia had more Mirage fighter planes in the Cold War than F-35s we have today. Also more drones. But of course, personnel numbers and budgeting are key here. Australia needs to have a larger military for the sake of not just ourselves, but also New Zealand and the other countries. We're already building an arms race with the F-35s and now AUKUS. May as well continue bolstering the size of the military. Doesn't have to be too aggressive but Australia is a large island. Heck, we could've triggered an arms race with buying the F-111 bomber decades ago but we didn't.
I can see advantages and disadvantages to AUKUS, even advantages and disadvantages to a hypothetical Collins class redesign that Keating said. Advantages to AUKUS are that it's nuclear powered and it will be fitted with the latest technology in the 2040s. Disadvantages are that it will take so long to develop and it's expensive. Advantage to a redesigned Collins class is that it would be cheaper and could be made in larger numbers (to some degree of what Keating said). Disadvantage is that we don't have the numbers in personnel in Australia to man a large number of them.
About time we had some common sense. Australia should be moving to improving relations with China, not jumping into bed with the military focussed USA.
Keating has turned into his hero Jack Lang. No one remembers Lang's achievements, just the decades of bitterness that followed the end of his political career. 27 years out of parliament, Keating has become as a Statler and Waldorf character hurling abuse from the sidelines. No one gives a toss what he thinks except a few aging leftie journos who hope he will say something quotable about the Coalition. Keating is last month's man, the Lib who ended his rule now held in higher regard by many in Labor for his quiet dignity after politics.
It’s interesting how their all for blowing astronomical amounts of money on these things yet refuse POINT BLANK to endeavour in nuclear energy in general
Cause it’s powering 3 submarines not a continent
“Buggered by the Chinese “ Keating just admitted His close personal and financial relations with China
💩🤡
😂😂😂
What "close personal and financial relations with China"? Put up or shut up.
If you look at the deal Australia had with the French, 1 Submarine was going to cost Australia 80 billion & it kept climbing in price too, so it might've gone over $100 billion.
How is 8 high tech Submarines & a couple of 2nd hand ones for $368 billion a bad deal in comparison?
The only thing bad about it is the waiting period.
The French were going to deliver 1 by 2028, but Australia have to wait 20 years for these American Subs.
Plus this was Morrisons deal, not Albo's.
Just depends on how much better the American Subs are in comparison to the French ones.
I just think that Australia should be prioritizing something that they can use now too.
Exactly! ‘enough said!
That guy is full of it. Australia is 30 years behind in military and it needs to have the capability. Coming from an international perspective must admit this idea of Australia( is far away it will never happen to us or it will never reach us) they've used up all the excuses they are getting them now because the threat is alot larger then people realise. China has over a billion people and Australia's whole country has 25m with natural resources. Let that sink in
Stop fear-mongering. Billions of people in China, right? Who’s going to maintain their trade-dependent economy? As soon as the West stops buying all their products from China, how will the hundreds of millions of Chinese workers not starve?
I think AUKUS is good. It has some drawbacks such as the fact that it will take decades to develop, but a nuclear-powered submarine will be good for picking off convoys far from home. I did think we could've gone for alternatives to AUKUS such as the Japanese Taigei class or the already developing American Columbia class.
In fact, the Columbia would've been less expensive than AUKUS since we could've procured it right off the bat. What I think Australia could've also done was procured more Hobart Class destroyers or reinstated the Anzac class line with a redesign in lieu of a second Canberra class LHD.
The US redesigned the Nimitz class with a couple of the last ones, so we could've done so with the Anzac class, I reckon. Anyway, just my thoughts.
Paul Keating is so out of touch its not even funny anymore
did you just cut the "coz I have brain" part? I think that's the most valuable part of the interview
Paul Keating is one of the best comedians Australia has produced.
best prime minister in last 30 years
We couldn’t staff 45 Collins class submarines anyway.
Yes, Australia should take military advice from a career politician who never saw the inside of a military enlistment office!
so your point is to go to war? bizarre take
@@santouchesantouche2873 Nice strawman argument!
@@planetmikusha5898 It's not a strawman argument, its spot on. It's actually you point that is highly flawed. Did you learn nothing during covid taking medical advice from only 'experts' in the field.
@@johnwoodrow8769 It is a strawman as I never voiced support for going to war.
Keating is out of touch with the 21st century, nuclear submarines are the only military assets that can't be taken out in a first strike, unlike Australia's Air Force, Army, and Naval surface vessels.
People on here saying Keating is the voice of reason, more like the voice of Treason.
Excellent answer by Paul Keating.
The whole interview (can be found on TH-cam) is worth watching. Many excellent points raised by Keating that should be debated. Australian taxpayers, who are the one paying for this, is being treated like 'mushrooms'.
After 'covid' surely no one should have any confidence in the competence or integrity of 'government'.
Keating one of the most incompetent PMs in Australian history. Has no understanding of the current threat by the Chineses in terms of Pacific stablity.. the guy is out of his depth... a dinasaur
As a American firearm(s) owner,all I have to say is from the old saying:..."it's better to have a gun and not need it,than to need a gun and not have it".
dont you guys have another saying? "what better to use a guy for than a mass shooting at a school..."
What about having the right gun? Is a shotgun good for dear hunting? Is an assault rifle good for duck hunting? THAT is what this debate is about.
@@johnwoodrow8769 the Virginia class submarine would actually be like carrying both....and a 50 bmg for good measure.
@@santouchesantouche2873 I never did a mass shooting....too late to gun grab now,it would make no sense the way everything is going.
Do you know the amount of manpower and oil it would take to conquer Australia? To run the logistics from the northern hemisphere and fight a war in the Southern Hemisphere? it’s never going to happen in a million years. We do not need these submarines. We are far more likely to endure damage through bushfires and flooding.
Welcome to the war machine
Nuclear subs don't rely on refueling stations to keep them running. There isn't a refueling station on every corner like gas stations. They make much less noise than conventional subs, easier to evade pursuit.
And what? to protect us against jihadist whales?
That’s not true nuclear subs are still noisy , diesel electric are actually very quiet
@@iamasmurf1122 what a joke. Diesel engines are NOT quiet. Nuclear fusion does NOT produce noise, only hot water. Diesels need constant refueling. Nuclear requires refueling about every 20 years.
we dont have a nuclear capability because America wont let us
I'm not an expert on any of this, this short clip seems right as far as defense of Australia goes, if however Australia needs access to global markets then they will need something more than a costal defense. This at a time when the U.S. is pulling back; everyone has grown up in the post war age of American world defense and those days are behind us, plus you can't just build nuclear subs/ships/powerplants when you decide to, it takes decades in come cases.
We do what America wants us to do to help America to defend the world, nothing new.
wakey wakey. It's the 21st century, there are other options than fossil-fueled submarines now
Blah blah blah, non proliferation only applies to nuclear weapons, not nuclear power.
And in addition, the same NPT treaty says states with nuclear weapons agree to share nuclear power to those who would like it.
You can argue over whether it should be in an attack sub.
Ain't much difference on the business end of a diesel or nuclear sub though.
hey keating are you back to design our next depression. we all thought you happily retired on one of your piggery
Rainbow Submarines
TALKING UTTER BOLLOX KEATING
What do you need them you already 20 years behind you've been kicking the can down the road forever.
They don't need them.... Until they do....
Terrorist fish?
Pinko ! Keating.
He does not understand the weaponry of modern age
Poor old man,give him.an ice cream and get him into an old people home
Maybe we can turn those subs into b&b
IMO, Australia needs an Australia First mentality which includes nuclear subs and a second amendment. China and Keating says 'no' which tells you all you need to know.
Australia needs the capability they are over 30 years behind. To be honest it's just scary that China is so close to Australia and Australia has a lot of natural resources and the country is hardly armed. Honestly surprised china hasn't tried to invade physically. Ohh wait they have through foreign investment and taking over ports, properties and infrastructure. Wake up Australia and act now
china has nuclear subs.and the second amendment protects free speech to criticise the government which is what Keating is doing. nice try pal
@@santouchesantouche2873 was not going against his right. He can say whatever he wants I don't have to agree it. This ain't china....yet
@@santouchesantouche2873 also their is no bill of rights in Australia try again too 😆
I think yes Australia needs to bolster its military in general. I say this as an Australian citizen. We don't need a massive military since we don't have the numbers in staff. But we could be stronger since we intercede in the South Pacific for countries like (especially) New Zealand, Malaysia, Fiji and New Guinea.
This is just my opinion, but if I was in charge, I would've reopened the Anzac class frigate line and redesigned them just as the US redesigned the Nimitz class aircraft carriers with the USS Ronald Regan and the USS George HW Bush which were redesigned from scratch upon construction.
Anyway, possibly also more F-35s would be another option since Australia had more Mirage fighter planes in the Cold War than F-35s we have today. Also more drones. But of course, personnel numbers and budgeting are key here.
Australia needs to have a larger military for the sake of not just ourselves, but also New Zealand and the other countries. We're already building an arms race with the F-35s and now AUKUS. May as well continue bolstering the size of the military. Doesn't have to be too aggressive but Australia is a large island.
Heck, we could've triggered an arms race with buying the F-111 bomber decades ago but we didn't.
China numbawan🎉🎉🎉
China would think this is a joke
Keating get back in your box your day is over