It was a bipartisan deal... so there is no point pointing the finger at either 'Scomo' or 'Albo'... it is a uniparty position to sell out our sovereignty But keep making it a party-political thing to ensure we fight amongst ourselves. Divide and conquer never fails to work.
@@awdrpepper 100 agree All my " Aussie , and 1/ 2 of ABC ( Australia born Chinese ) friends have no idea of this nuclear Sub deal , majority agree that we need to protect our Australia soil , otherwise Chinese PLA will land in the northern Australia and will invade the rest of the Australia in years to come , WHY ? because they ( Chinese goverment ) is having huge issue with food supply to their large population they need our land to farm and produce food, and I've have watch a Western EV interview , the gust said " China is having a Famine crises recently ! " and the host of the program " is that so ? " ... ...
60% of Australia’s news comes from Rupert Murdoch as their storyteller - sadly they don’t seem to understand the severity of not having sovereignty but they’ll learn the hard way that buying tickets on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg isn’t wise
Real Australians after WW2 were covertly Nuked by the Pommy s .Millions were Silently eliminated in the Decades after...And replaced mainly by their things like above. Dead People do Tell Tales !
@@Client_State_Aussie also the government had annouced they were buying back the farm and all royalties from mining and so forth would go to the people, the Queen did her dirty work as she owned shared in the mining companies that were going to get the boot.
haha, Australia was never a sovereign country. In fact there are just a few sovereign countries in the world, the US, China, Russia, India...that's probably it when you come to think of it
Working Dog Productions said it the best in their skit."Australia's Defence Policy Explained" check it out if you haven't seen it ! The icing on the cake which most Aussies wouldn't know is their tax dollars will be used to service and maintain U.S Nuke Subs at Garden Island in West Oz as part of the agreement regardless if the Subs are finished or not .
The greatest irony of this whole fiasco, is that if we really wanted 'nuclear powered' submarines, we could've simply bought the original design from France - unmodified, for a fraction of the cost we will end up paying for these future US subs, assuming we ever receive them.
@@jw-vx8im Yes, the US is on the downward spiral but unless Australia proves to the world that it is not a US stooge, the BRICS cannot admit a possible member who will spoil the party. Remember that BRICS works on consensus, so if a member wants to sabotage the organisation on the order of the US, that it will become a Trojan horse.
2 วันที่ผ่านมา +8
Hi Guys I recall USA largest Antennas in Your Pine Ridge, CIA office Large in Alice Springs. Not sure anymore how many USA military stationed rotated in and out of Australia. USA speaks only English French nuke-subs not allowed only freedom fries. USA already had large investements in Australia. French squeezed out. Aussies are under USA control all 5 eyes are black.
Follow the money ! check Morrison and Turnball new employer company after they leave the PM position ! his package salary and the function of their position !
A point that i consider was not touched apon was the fact that the ALP & the LNP both conspired to make sure the Australian public received the National Anti Corruption commision which appears to be as corrupt as the both major parties and preventing Australian's from ever getting the truth or the ability to have anyone held liable for what in the opinion of the Australian public is pure corruption
His analysis of the end result isn't completely off, but the exploration of the how and why is depressingly incomplete. Not one staffer offered a delicate hint over almost four decades? Impressive.
Years ago before Australia signed with France, we had a chance to buy from Japan, if we had we would have a submarines now, NOT IN 30 YEARS TIME and billions of dollars we (Australia ) cannot afford, it’s time Australia ditched the 5 eyes and join BRICS, Australia is in Asia not Europe, America and Europe are no longer the leading countries.
Australia, like the EU, Japan and SK are being harvested by the US to hold up its dying empire. Australia doesn't need nuclear subs. It needs numerous small, AIP subs that can operate in the shallow seas in northern Australia. They need these subs to at choke points in the Indonesia archipelago and among the southern Pacific islands.
allowing politicians to direct the nation would be an absurd idea, except we inherit the servitude and are constantly assured that politician-rule is democracy, the modern improvement, 'done for you.' democracy needs citizen-quality people, and that ain't orstralia.
A good & informative interview up to the point both Joe & Elizabeth show their ignorance of real macroeconomics by going off on a neoliberalist tangent criticising "the deficit" per se. @ ~81m Joe: "...One individual in Australia has caused this enormous deficit for Australia...." Elizabeth: "... the elephant in the room here when we're talking about Australia's prospective deficit ..... that it's absolutely nothing compared to America's..... I mean the elephant in the room is over 35 trillion [US] dollars of debt and yeah one could be cynical and just think that well you know they want money they want money from us ... we've got money and they've given us a terrible deal..." How can we ever get the message out to educate the public that 'the deficit' of sovereign govts. is actually an monetary asset of their citizens. If a govt. reduces the deficit it does so by taking more money from its citizens through taxation than the govt. injects through govt. spending. A fully sovereign govt. issues its own currency by passage of a money bill through Parliament/Congress. Why ever would the US to take AUD from Australia? The US wants access and control of Australian resources - that's what it really is about. Australia's deficit level if fine - all that debt owed is denominated in AUD - the very same currency the Australian govt. can freely issue! The deficit is NOT a problem - it is a national investment asset. Eliminate it and the Australian people will have no money!
@@jillfryer6699 No it doesn't - decades of applied neoliberal macroeconomics is what has destroyed US citizen wealth & social services. Deficits can be used for good purpose or bad purpose - but deficits per se should not be feared. It is normal for a sovereign currency issuing govt. to run a fiscal deficit - if the Fed govt. doesn't run sustained deficits an economy can not grow to accommodate population or industrial growth. The only source of unencumbered money to citizenry is net Fed govt. fiscal injection - ie Fed. spending must, long term, exceed money destruction by taxation. The US has not used its deficits to build/finance social security or citizen serving infrastructure - it has instead preferred to subsidise the rise of profiteering monopolist financiers and military equipment manufacturers and endless imperialist wars.
A nuclear submarine is not a nuclear bomb. There appears to be deliberate conflation of nuclear weapons and weapons that use nuclear power let alone the notion of highly enriched. This is not helpful in shedding light on what I would agree is a lousy deal and as well one founded upon reneging on the original deal (which also was pretty much shit).
No, it's not but it could become one. Uranium enrichment is one of the bottlenecks in nuclear weapons and having enriched uranium often means you have overcome an obstacle in getting the bomb. While it is unlikely that Australia will have the bomb, it is still a violation of the NPT to own highly enriched uranium. That's the problem. The other problem which is no less daunting, is the fact that you will have to deal with the waste after the sub is decommissioned. It is an ongoing problem even for the Americans.
@@gelinrefira There are many countries that have nuclear power, Australia being the rare exception of only having a mini reactor for medical material purposes. The notion that it is a step toward the BOMB by having nuclear reactor is alarmist and therefore not helpful. Reasons why Australia should have nuclear powered submarines is somewhat suspect if the purpose of the submarines is defensive, that is it should not require long term and distant voyages where nuclear subs excel. If the submarines were to defend areas reasonably close to Australian shores they may as well be diesel/electric. If the submarines were limited in arms to say, torpedoes just to sink hostile navies, then there are more reasonable alternatives to nuclear power. Given the lack of nuclear industry infrastructure in Australia, it is not all that reasonable that it should possess multiple nuclear reactors only in the submarine fleet. If the submarines were to have missile launching capability, one is looking, without question, at offensive capability. There is quite a lot of room for serious debate on the subject, instead it seemed to have started, and failed at, generating a handful of welding jobs in South Australia as well as panic over the failing Colins.
White elephants that is what Au will receive. The best outcome is for the deal to fall through. The best option was French nuclear. As far as I can see. It was powered by non military grade plutonium.
The best option is smaller, more numerous AIP subs that can be placed at choke points. Australia shouldn't even be considering nuclear subs. They are usually much larger and harder to operate in the shallow seas all around Australia and at these choke points. They are also far more expensive. 1 nuclear sub cam cost as much as 2-4 conventional subs.
Fowler, unfortunately, is a very unengaging guest. Despite being a celebrated author, he doesn't present background and pressing issues in a clear and interesting way for people new to the topic. My guess is he doesn't prep for this type of interview. He just switches on his camera and starts talking in a disorganised way that puts a lot of onus on the interviewers to get it to make sense and be relevant. When I say "prep", of course Fowler doesn't need to prep his knowledge - but there's kind of an expected custom in these deep dive interviews that the guest will start with a coherent preamble of 3 or 4 minutes that sets up the discussion. In fact, the guy is even bordering on ascerbic and recalcitrant at times; if he is frustrated at the lack of interest he was able to get from local media and politicians he might look to himself. And by the end of it, still nobody has made the clarifying point that although Australia is vast on a map, based on population and economy it's really just another California in the Pacific. And that really brings home the absurdity if we imagine California buying a fleet of nuclear subs - it's disproportionate and will translate to our debt level and pressures on funding health, education, pensions and police. And that's quite apart from the horror of essentially ceding the Australian Navy to a belligerent, jealous, serially disingenuous empire that thrives on chaos and theft. And BTW, France may have generically good steel for subs - but I tend to believe the Japanese when THEY said they had the world's best specialised steel for the subs we had promised to buy from THEM... before we reneged on Tokyo before we reneged on Paris. If we had stuck with Tony Abbot's Japanese deal we would shortly have the first delivery!
Maintaining sovereignty in your closing comments, then moving to your view on 'the voice' makes no logical argument - giving the current administration a blank cheque to potentially remove your sovereignty from our foundation; Leaves one perplexed. Look forward to reading your book.
Scott Morrison is the worst PM Australia ever had.
He alone put Australia in so much trouble.
The most horrible thing is that Albanese would have been worse.
@rjgarnett
Yeah okay 😂
It was a bipartisan deal... so there is no point pointing the finger at either 'Scomo' or 'Albo'... it is a uniparty position to sell out our sovereignty
But keep making it a party-political thing to ensure we fight amongst ourselves. Divide and conquer never fails to work.
100% compromised in some way and was reporting to someone, and I note he did receive a Zionist award after he became PM.
I think most Australians knew this was a dodgy deal.
You have more faith in the average Australian than I do. On this issue, I think most Australian's are clueless.
@@awdrpepper 100 agree All my " Aussie , and 1/ 2 of ABC ( Australia born Chinese ) friends have no idea of this nuclear Sub deal , majority agree that we need to protect our Australia soil , otherwise Chinese PLA will land in the northern Australia and will invade the rest of the Australia in years to come , WHY ? because they ( Chinese goverment ) is having huge issue with food supply to their large population they need our land to farm and produce food, and I've have watch a Western EV interview , the gust said " China is having a Famine crises recently ! " and the host of the program " is that so ? " ... ...
60% of Australia’s news comes from Rupert Murdoch as their storyteller - sadly they don’t seem to understand the severity of not having sovereignty but they’ll learn the hard way that buying tickets on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg isn’t wise
1975 australia lost it's sovereignty.
Real Australians after WW2 were covertly Nuked by the Pommy s .Millions were Silently eliminated in the Decades after...And replaced mainly by their things like above. Dead People do Tell Tales !
@@Client_State_Aussie emfisweaponizedavoid...over...
@@Client_State_Aussie also the government had annouced they were buying back the farm and all royalties from mining and so forth would go to the people, the Queen did her dirty work as she owned shared in the mining companies that were going to get the boot.
haha, Australia was never a sovereign country. In fact there are just a few sovereign countries in the world, the US, China, Russia, India...that's probably it when you come to think of it
@@tigris4247 Iran, North Korea, Cuba
When you are not in NATO they find another way to implement the Marfia style protection racket.
Trump has already said he wants to make Canada the 51st State of the United States!
Guess what Australia you're already on the way to being the 52nd!😊
53rd, after Israel.
Nah, that's either UK or Germany.
@@gelinrefira
So you're OK with being a vassal state run in the interests of Wall Street like the UK and Germany?
Wake up sunshine!
We are already
Most of US navel building facilities are not in operation. They can't service or replace thier own fleet.
😊 are you sure? 🎉
Most US naval shipyards are running 2-3 years behind schedule.
@@jillfryer6699 As sure as we can be they're really in bad shape. And no, it's not hard to believe
A glimmer of hope for journalism going forward.
How do we get more people to wake up?
Join The Australian Citizens Party
I'm not sure that's possible at this stage. When Stalin came to power, he was cheered like the Beatles.
Ha Ha Ha, Morrison got a good gig with the US war machine makers! Left Australia laughing his head off.
What sovereignty ?? Lost it long time ago.
When was it ever anyway? Far as I know always been a colony. With spasmodic delusions.
We have never had any sovereignty, we just swapped one colonial master for another, ie from Britain to USA.
Working Dog Productions said it the best in their skit."Australia's Defence Policy Explained"
check it out if you haven't seen it ! The icing on the cake which most Aussies wouldn't know is their tax dollars will be used to service and maintain U.S Nuke Subs at Garden Island in West Oz as part of the agreement regardless if the Subs are finished or not .
And the Debt.
No
OZ R so keen to have submarine should get them from China deliver earlier
😂
If you believe that Australia will get a nuclear sub, well I've got a sub to sell you.
The greatest irony of this whole fiasco, is that if we really wanted 'nuclear powered' submarines, we could've simply bought the original design from France - unmodified, for a fraction of the cost we will end up paying for these future US subs, assuming we ever receive them.
Scott Morrison v's a guy with Dementia,...and Scott (along with Australia) loses,....wow
Scot Mor got a good job with MIC
@@Zandiv Morrison didn't lose. He's riding like a train bandit. It's the people that are dupes.
Australia should join BRICS
What makes you think BRICS will welcome a Trojan horse.
@@gelinrefira I don't see any future with the USA in an economic sense. Maybe Paul Keating was correct
@@jw-vx8im Yes, the US is on the downward spiral but unless Australia proves to the world that it is not a US stooge, the BRICS cannot admit a possible member who will spoil the party. Remember that BRICS works on consensus, so if a member wants to sabotage the organisation on the order of the US, that it will become a Trojan horse.
Hi Guys I recall USA largest Antennas in Your Pine Ridge, CIA office Large in Alice Springs. Not sure anymore how many USA military stationed rotated in and out of Australia. USA speaks only English French nuke-subs not allowed only freedom fries. USA already had large investements in Australia. French squeezed out. Aussies are under USA control all 5 eyes are black.
Aukus is a deal that is either incredibly stupid, or corrupt - likely a combination of both.
Great deal for the USA
@@jw-vx8imindeed. US pulled off a con job, and Australia was sucked in by the minute.
Follow the money ! check Morrison and Turnball new employer company after they leave the PM position ! his package salary and the function of their position !
A point that i consider was not touched apon was the fact that the ALP & the LNP both conspired to make sure the Australian public received the National Anti Corruption commision which appears to be as corrupt as the both major parties and preventing Australian's from ever getting the truth or the ability to have anyone held liable for what in the opinion of the Australian public is pure corruption
His analysis of the end result isn't completely off, but the exploration of the how and why is depressingly incomplete.
Not one staffer offered a delicate hint over almost four decades? Impressive.
Years ago before Australia signed with France, we had a chance to buy from Japan, if we had we would have a submarines now, NOT IN 30 YEARS TIME and billions of dollars we (Australia ) cannot afford, it’s time Australia ditched the 5 eyes and join BRICS, Australia is in Asia not Europe, America and Europe are no longer the leading countries.
Morrison makes Johstom look good.
The US couldn't afford it
Australia, like the EU, Japan and SK are being harvested by the US to hold up its dying empire. Australia doesn't need nuclear subs. It needs numerous small, AIP subs that can operate in the shallow seas in northern Australia. They need these subs to at choke points in the Indonesia archipelago and among the southern Pacific islands.
Well that woke us up
Which American war outside of central America has Australia NOT been involved in? (Rhetorical question)
No sex in this book ? on the contrary Andrew, each page graphically depicts just how severely Australian taxpayers are being screwed.
Here here
allowing politicians to direct the nation would be an absurd idea, except we inherit the servitude and are constantly assured that politician-rule is democracy, the modern improvement, 'done for you.'
democracy needs citizen-quality people, and that ain't orstralia.
Need practice to be citizens.
Been saying so for years.
We should not have bought French submarines, nor American, nor British, but Russian nuclear subs. They are cheaper,better and Russia will deliver.
To get a country in to debts you can control the country security deposit
👏👍👌🤟💯❤️🙏
I would be happy with smaller conventional subs also.
Only traitors of Australian sovereignty and national interest could have concluded this 'deal'. Great deal of course for the USA and Britain.
A good & informative interview up to the point both Joe & Elizabeth show their ignorance of real macroeconomics by going off on a neoliberalist tangent criticising "the deficit" per se.
@ ~81m Joe: "...One individual in Australia has caused this enormous deficit for Australia...."
Elizabeth: "... the elephant in the room here when we're talking about Australia's prospective deficit ..... that it's absolutely nothing compared to America's..... I mean the elephant in the room is over 35 trillion [US] dollars of debt and yeah one could be cynical and just think that well you know they want money they want money from us ... we've got money and they've given us a terrible deal..."
How can we ever get the message out to educate the public that 'the deficit' of sovereign govts. is actually an monetary asset of their citizens. If a govt. reduces the deficit it does so by taking more money from its citizens through taxation than the govt. injects through govt. spending.
A fully sovereign govt. issues its own currency by passage of a money bill through Parliament/Congress.
Why ever would the US to take AUD from Australia?
The US wants access and control of Australian resources - that's what it really is about.
Australia's deficit level if fine - all that debt owed is denominated in AUD - the very same currency the Australian govt. can freely issue!
The deficit is NOT a problem - it is a national investment asset. Eliminate it and the Australian people will have no money!
So Americas massive deficit gives its citizens the super standard of living they have.
@@jillfryer6699 No it doesn't - decades of applied neoliberal macroeconomics is what has destroyed US citizen wealth & social services. Deficits can be used for good purpose or bad purpose - but deficits per se should not be feared.
It is normal for a sovereign currency issuing govt. to run a fiscal deficit - if the Fed govt. doesn't run sustained deficits an economy can not grow to accommodate population or industrial growth.
The only source of unencumbered money to citizenry is net Fed govt. fiscal injection - ie Fed. spending must, long term, exceed money destruction by taxation.
The US has not used its deficits to build/finance social security or citizen serving infrastructure - it has instead preferred to subsidise the rise of profiteering monopolist financiers and military equipment manufacturers and endless imperialist wars.
MMT nonsense!!
A 10 000usd torpedo sank the 385 billion sub.
"385 billion sub"???
@@footbru 385 trillion sub
US$10,000 torpedo??
@@footbru 100 000usd torpedo
@@deadmanwalking6342 "The US$5.4m torpedo theoretically sank the US$4.3B submarine"?
A nuclear submarine is not a nuclear bomb. There appears to be deliberate conflation of nuclear weapons and weapons that use nuclear power let alone the notion of highly enriched.
This is not helpful in shedding light on what I would agree is a lousy deal and as well one founded upon reneging on the original deal (which also was pretty much shit).
No, it's not but it could become one. Uranium enrichment is one of the bottlenecks in nuclear weapons and having enriched uranium often means you have overcome an obstacle in getting the bomb.
While it is unlikely that Australia will have the bomb, it is still a violation of the NPT to own highly enriched uranium. That's the problem. The other problem which is no less daunting, is the fact that you will have to deal with the waste after the sub is decommissioned. It is an ongoing problem even for the Americans.
@@gelinrefira There are many countries that have nuclear power, Australia being the rare exception of only having a mini reactor for medical material purposes. The notion that it is a step toward the BOMB by having nuclear reactor is alarmist and therefore not helpful. Reasons why Australia should have nuclear powered submarines is somewhat suspect if the purpose of the submarines is defensive, that is it should not require long term and distant voyages where nuclear subs excel. If the submarines were to defend areas reasonably close to Australian shores they may as well be diesel/electric. If the submarines were limited in arms to say, torpedoes just to sink hostile navies, then there are more reasonable alternatives to nuclear power. Given the lack of nuclear industry infrastructure in Australia, it is not all that reasonable that it should possess multiple nuclear reactors only in the submarine fleet. If the submarines were to have missile launching capability, one is looking, without question, at offensive capability. There is quite a lot of room for serious debate on the subject, instead it seemed to have started, and failed at, generating a handful of welding jobs in South Australia as well as panic over the failing Colins.
White elephants that is what Au will receive. The best outcome is for the deal to fall through. The best option was French nuclear.
As far as I can see. It was powered by non military grade plutonium.
The best option is smaller, more numerous AIP subs that can be placed at choke points. Australia shouldn't even be considering nuclear subs. They are usually much larger and harder to operate in the shallow seas all around Australia and at these choke points. They are also far more expensive. 1 nuclear sub cam cost as much as 2-4 conventional subs.
And so where does ScoMo spend New Years Eve 2025. With Gina, Richard Pratt and Donald Trump at Mara Lago. They have “ no shame”.
...a colony of convicts🤷🏼♂️
Fowler, unfortunately, is a very unengaging guest. Despite being a celebrated author, he doesn't present background and pressing issues in a clear and interesting way for people new to the topic. My guess is he doesn't prep for this type of interview. He just switches on his camera and starts talking in a disorganised way that puts a lot of onus on the interviewers to get it to make sense and be relevant.
When I say "prep", of course Fowler doesn't need to prep his knowledge - but there's kind of an expected custom in these deep dive interviews that the guest will start with a coherent preamble of 3 or 4 minutes that sets up the discussion.
In fact, the guy is even bordering on ascerbic and recalcitrant at times; if he is frustrated at the lack of interest he was able to get from local media and politicians he might look to himself.
And by the end of it, still nobody has made the clarifying point that although Australia is vast on a map, based on population and economy it's really just another California in the Pacific. And that really brings home the absurdity if we imagine California buying a fleet of nuclear subs - it's disproportionate and will translate to our debt level and pressures on funding health, education, pensions and police. And that's quite apart from the horror of essentially ceding the Australian Navy to a belligerent, jealous, serially disingenuous empire that thrives on chaos and theft.
And BTW, France may have generically good steel for subs - but I tend to believe the Japanese when THEY said they had the world's best specialised steel for the subs we had promised to buy from THEM... before we reneged on Tokyo before we reneged on Paris. If we had stuck with Tony Abbot's Japanese deal we would shortly have the first delivery!
Maintaining sovereignty in your closing comments, then moving to your view on 'the voice' makes no logical argument - giving the current administration a blank cheque to potentially remove your sovereignty from our foundation; Leaves one perplexed. Look forward to reading your book.
Australia could have leveraged the strategic position they have to offer the US empire to get American submarines for free.
there is nothing for free if you're dealing with the united states!
@@sunshinegirl1217 Israel is a "country" built on free stuff from the US
@@takfaazul5408 ah yes, the one exception of The Chosen.