‘It’s delicious that this AUKUS deal was done with Joe Biden, darling of the left’
As the news surfaced that a historic deal had been struck with the US and UK to acquire nuclear submarines, Beijing went ballistic, NZ ran for cover and readers dived in, submitting 3060 comments and counting on this story alone. Silvafoxy savoured the deal:
“What’s even more delicious is that this AUKUS deal was done with Joe Biden. The darling of the left media, their man. They can’t say he’s a warmonger, he’s going to provoke WW3, like they would revel in if Trump was involved. They can’t blame their man Biden.”
Gimiston giggled:
“So this morning Xi Jinping is reaching for the Aspros and the luvvies around Australia are going into a spin.”
Bruce in Brisbane was brief:
“Best news I’ve read this year.”
The Vale said:
“At the end of day, it’s your proper mates that matter. This is a spectacular achievement by Dutton. No doubt Albo, Tanya and Wong will now be in a panic with their best ‘maaaates’ in the unions about how ‘unfair’ it is to deal with those dastardly Americans.”
Steve said:
“The biggest win in Australia’s military acquisition history … Beijing can now feel some Australian ‘soft’ power.”
Keith cavitated:
“I always felt that converting the French nuclear submarines to diesel was dumb for a country that has so much coastline without refuelling infrastructure and massive distances. Good one PM.”
William wasn’t wowed:
“If the Morrison Government has not already made Australia a nuclear target by its servile desire to do anything the US wants it to do, this arrangement, which effectively makes us part of the US navy, certainly will.”
Dave Wane was:
“So the biggest bully on the planet, and a communist one as well (surprise, surprise) calls out little old Australia for ‘getting a little help from our friends’. Thankfully, our powerful friends and allies, who also believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law have decided to assist us to deter, and if necessary, defend our country from the massive, and ever-increasing threat that Communist China presents.
“My only criticism/advice. Why not get some ‘off-the-shelf’ nuclear submarines to tide us over until this long range plan is implemented. Even if we have to hire key military personnel such as nuclear engineers from the US or the UK. But we should get the ball rolling.”
The Fam noted:
“Ardern has again been exposed as all tip and no iceberg. Shackled to the illogical Labor mantra and again leaving Australia to shoulder the burden of protecting Australia as well as NZ. Australia continues to do the heavy lifting in the region.”
Dave Strange said:
“What bloody-minded arrogance characterises the Chinese Government. It’s OK for them to build nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers etc etc and sail around the Pacific intimidating us, but for us to get nuclear submarines puts world peace at risk. They need to look in the mirror!”
Credit where it’s due, said R4:
“I’m not a big fan of sleepy Joe Biden but he’s done a great deal here. Afghanistan is gone and in the past, China is the only thing that matters now – and this pact demonstrates that. Unlike DT, JB knows that the US cannot tackle the CCP on its own and needs allies with a real bite – and Aukus provides it. I was worried that JB would be a typical left-wing CCP appeaser, but so far the opposite has been true.”
Doug reckoned:
“President Biden was in his prime when Australia won the America Cup. He obviously remembers the theme song about the man from down under.”
SL said:
“Irresponsible according to the CCP, but the Prime Minister is not responsible to the CCP, but the people of Australia.”
Craig crowed:
“Boo yah. Scotty from marketing has shifted the focus onto defence, united powerful friends at a time of need, made the correct choice, delivered in spades, set Australia up for the next century, taken concrete steps to defend us & our neighbours, done the near impossible getting nuclear & missile technology transfer, all hail PM Morrison.”
Steve surmised:
“A massive blunder by China to force the hand of the democratic Allies to mobilise against them in this manner. They have woken everybody to their aggressive ambition. China’s prosperity is totally dependent upon selling their manufactured goods to the Western world. The world can only hope that they see the impact of this on their economic future and temper their aggressive actions.”
Laughs from Leslie:
“China will be raucous about AUKUS.”
AnthonyR rewrote history:
“‘Irresponsible’: China blasts nuclear subs deal in Australia, UK, US ‘forever partnership’
Irresponsible China blasts nuclear subs deal in Australia, UK, US ‘forever partnership’
Headline fixed. You’re welcome.”
Arthur’s theme:
“The really sad thing is that China’s outrage may stir animosity towards those Chinese people, here and abroad, who have nothing to do with those statements from the CCP and their media outlets. We mustn’t lose sight of the distinction between Chinese people and the CCP. I often get the feeling that China’s messages of outrage are intended more to influence their own population to rally behind the CCP, than to send any message to us or the rest of the world.”
Georgio gloated:
“Albo wants in on the subs deal chat, how funny. It was only last week he was waffling on about climate change deals with US to assist our security arrangements. No Albo, Labor have been sidelined again by ScoMo and Dutton and made to look irrelevant.”
PJF’s assessment:
“An astute tactical move – we must do our bit to help promote and preserve peace in the region and strengthen our alliances with our democratic allies. Real deterrence is the only proven path when it comes to resisting autocratic regimes.”
Randal was rapt:
“Brilliant. About time. And so glad to see Labor settling for mere scraps in its politicisation of the plan – expressing concerns only over ‘expected costs’ – albeit they have been caught out and wedged on the nuclear issue, big time. Even NZ(!) has been forced to contradict itself by simply reasserting its ban of nuclear from its own waters, as though that policy persistence wasn’t transparent tokenism next to Jacinda’s praise of the bigger picture – the nuclear deal itself and the necessity of the tripartite alliance.
“There is no better news than one of a tightening and strengthening of the partnership with Australia’s top two historic economic and military allies, out of a realpolitik pragmatism to confront the number one threat to the free world. Good for Australia, its defence, and as a start to its long necessary journey towards nuclear power. Good for a UK coming out of Brexit and looking to reassert its independence and leadership-role in liberal- (as opposed to ‘social’-) democratic ideals. And good for the free world.”
–
As the irrepressible Kristina Keneally prepared to be parachuted into the safe Labor seat of Fowler in Western Sydney, elbowing aside a local Vietnamese-Australian lawyer who lives and works in the electorate, Janet Albrechtsen delved into diversity while noting: “Keneally says she’s a boat person too; after all, she lives on Scotland Island, a salubrious suburb on Sydney’s northern beaches accessible only by boat.” Ron reckoned:
“I think this issue with KK demonstrates yet again the critical issues with Labor and Albo’s alternative government, they are elitist in themselves and very much self serving. They have lost the working classes for elitist ideology conforming to inner city green.
“Most of these Labor Party entities, if not all, are those who could easily have walked both side of politics, for example Turnbull. KK is sinking. Her inability to attract votes, her past history as NSW Premier in an apparent corrupt government, her continued practise of parachuting into safe non-contested position is contemptible.
“Albo’s loyalty to KK could be commendable if not for the fact that KK has been placed before the loyalty to the Labor Party, Labor policies and principles, Labor loyal supporters but mostly and importantly the electorate.”
Tim and Karen:
“KK, an English speaking well heeled American who married an Australian, is touted as a working class immigrant! Give me a break. That is the best Newspeak dished up by Albo’s left wing that would be worthy of Orwell’s 1984!”
Argustuft was impressed:
“What a beautiful piece of writing. These types of articles, the way the data is presented and points made, is why subscribers keep paying up. We don’t pay for diversity, we don’t pay for quotas, we don’t pay for wokeness. We pay for data, opinion, research, facts, argument, debate. This is what makes society thrive – not division driven by identity agendas.”
Peter too:
“Brilliant Janet, and so important to expose the hypocrisy at the heart of the born to rule, Left Establishment. And then for Keating and Albanese to have the audacity to make the preposterous claim that the lives of Tu Le and Keneally have taken the same path! Former Labor leader, Mark Latham, has a more realistic opinion of Keneally: ‘There isn’t a (parliamentary) seat in the country she couldn’t lose’.”
Ron Deathsantis wanted to know:
“What is woke ideology? None of you can even get a consistent definition of woke, and there’s no consistency over who is and who isn’t woke. Can you all please just have meeting and decide what it is. Then you can explain what woke ideology is or will that go into the pile of mythical quiet Australians, the mythical left and the mythical dole bludger?”
Jan reckoned:
“A few (diversity) targets in the fed liberal party in regard to number of women might not be a bad thing. The culture has been bad for years and needs fixing!”
Brian’s bit:
“You make some good points JA, but there is one thing you don’t seem to acknowledge. That is, diversity in companies and organisations makes them better, more successful entities.
Monocultural organisations are too narrow in experience and relevance, and date quickly. Organisations need to be nimble and reflect the people they aim to represent and/or profit from.”
Ian took issue:
“My research suggests that it’s actually currently successful companies which can afford to throw shareholders funds around on social experimentation. These already successful companies show up in the statistics. Let’s see a decade out how well they perform against companies that choose employees based on merit.”
Simples, said Jennifer:
“Ability, ability, ability. That’s what I want as a shareholder.”
Anthony’s answer:
“I hope Tu Le decides to stand as an independent and wins. That will show Albo, KK et al that their bullyboy tactics backfired.”
E and M argued:
“Companies like KPMG need to be careful what they wish for and my advice is they need to find a better way. They can be at risk of losing top talent. One of my well educated high performing daughters used to work for one of the big four. She left even though she was promoted every year she worked there.
“When asked why she was leaving, she responded ‘can I be honest’ and was told yes. She replied “ don’t want your job. She was a victim of a ‘diversity’ recruitment policy. Many people clearly were employed based on ticking a ‘diversity’ box and mostly were unable to perform as part of a team to deliver results. That meant my daughter and others like her were left to put in extremely long hours to do the work of, and cover for, those that didn’t have the skills being educational standards and communication skills to meet the company’s and clients’ performance criteria. She could see this playing out further up the line as well. Now very happy at her new job she has been promoted just inside one year.”
Last word to Marty T:
“Bravo Janet. The common sense and highlighting the hypocrisy and self serving nature of woke/left policies is essential reading. Meritocracy is the only solution to productivity and development. Investors beware of investing in woke companies that use your money to subsidise inefficient woke policies at the expense of shareholders and staff that suffer discrimination as a result.”
–
Each Friday the cream of your views on the news rises and we honour the voices that made the debate great. To boost your chances of being featured, please be pertinent, pithy and preferably make a point. Solid arguments, original ideas, sparkling prose, rapier wit and rhetorical flourishes may count in your favour. Civility is essential. Comments may be edited for length.