As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[US Foreign Policy] is still practicing drone diplomacy

16162636567

Posts

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited September 17
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    shryke on
    mrondeauBlackDragon480KaputaMrMisterIncenjucarGnome-InterruptusRingoJaysonFourOneAngryPossum
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    Commander ZoomSmrtnikLord_AsmodeusOrcaJaysonFourElvenshaeKamar
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    Yeah, France is definitely huffing and puffing very hard about this. But between contractor screwups and getting objectively better equipment, it's not hard to see why Australia is doing this. Nor why the US is.

    China complaining about nukes is just the usual nonsense of course - these are attack subs, they carry torpedos and exist to sink ships specifically. They have nuclear reactors because it turns out nuclear powered subs can just stay underwater and hidden for months at a time (iirc diesel subs need to surface for air every so often?)

    Modern diesel subs use snorkels, but yeah they have to be near the surface to run the diesel generator and recharge their batteries. Snorkels are a big improvement over just hanging out on the surface like old U-Boats used to but the wake from the snorkel is still very easy to detect.

    The trade-off is that when running submerged they're even harder to detect than nukes since there's literally no engine noise. Exact submerged times are classified (and would vary by model anyway) but it's typically assumed to be a day or two IIRC.

    uH3IcEi.png
    OrcaElvenshae
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    To be honest, I'm a little surprised France was invited to join. They have interests and territory in the Pacific, and the French Navy is no joke one of the best in the world.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    mrondeauGnome-Interruptus
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.

    uH3IcEi.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.

    In what way is it disproportionate?

    OrcaDarkPrimusGnome-Interruptus
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    "it's not our fault that what we were promising to deliver, eventually, was obsolete crap - the client specifically asked for obsolete crap! that's what we were charging them extra for!"
    :rotate:

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    TryCatcherSmrtnikJaysonFour
  • UrsusUrsus Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    "it's not our fault that what we were promising to deliver, eventually, was obsolete crap - the client specifically asked for obsolete crap! that's what we were charging them extra for!"
    :rotate:

    This is not anywhere near an uncommon situation. Not saying this is exactly what happened in this specific situation, but customers demanding to purchase old and obsolete items despite everyone telling them that the new stuff is cheaper, faster to delivery, and performs better happens all the time. And more or less everytime it happens the customer will then bitch and moan about the lead times and the higher price when the invoices show up (despite this being very well explained upfront).

    OrcaGnome-Interruptus
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    Color me skeptical.

    My guess would be that the Aussies asked for nukes, France offered a stratospheric price, offered the diesels as a compromise, messed up that contract, and the Aussies for sick of dealing with them and came to the US.

    This is all 100% supposition, but it fits what everyone has said.

    uH3IcEi.png
    Commander ZoomTryCatcherSmrtnikJaysonFourElvenshae
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    France is whinging cos they can't sell nuclear submarines to Australia, to which I say big fucking deal, noone cares

  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.
    I dunno, it's a sizable economic blow, and one with possible geopolitical ramifications in terms of how the US is shaping its alliances. I do love shitting on Macron at any opportunity, but I'm not surprised that the French government is enraged at this.

    Gnome-InterruptusElkiRingoOneAngryPossum
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Lots of this is guessing. I will say I seen it claimed that the US subs were cheaper than the French diesel ones.

    If France was honestly surprised by this, that's quite the intelligence failure on their part.

    TryCatcher
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Lots of this is guessing. I will say I seen it claimed that the US subs were cheaper than the French diesel ones.

    If France was honestly surprised by this, that's quite the intelligence failure on their part.

    Again, the disatisfaction of the Australian politicians and public was not a secret. The french embassy can pick a newspaper, their deal was getting blasted on the media by months, and it has been a mess since years. Only thing is, now that Australia needs those subs, they can't afford to keep playing around.

    Smrtnikelectricitylikesme
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    As the saying of this age goes, fuck around and find out.

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    TryCatcherJaysonFourTicaldfjamMrVyngaard
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.
    I dunno, it's a sizable economic blow, and one with possible geopolitical ramifications in terms of how the US is shaping its alliances. I do love shitting on Macron at any opportunity, but I'm not surprised that the French government is enraged at this.

    The French arms industry has been persnickety about US competition basically forever, and yeah, they lost a big sale. But the idea that the US is abandoning cooperation with a premier NATO power because the Aussies were tired of delays and cost overruns and went shopping is a little dramatic, and likely mostly intended for domestic French consumption.

    uH3IcEi.png
    TryCatcherGnome-InterruptusLord_AsmodeusSolarSmrtnikelectricitylikesmeJaysonFourElvenshaeKamar
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    kimeRingo
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    Okay, yeesh. Performative outrage is par for the course, but that's definitely an overreaction.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
    Gnome-InterruptuszagdrobTryCatchercckerberosViskodMonwynMillkimeGennenalyse RuebenBullheadLord_AsmodeusDacboogedybooIncenjucarCommander ZoomSolarSmrtnikelectricitylikesmeKayne Red RobeHappylilElfJaysonFourElvenshaeTicaldfjamKamar
  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    "it's not our fault that what we were promising to deliver, eventually, was obsolete crap - the client specifically asked for obsolete crap! that's what we were charging them extra for!"
    :rotate:

    Nuclear Vs non nuclear is not a matter of one being objectively better than the other. It's more a matter of trade offs in one area to benefit in another. I can believe before this point the Australians were insisting on non-nuclear subs because that's been their foreign policy for a long time, up to and including not allowing US nuclear-powered ships in their territory iirc? There is a vast tech and skill tree involved in operating these vessels that only a handful of nations in the world can actually do.

    The US/UK agreeing to help the Australians build all of this is actually a very big deal, nuclear powers almost never share their tech. It speaks volumes about how far the US is willing to go to check China in the Pacific, and just as much about how worried Australia is that they're going for this seismic change in foreign policy at vast expense.

    GiantGeek2020shrykeGennenalyse RuebenLord_Asmodeusrahkeesh2000SmrtnikDongs GaloreelectricitylikesmeJaysonFourOrcaKamar
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.
    I dunno, it's a sizable economic blow, and one with possible geopolitical ramifications in terms of how the US is shaping its alliances. I do love shitting on Macron at any opportunity, but I'm not surprised that the French government is enraged at this.

    The French arms industry has been persnickety about US competition basically forever, and yeah, they lost a big sale. But the idea that the US is abandoning cooperation with a premier NATO power because the Aussies were tired of delays and cost overruns and went shopping is a little dramatic, and likely mostly intended for domestic French consumption.

    The F35 has also been winning most the neutral country-no stake in eureofighter consortium- replacement plane contracts versus upgraded Eurofighter Typhoons and Dassault's[French firm] Rafales. Belgium, Poland, and Switzerland all went with the F35, and it looks like Finland will as well.

    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    Withdrawing ambassadors from the US and Australia but not the UK because it’s a performance stunt but also Macron knows it would play as a victory for the Tories. Like being insulted by three people and then slapping two of them across the face and nodding politely to the third because you don’t want to give them the satisfaction.

    BullheadToxboogedybooIncenjucarelectricitylikesmeJaysonFourElvenshaeOrcaKamarQanamilSkeithDark Raven X
  • GiantGeek2020GiantGeek2020 Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    I wonder if it's not just a demonstration of outrage and how pissed they are about losing the sale ill but also a punishment and re arrangement of staff.

    Part of a decent ambassador And civil service arrangement and embassy is that you would have intelligence on this shit ahead of time not just relying on your allies to tell you but that you have your own sources who also tell you

    Kayne Red Robe
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    ...huh.

    Has there been any kind of concerted push for an integrated, EU-specific military alliance or command structure? Because this suddenly feels like an attempt for France to paint the US as unreliable and unnecessary and set up a new continental organization on the basis of "fuck the Anglophones."

    uH3IcEi.png
  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    ...huh.

    Has there been any kind of concerted push for an integrated, EU-specific military alliance or command structure? Because this suddenly feels like an attempt for France to paint the US as unreliable and unnecessary and set up a new continental organization on the basis of "fuck the Anglophones."

    They've been making noises about it since the Trump admin dramatically undermined the NATO security guarentee but made very little concrete steps towards it. The French in particular are using this event to shine a spotlight on the need for EU security independence again.

    JusticeforPlutoGiantGeek2020boogedybooRingo
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Bogart wrote: »
    Withdrawing ambassadors from the US and Australia but not the UK because it’s a performance stunt but also Macron knows it would play as a victory for the Tories. Like being insulted by three people and then slapping two of them across the face and nodding politely to the third because you don’t want to give them the satisfaction.

    This reminds me of yesterday’s quote from the former French ambassador to the US, Gerard Araud, about the American and Australian treachery. And then, at the end, making sure to include a quote about how irrelevant the British are.
    He said the British involvement was immaterial because they were “poodles of the Americans, as usual”.

    https://amp.smh.com.au/world/europe/stab-in-the-back-europe-s-fury-with-morrison-and-biden-over-aukus-submarine-deal-20210916-p58sea.html

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    RingoKayne Red RobeElvenshaeTicaldfjamKruite
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    Yeah I knew they'd floated it back a under Trump, just didn't know if anything ever came of it.

    uH3IcEi.png
  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    It’s pretty embarrassing for France to have been blindsided this badly, which may be causing them to overreact to cover that aspect up.

    TryCatchershrykeCasualJusticeforPlutoFencingsaxAegisGiantGeek2020zagdrobGennenalyse RuebenLord_AsmodeusboogedybooShadowfireKayne Red RobeJaysonFourElvenshaeKaputaKruiteKamarDark Raven X
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    edited September 17
    Casual wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    Welp, that escalated quickly.


    "PARIS (AP) — France recalls its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia in submarine deal backlash, French foreign minister says."
    - Jon Lemire is the White House reporter for the Associated Press.

    Honestly, I'm not clear on the particulars, but this is a full blown diplomatic incident now.

    ...huh.

    Has there been any kind of concerted push for an integrated, EU-specific military alliance or command structure? Because this suddenly feels like an attempt for France to paint the US as unreliable and unnecessary and set up a new continental organization on the basis of "fuck the Anglophones."

    They've been making noises about it since the Trump admin dramatically undermined the NATO security guarentee but made very little concrete steps towards it. The French in particular are using this event to shine a spotlight on the need for EU security independence again.

    That makes more sense than "the french diplomatic corps are really that useless", even though I suspect that they are.

    TryCatcher on
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    I’ll point something the French diplomats I follow have been saying, which is that the French were redesigning their nuclear subs to use conventional fuel at Australian request. So, from the French perspective, to say that the deal is cancelled because American submarines are nuclear isn’t convincing. Or say they say.

    "it's not our fault that what we were promising to deliver, eventually, was obsolete crap - the client specifically asked for obsolete crap! that's what we were charging them extra for!"
    :rotate:

    Nuclear Vs non nuclear is not a matter of one being objectively better than the other. It's more a matter of trade offs in one area to benefit in another. I can believe before this point the Australians were insisting on non-nuclear subs because that's been their foreign policy for a long time, up to and including not allowing US nuclear-powered ships in their territory iirc? There is a vast tech and skill tree involved in operating these vessels that only a handful of nations in the world can actually do.

    The US/UK agreeing to help the Australians build all of this is actually a very big deal, nuclear powers almost never share their tech. It speaks volumes about how far the US is willing to go to check China in the Pacific, and just as much about how worried Australia is that they're going for this seismic change in foreign policy at vast expense.

    That was NZ.
    Monwyn wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    There was supposed to be a big gala at the French Embassy here in DC tonight to celebrate the French Navy's participation in the Revolutionary War. The top French naval officer was flown in and a French military ship in Baltimore was also holding an event on board. The entire thing has been canceled at the last minute and the naval officer was flown home really early.

    What a bunch of babies.

    like the US wouldn't if the shoe was on the other foot

    Maybe. But that and fiery language like "stab on the back" for what is first and foremost an argument about money is vastly overdramatic. This is just an oversized version of what happens every time that a company or a local government decides that they rather suck it up and pay the severance fee than keep working with a particular contractor.

    Again, Australian press was blasting this contract for months, so it was no particular secret that the australians were very unsatisfied customers. The french could have done something about it. They didn't, well, that's on them isn't it?

    This is the silliest framing though. You are acting like these are people, not nations. The French stance here exists not as an extension of some emotional response but as a extension of their national interests. So why are you trying to act like this is a matter of maturity or something? It's weird and silly.

    The french government is kicking up a fuss because they lost a bunch of money on this deal and are using diplomatic tools to make the fact that they don't like this known to the US and others involved.

    So what? No contractor is entitled to public money, specially for not delivering. Australia is within their full rights to pursue their national interest, which, like any other government, whatever is national, regional or local, includes paying for contractors that actually do the job.

    And France is fully within their right to pursue their national interests, which is getting fucking paid. And so they are kicking up a fuss on that account.

    Again, what is this framing you are using? It makes no sense. You are acting like France is being rude or childish or something for complaining that they just lost a bunch of money.

    More like that the amount of fuss they're kicking up is pretty disproportionate, considering.
    I dunno, it's a sizable economic blow, and one with possible geopolitical ramifications in terms of how the US is shaping its alliances. I do love shitting on Macron at any opportunity, but I'm not surprised that the French government is enraged at this.

    The French arms industry has been persnickety about US competition basically forever, and yeah, they lost a big sale. But the idea that the US is abandoning cooperation with a premier NATO power because the Aussies were tired of delays and cost overruns and went shopping is a little dramatic, and likely mostly intended for domestic French consumption.

    The F35 has also been winning most the neutral country-no stake in eureofighter consortium- replacement plane contracts versus upgraded Eurofighter Typhoons and Dassault's[French firm] Rafales. Belgium, Poland, and Switzerland all went with the F35, and it looks like Finland will as well.

    Yeah, the French arms Industry seems to be struggling to compete with the scale of the US. The Dassault Rafale (France's premier fighter) apparently costs more than an F-35. The Dassult also lacks stealth and lots other bells and whistles.

    Also worth noting that France had been pursuing a more formalized European Army/defense strategy. Framing the US as unreliable even under Biden might help to some extent. But....unless Germany and France really increase arms spending, there is no way they can guarantee the safety of Eastern Europe from Russia.

  • Dongs GaloreDongs Galore Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    Macron is mostly performing to make sure the French public can see that their government isn't taking this lying down.

    That said, France's fixation on maintaining a fully independent big boy defense industry isn't realistic anymore. They missed the boat on Eurofighter and F-35, they should really buy into the next joint program.

    Dongs Galore on
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Macron is mostly performing to make sure the French public can see that their government isn't taking this lying down.

    That said, France's fixation on maintaining a fully independent big boy defense industry isn't realistic anymore. They missed the boat on Eurofighter and F-35, they should really buy into the next joint program.

    I mean, they already had to source their rifles from Germany.

  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    Yeah there’s a lot of money involved. But that’s not the primary reason for the French affront. They wouldn’t recall their ambassadors over money.

    This was France’s big strategic security project in the pacific. AUKUS considered France’s interests so irrelevant, they didn’t even warn the French government that the rug was about to be pulled out from under it.

    AUKUS just signaled to the world that the French navy doesn’t really matter, at the very least in the Pacific. That’s a devastating blow. At its very heart, defense policy is about credibility.

  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Honestly I find that hard to believe. The French Navy is one of the best in the world. One of the few blue water capable navies, key NATO ally.

    What ever happened, I find it hard to believe France was snubbed because they didn't matter. More likely perusing relations with Australia was valued over the back lash it would cause in France.

    It is possible that France knew a head of time, either being told or learning about it, and decided that acting blindsided was better than admitting they knew and couldn't stop it.

  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    France was snubbed because the U.S. wants to counter China in the Pacific. And Australia sees China as a much bigger threat than before so they want the best subs and they want to enhance their alliance with the country most likely and capable of sending a fleet or two to aid Australia if the situation gets really dicey.

    The signal this sends about France is collateral damage, which the U.S. and Australia considered an acceptable cost. Which in itself reveals their calculations about France’s importance to their respective Pacific strategies.

    Ringo
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    One would think that France would put more effort on meeting deadlines and not having costs balloon out of control if it was so important to them.

    EDIT: And is not about "the best subs". Is about having any subs, and the French were failing on that.

    TryCatcher on
    Smrtnik
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    Whoops.

    TryCatcher on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 19


    @TryCatcher I think you had the wrong tab open.

    Unless military procurement has got a lot more interesting than I thought.

    Fencingsax on
    Commander ZoomHappylilElfMorganVShadowfire
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »

    @TryCatcher I think you had the wrong tab open.

    Unless military procurement has got a lot more interesting than I thought.

    Lol sorry my bad.

  • HefflingHeffling No Pic EverRegistered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    It’s pretty embarrassing for France to have been blindsided this badly, which may be causing them to overreact to cover that aspect up.

    The fact that France got blindsided by this fits in really well with the narrative told by massive delays and cost overruns.

    zagdrobTryCatcherSmrtnik
Sign In or Register to comment.