Greg Sheridan thinks that the new submarine deal gives us "absolutely nothing"; we will end up with no submarines at all after the Collins can no longer be kept going. As with past talks on submarines, doubts will creep in, critics will rev up, and the whole thing will come to a halt until the next time someone comes up with another submarine myth.

All the government has actually done is cancel the French deal, and received a lot of good will without producing anything.

It takes the US 7 years to build a Virginia; 10 years for the UK to build an Astute - and they both know what they are doing.

Sheridan claims that it would take 15 years to train a workforce to be capable of building a nuclear submarine, and we might be able to get one on the water in 20 to 30 years if it is built in Adelaide. He reckons no government will have the guts to say that the things cannot be built in Adelaide, and talk-talk will drift along, the idea not abandoned outwardly, but put off as another thing to happen "by 2050" - which is as good as abandonment.

We could build some more Collins?

Like Manuel from Barcelona, I know nothing. But, can things get much more depressing in Australia?

can things get much more depressing in Australia?
ttbn,
Oh yes, if Labor gets in again !

Another example of the folly of war. Economic conservatism goes out the window whenever the warmongering politicians of the right (including Labor) get the chance to waste billions on such a nonsenses as nuclear powered submarines. This waste may allow Morrison to shove his head a little further up the American Presidents arse, something Australian Prime Ministers (except Gough Whitlam) have been doing for over 70 years for no advantage. Will it make Australia safer, NO, will it make us a greater target, YES.

individual

Yes. But the really depressing thing is that the government still looks like handing the election to Labor.

I like the idea of decommissioned reappointed US subs.

Another example of why the pinhead greens should never be in power.