/k/ - Weapons

>>553335

>tony abbott

>good

>muh boats

Yeah, based, cutting illegal immigration while massively increasing legal immigration from China and other shithole Asian countries

>>553314

https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iYVix82brgmQ/v1/1200x-1.png

>>553335

>Lapdog and shield for American interests in Asia

I thought that's korea considering they removed whatever culture they had left in favor of talmud and emulating USA pop "culture"?

>Also shut the fuck up about whales you cunts

How do whales taste like?

>Beacon of the free world, but they will force the beacon onto you if you don't pay (((them))) in children and interest

They're pushy only if Greatest Ally tells them to, see Jordan, no democratization effort there despite being right next to Priceless 2 Billion USD yearly Israel

>>553373

>How do whales taste like?

Weird. Not something I would suggest eating, piss poor for seafood.

>>553335

Do me! Do me!

>India

Yeah nah, on behalf of the Australian people I declare this alliance cancelled.

>>553314

> India

This is ridiculous. Indian-Aussie relationship is not good so what are the Aussie pollies thinking?!?!?!

>>553433

Isn't literal shipping the backbone of global economy though? I don't the leverage of couple hundred thousand turks with trucks can compare.

>>553335

We all now Japan is (((the lost tribe))).

>>553585

If that were the case you would be a superpower.

>>553799

S-SHUT IT DOWN!

THE BARBARIANS KNOW

>>553314

I bet India will destroy the joint force before it go ahead. Whoever came up with this idea are not good tactician. Frickin' why?

>>553335

>a hero who turned back the boats

It was a publicity stunt, nothing more. He still did absolutely nothing about all the third-world bastards coming in by plane, on a "skilled worker" visa that they'll use to collect fucking shopping trolleys.

>>553531

Came here to say this. Pajeets are just as bad as the dog-eaters, except they smell worse and are more likely to accidentally break things from being too inbred to figure out how shit works.

>>553433

<Implying sea countries can do anything about inland trade.

https://archive.fo/TL8mt

>The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimates that roughly 80 percent of global trade by volume and 70 percent by value is transported by sea. Of that volume, 60 percent of maritime trade passes through Asia, with the South China Sea carrying an estimated one-third of global shipping.

>As the second-largest economy in the world with over 60 percent of its trade in value traveling by sea, China’s economic security is closely tied to the South China Sea.

<Implying India, which is 100% anti-US (and the US constantly supporting anti-indian terrorism and enemy regimes, AKA Pakistan, Tamil Tigers, etc…) is gonna join.

You are totally unacquainted with the subject matter.

Please, read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93United_States_relations

The Tamil Tigers/LTTE had no designs against India and were in fact receiving training and support from India. This changed in the 1980s when India and Sri Lanka came to agreement and Indian troops were deployed in Sri Lanka.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_Tigers_of_Tamil_Eelam#Indian_support

https://archive.fo/4leg2

India and USA have worked against China in the past arguably when India China relations were at their high point so there is no reason why they cannot do it again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Frontier_Force

Also, according to Pakistan India is already supporting Baloch separatists (who have directly attacked and killed Chinese) through Afghanistan, with USA's approval to disrupt CPEC (the land routes you are talking about).

https://archive.fo/Z8OLa

https://archive.fo/J0J1G

Pakistan's response:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_bombing_of_Indian_embassy_in_Kabul

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_bombing_of_Indian_embassy_in_Kabul

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Indian_embassy_attack

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_attack_on_Indian_consulate_in_Herat

>>553966

>on a "skilled worker" visa that they'll use to collect fucking shopping trolleys

>tfw every shopping center i go to now no longer has teenagers pushing trolleys, but are all made up of pajeets

>tfw globalism killed afterschool jobs

>>553995

what if china loads anti ship missiles on to cargo ships though

>>553531

>Not wanting allies immune to poo warfare

>>553433

>to Beijing.

Indian hate the Chinese more than Pakistan

>>554033

>Are there any good non-kiked, non-fun hating pollies left in Australia? Maybe Bob Katter

Katter's good for a laugh but he's a leb and not really, no. A politician with the charisma to win that wants to reinstate (and improve) the WAP and repeal the NFA would be one in a million. Best we could probably get is a parliament where One Nation holds the most seats, LDP the second most and Hunters and Fishers third but that would still leave so much to be desired. It's probably easier to get all the pro-gun Aussies to move to Tasmania and secede.

>>554008

>what if china loads anti ship missiles on to cargo ships though

I think you have something like the Russian Club in mind

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1200/0*wCvn4197JfzFsL2v.png

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u4xNyXVmZ18/Uh1bIYVdjzI/AAAAAAAAc_M/huq0miXC69o/s1600/Beauty+and+The+Beast+Container+3M-54+Klub+Multipurpose+Cruise+Missiles+export+india+iran+syria+china+korea+export+antiship+ground+attack++(1).jpg

There are many problem with this concept.

Firstly, enemy cargo ships are considered legitimate targets (more or less) and in case of war no Chinese cargo ship will be allowed to venture anywhere near US vessels or coast. They could be used on neutral ships but I think most countries will toe the American line and will stay away from China.

Secondly, container ship having no sensors or command and control center of it's own will be entirely dependent on external sources for target information.

Thirdly, USA and its allies depend on submarines and aircraft (both land and carrier based) for commerce raiding/enforcing blockades (see USN submarine campaign against Japan) rather than surface vessels, against which an anti-ship missile armed container ship is useless. This is also why the "First Island Chain" and "Second Island Chain" (https://leadingedgeairpower.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/a2ad.jpg) with their airbases (despite being vulnerable to Chinese cruise and ballistic missiles) and SOSUS network (https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tcl5KWO3-Lk/VekiOxnKxgI/AAAAAAAAG-Q/bmF99fneIbA/s1600/undersea%2Barray%2BAsia-Pacific.jpg) concern China so much. Also this is why India is necessary for this alliance (see their base in Nicobar plus stations in Madagascar and Mauritius especially their relation to China's "String of Pearls": https://media.indiatimes.in/media/content/2017/Jun/string_of_pearllss_1498041521_725x725.jpg)

Such container borne missiles could be however used for surprise attack at the commencement of hostilities. These armed container ships can also complement the firepower of a convoy. An example, being the US Project ARAPAHO (https://archive.fo/OiCg6) to use container ships for additional ASW capability including helicopters (A somewhat related example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MT_Bunga_Mas_Lima). An interesting proposal for such a ship with a thorough overview of various aspects of naval warfare can be found here:

https://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.nl/2018/02/modern-warships-vii-conclusion-two-paths.html

Such ships can always be used in support role like the Chinese hospital ship and this proposal:

https://archive.fo/yiq59

Ship air defenses could be enhanced by securing a SAM system on deck like this Israeli experiment albeit with a ballistic missile:

https://archive.fo/1oe42

But that would necessitate specialized crews for maintenance and operation and "marinisation" of components.

As always a shout-out to Mike Sparks:

https://archive.fo/q1zuo

>>554033

>Are there any good non-kiked, non-fun hating pollies left in Australia?

Maybe Leyonhjelm?

>>554363

Literally who?

>>554404

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Leyonhjelm

It's worth noting India is just playing both sides as they are also involved heavily with China and Russia in the silk road

>>554099

Wouldn't the US get shit on for unprovoked attacks on civilians vessels though? Isn't it a bit difficult to enforce a blockade on a massive merchant marine that could be armed defensively and pretend like they did nuffin wrong?

>>553335

IS real jap annon?

The US is already fucking China over by producing it's own oil. Basicly the US is now gonna pull out of the gulf of aden zone and the fire that is the fucking power keg called Arabia's gonna light up again Iran vs Sauds when lol??

>>553433

Seems optimistic slavboo shit as soon as the US ceases to be a world power Russia and China will fight. India is playing both sides and the silk road is was and will forever be unstable because of Islam

>>555245

>Seems optimistic slavboo shit

That indeed was made by some extremely retarded Western slavaboo instead of an actual Slav. Everyone here knows how Uzbeks, Tajiks and Kyrgyzs were genociding russians after USSR collapse and how russians hate the current tsunami of Asian immigrants from those countries, yet they are still depicted as russian friendos on the map. Kazakhs were more chill, but nowadays they are pushing massive de-rusification of the country and just recently even announced this: http://www.novinite.com/articles/188090/Kazakhstan+Moves+from+Cyrillic+to+Latin

There's plenty of other stuff to laugh here, like Pakis and Chinese being the same color as Pajeets lol. I mean this isn't your regular autism, rather something way more intense.

>>555262

>Uzbeks, Tajiks and Kyrgyzs were genociding russians after USSR collapse

That send the chills down my spine.

>>556223

I rather to stay out of the (((wars))).

>>554902

Frankly speaking I have little to no knowledge of maritime laws, which like international laws can be easily disregarded given your power level.

Apparently if you declare a naval blockade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade) you have to follow a lot of rules:

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/lusiblck.htm

>The basic scheme is that a blockade, to be legal, MUST be effective: the term is a bit hazy, but, essentially, means that the bulk of enemy and neutral merchant shipping must be subject to being stopped. Once the blockade is LEGAL, then a belligerent ship may STOP a neutral or enemy merchant vessel and inspect it. If the cargo is found to be actual or conditional contraband, it can be seized without payment, though this can only be done once the ship is taken to a friendly port (which may be neutral) and a judicial proceeding is held to confirm that the cargo was indeed "contraband". (If the cargo is not contraband but is, for instance, food, it must be permitted to pass unhindered.)

All of this hassle can circumvented by not declaring a blockade and just doing commerce raiding.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_raiding

Or by using submarines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare

>the London Naval Treaty required submarines to abide by prize rules. These regulations did not prohibit arming merchantmen but having them report contact with submarines (or raiders) made them de facto naval auxiliaries and removed the protection of the prize rules. This rendered the restrictions on submarines effectively useless. While such tactics increase the combat effectiveness of the submarine and improve its chances of survival, some regard them as a breach of the rules of war, especially when employed against neutral vessels in a war zone.

Interestingly, the Allies had declared a naval blockade of Germany and Germany returned the favor. Per the initially mentioned laws (prize rules) both should have conducted boarding operations but in the end it was a free for all affair. Also both sides used armed cargo ships further mucking the issue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_raider

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Merchant_Cruiser

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensively_equipped_merchant_ship

Americans also conducted unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan and carried out even more indiscriminate mining of Japanese ports:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_submarines_in_the_Pacific_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Starvation

>Allied actions in the Pacific are believed to have been a mitigating factor in reducing the sentence of Großadmiral Karl Dönitz following the Nuremberg Trials, who was accused of similar actions in the Battle of the Atlantic; indeed, Admiral Nimitz provided Dönitz with a statement saying his boats behaved no differently.The official judgment of the International Military Tribunal cited the statement as part of the reason Donitz's sentence was "not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare."

Found this interesting article

Blockading China: A Guide

https://archive.fo/STbSP

>>556249

Maybe he has "Kimutaku syndrome" and is trying to emulate Takuya Kimura's character Katagiri Teppei in "Love Generation".