Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

[Deleted member 675]

Popeye's article stated Taiwan's legislature is STILL working on a policy to release $63 mil to fund a portion of the submarine design.

I think you misunderstand. The money is in the budget, which is set to be voted on this week. The recent announcement was the conclusion of budget negotiations prior to the vote.

Let us pretend Taiwan's legislature passes this policy

Now that consensus between the big parties has been reached on the matter, the KMT would be mad to kill it off with approaching elections.

I mean all the involved decision makers say "Yes" to this deal so the deal REALLY happens, not some who say "Yes" and others who say "No" so the deal stays mired.

That isn't how government works. You get the people who make the decisions together and a majority decide what goes. Some people always disagree, but they have to accept it - or they get disciplined. If they can't accept it they're expected to resign. Trying to sabotage a project from the inside would kill off their careers.

At this rate, Taiwan will get modern submarines at a very slow rate.

Not necessarily. Speed depends on political will in the US and Taiwan. If the US wants the project to go ahead and Taiwan funds it, there's no reason for it to necessarily be as slow as you describe. The delay over the years was down to trying to work out how to proceed and to get funding - those decisions appear to have been made.

Let us pretend that Taiwan's currently KMT-favored legislature rejects this policy.

As I said above the KMT has already approved it, so it would be ridiculous to then reject it in less than a week with an election coming up.

 

[Infra_Man99]

I think you misunderstand. The money is in the budget, which is set to be voted on this week. The recent announcement was the conclusion of budget negotiations prior to the vote.

Now that consensus between the big parties has been reached on the matter, the KMT would be mad to kill it off with approaching elections.

That isn't how government works. You get the people who make the decisions together and a majority decide what goes. Some people always disagree, but they have to accept it - or they get disciplined. If they can't accept it they're expected to resign. Trying to sabotage a project from the inside would kill off their careers.

Not necessarily. Speed depends on political will in the US and Taiwan. If the US wants the project to go ahead and Taiwan funds it, there's no reason for it to necessarily be as slow as you describe. The delay over the years was down to trying to work out how to proceed and to get funding - those decisions appear to have been made.

As I said above the KMT has already approved it, so it would be ridiculous to then reject it in less than a week with an election coming up.

1. Nope you are wrong, because many times, budgets are canceled and changed in governments in every nation.

2. Nope you are wrong, because there are lots of dissent in governments in every nation, including backstabbing, inside competition, and internal power grabs. However, Taiwan's government does not need to worry about internal power grabs.

3. Nope you are wrong, because governments do not function as simplistically as your "majority decision" process.

4. You have misread the news article, which states, "A major committee of the Taiwan legislature this week approved a $62 million spending package for submarine design that could lead to a windfall for Electric Boat in Groton. . . . Taiwan's Legislative Yuan has final say over the country's spending, and it might release more money for submarine work in 2008."

The future will see how quickly Taiwan receives the submarines, the number of submarines, and the type of submarines. I predict a slow pace, such that China's military increases its advantage over Taiwan. This is because Taiwan does need submarines to replace its old submarines, but the deal has been moving slowly, while China is quickly improving its status on many fronts, domestic and international.

What do the board members predict about this Taiwan submarine deal?

 

[Deleted member 675]

1. Nope you are wrong, because many times, budgets are canceled and changed in governments in every nation.

There has not been a single instance (that I can remember since 2000) where the KMT members of the defence committee have approved a budget and then the KMT caucus has completely voted it down - in one case I can remember a budget was returned to committee stage to trim a missile purchase. If you can provide an example of a budget being vetoed in this sort of situation, please enlighten us.

2. Nope you are wrong, because there are lots of dissent in governments in every nation

There is no dissent inside the Taiwanese government over the submarine plan.

3. Nope you are wrong, because governments do not function as simplistically as your "majority decision" process.

So what are you saying? That if two members of the US cabinet say "no" to the plan their views veto those of everyone else (remembering that the Pentagon has repeatedly said they support it)? Or that if some people inside the USN say "no" despite the fact the decision has already been made higher up then they will veto the project?

Neither scenario is credible.

4. You have misread the news article

No, I didn't misread a thing.

This is because Taiwan does need submarines to replace its old submarines, but the deal has been moving slowly

The deal has been moving slowly because the two-stage procurement was only authorised in the last year and a half. Things will speed up.

What do the board members predict about this Taiwan submarine deal?

I remember that certain members predicted that none of the big three arms purchases would see the light of day for years - I'm not sure they can accurately predict what will happen.

I would like to point out that I remained optimistic about all three purchases being approved. Two and a half out of three to-date isn't bad.

 

[crobato]

Have you tried reading a whole post before replying? Try it - it's a refreshing experience.

I read the article. That's what you call doing nothing. Just a bunch of cheap talk.

I have no idea what the total R&D cost will be, but millions have been quietly spent over the past years so it may not be far off.

You spent millions on a feasibility study? Somehow you think that would be impressive or convincing?

That has nothing to do with the R&D of the sub itself. The RD for a new sub design alone would cost billions, and don't expect the 62 million to be spent wisely.

So? China was able to buy some of those. For those that it built, how long did it take China to build its own submarine industry?

China developed its submarines with not so much help other then the Romeo and Golf class, and these are pretty primitive. Taiwan can potentially access much more technical help from various sources. Much of the great changes in Chinese sub design in fact, happened in the last ten years, and in fact, they effected a complete generational change while Taiwan is busy giving lip service on the sub issue without trying to seriously develop one.

Taiwan needs good submarines in the near future, not in 30 years. If you're still complaining Taiwan should have looked into that decades ago, write a letter to the KMT and ask them why - they were in charge for half a century.

Under the KMT, they developed the IDF fighter, all the HF and TK series of missiles, did the Kang Ding frigates and bought the Zvaardis subs. In fact, the great majority of Taiwan's indigenous weapons development STARTED with the KMT and ended post KMT.

I remember that certain members predicted that none of the big three arms purchases would see the light of day for years - I'm not sure they can accurately predict what will happen.

I don't remember anyone predicting that the destroyer and helicopter purchases would fail, and I actually feels very surprised that the procurement process took that _long_. For what is basically outdated destroyers meant for the Shah's navy no less. In fact I tend to remember pundits talking about the sub purchase back in 2002 as if its such a sure short term thing. And now its close to 2008, and there's still nothing.

 

[Infra_Man99]

There has not been a single instance (that I can remember since 2000) where the KMT members of the defence committee have approved a budget and then the KMT caucus has completely voted it down - in one case I can remember a budget was returned to committee stage to trim a missile purchase. If you can provide an example of a budget being vetoed in this sort of situation, please enlighten us.

There is no dissent inside the Taiwanese government over the submarine plan.

So what are you saying? That if two members of the US cabinet say "no" to the plan their views veto those of everyone else (remembering that the Pentagon has repeatedly said they support it)? Or that if some people inside the USN say "no" despite the fact the decision has already been made higher up then they will veto the project?

Neither scenario is credible.

No, I didn't misread a thing.

The deal has been moving slowly because the two-stage procurement was only authorised in the last year and a half. Things will speed up.

I remember that certain members predicted that none of the big three arms purchases would see the light of day for years - I'm not sure they can accurately predict what will happen.

I would like to point out that I remained optimistic about all three purchases being approved. Two and a half out of three to-date isn't bad.

You continue to make so many erroneous assumptions and claims that it is not worth answering all of them. You are also missing the point.

To answer at least one of your mistaken assumptions, read this article on how there have been disagreements and dissent in Taiwan's government and America's government, like all nations' government. This article relates to Taiwan's post-2000 weapons deals with the US. Again and again I enlighten you, I easily found this article using Google.com, and again I recommend you use internet search engines. They are a lot easier than digging through old newspapers whether in print or online, especially if they are in Chinese. I remind you again and again, USE GOOGLE.COM, it is very easy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I will give you some credibility, because maybe, JUST maybe, some of your assumptions are true to various degrees, while the news is incorrect. Let me enlighten you, the news is not always true. In fact, many times news have been wrong or purposely misinformed the public.

 

[Deleted member 675]

I read the article. That's what you call doing nothing. Just a bunch of cheap talk.

$60 million on top of the millions already spent is hardly "cheap talk".

You spent millions on a feasibility study?

Why do you keep saying "you"? Do you think I'm Taiwanese or something?

don't expect the 62 million to be spent wisely.

Don't expect it to be wasted either.

Under the KMT, they developed the IDF fighter, all the HF and TK series of missiles, did the Kang Ding frigates and bought the Zvaardis subs.

I think you may be trying to obscure the issue at hand - the lack of any domestic submarine project under the KMT. Under their rule, Taiwan had better links with the world as China's diplomatic influence hadn't completely eclipsed it. It took a long time just to get those two Dutch submarines and then, nothing. If submarines are so important and Taiwan could have made them itself, why didn't the KMT start a local project when it was clear nothing more was coming? They're hardly soothsayers who could predict the US would help out in 2001. They also had control of the legislative so could pass a budget much more easily than the current lot could.

On the other hand, after the KMT lost power the US offer came around reasonably quickly. You may say that it's a dead-end, but obviously the Taiwanese government would try to make it play out.

I don't remember anyone predicting that the destroyer and helicopter purchases would fail....

They weren't part of the "big three", which was what I was taking about.

You continue to make so many erroneous assumptions and claims that it is not worth answering all of them.

What you mean is that you don't have an answer to them.

To answer at least one of your mistaken assumptions, read this article on how there have been disagreements and dissent in Taiwan's government and America's government, like all nations' government.

Duh, really?

Geez you really are dim. Of course governments disagree, but that doesn't mean they never take decisions apart from where there's consensus. Otherwise they could never get anything done.

Again and again I enlighten you

Lol, you haven't done anything to disprove my point. Nowhere does that article say the F-16 sale is being held up because of opposition from one department. If anything it is the White House that has temporarily blocked the sale.

 

[crobato]

$60 million on top of the millions already spent is hardly "cheap talk".

That's cheap talk when it comes to the defense industry.

Example. Reagan administration allocated 3 billion for the development of the ISS. When the 3 billion was spent, all NASA ever came up was a proposal and a model.

Don't expect it to be wasted either.

You really don't know the story do you?

I think you may be trying to obscure the issue at hand - the lack of any domestic submarine project under the KMT. Under their rule, Taiwan had better links with the world as China's diplomatic influence hadn't completely eclipsed it. It took a long time just to get those two Dutch submarines and then, nothing. If submarines are so important and Taiwan could have made them itself, why didn't the KMT start a local project when it was clear nothing more was coming? They're hardly soothsayers who could predict the US would help out in 2001. They also had control of the legislative so could pass a budget much more easily than the current lot could.

Maybe there are plans to make a submarine. Why do they have the blueprints for the Zvaardis in the first place? You think you can acquire blueprints that easily? The fact that they acquired blueprints showed they have a serious intention in the first place.

They weren't part of the "big three", which was what I was taking about.

And what the hell is the "big three" because I have not seen anything BIG.

Keep on wishing and keep on dreaming. I have similar conversation back in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and we are approaching 2008 and its still the same situation.

As many have agreed here, the only way out of the rut, which includes political dependency, is to do it yourself with the help of free agents if possible.

 

[Infra_Man99]

$60 million on top of the millions already spent is hardly "cheap talk".

Why do you keep saying "you"? Do you think I'm Taiwanese or something?

Don't expect it to be wasted either.

I think you may be trying to obscure the issue at hand - the lack of any domestic submarine project under the KMT. Under their rule, Taiwan had better links with the world as China's diplomatic influence hadn't completely eclipsed it. It took a long time just to get those two Dutch submarines and then, nothing. If submarines are so important and Taiwan could have made them itself, why didn't the KMT start a local project when it was clear nothing more was coming? They're hardly soothsayers who could predict the US would help out in 2001. They also had control of the legislative so could pass a budget much more easily than the current lot could.

On the other hand, after the KMT lost power the US offer came around reasonably quickly. You may say that it's a dead-end, but obviously the Taiwanese government would try to make it play out.

They weren't part of the "big three", which was what I was taking about.

What you mean is that you don't have an answer to them.

Duh, really?

Geez you really are dim. Of course governments disagree, but that doesn't mean they never take decisions apart from where there's consensus. Otherwise they could never get anything done.

Lol, you haven't done anything to disprove my point. Nowhere does that article say the F-16 sale is being held up because of opposition from one department. If anything it is the White House that has temporarily blocked the sale.

Anyhow, I am moving the discussion away from fantasies, and moving the discussion back on topic . . .

Here is another news article about Taiwan's government thinking about spending $62 million for R&D on new submarines. It basically reaffirms the previous article, and then adds a little more info.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Deleted member 675]

That's cheap talk when it comes to the defense industry.

Example. Reagan administration allocated 3 billion for the development of the ISS.

One thing you left out - the Reagan government could afford to shell out that much money.

You really don't know the story do you?

So what are you saying - that most of it will be wasted?

Maybe there are plans to make a submarine. Why do they have the blueprints for the Zvaardis in the first place?

As far as I know it was part of the deal for the first two - but as I said earlier, only about 80% of the Hai-Lung class.

If the KMT did have plans to make a Taiwanese submarine, why didn't they institute them? They had all the time in the world. Furthermore I've never heard any KMT presidential candidate since 2000 say they would do such a thing. If a domestic purchase is the clever option and a US buy a bad idea, surely they would have ditched the latter and pledged to work on the former.

And what the hell is the "big three" because I have not seen anything BIG.

Do you actually read the Taiwanese media? The "big three" are the PAC-3s, SSKs and P-3C Orions - so called because their total cost was so large.

 

[crobato]

One thing you left out - the Reagan government could afford to shell out that much money.

So what are you saying - that most of it will be wasted?

Yup.

As far as I know it was part of the deal for the first two - but as I said earlier, only about 80% of the Hai-Lung class.

According to Bryan at the CDF, and he is a staunch as an advocate for Taiwan as you can find, 90%. Discussing things with him, he seems more about military issues than you do, no offense. The percentages don't seem to really matter as to the point that the majority of the plans are in place.

If the KMT did have plans to make a Taiwanese submarine, why didn't they institute them? They had all the time in the world.

If they already have the blueprints and why did they stop? That's a question for historians to answer.

Do you actually read the Taiwanese media? The "big three" are the PAC-3s, SSKs and P-3C Orions - so called because their total cost was so large.

Does not seem like the PAC 3 or the Orions is that big deal to me, though they add to the defense no matter what. The cost of the SSKs would far outweigh the other two by multiple times.