Re: Attack on Australian Federal politician Dr Helen Haines MP (she has lost a leg)
My OPEN SOURCE calculations: Bodyguards needed, minimum 8 x 226
(76 senators and 150 House of Reps) = 1,808
rounding to 2,000+ (support, coordination, trainers, supervisors)
More info to follow in 6 hours on published books on US Secret Service issues.
AI goes further back than most people think eg. the US-Israeli multi-million lines of code Stuxnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet) Iranian nuclear program wreck-ware extends back to 2009 (if not earlier). Stuxnet escaped its anti-Iran focus by the 2010s and began to attack unintended Western and Russian networks - with an international joint Western and Russian effort eg, Kaspersky Lab finally combatting Stuxnet's spill over.
These things continue to happen in intended? or untended? ways. We only see the US (massive AI) corporate face of what continues to be a heavily civilian and military intelligence reliant software world. Many middle level US AI company experts received/receive their higher level training while they worked/work for US civilian and military intelligence.
AI overview as at October 19, 2026 with some additional Wikipedia links and Pete's comments in square bolded [...] brackets.
"Indonesia is rapidly modernizing its military under President Prabowo Subianto through major multi-billion-dollar acquisitions spanning fighter jets, warships, submarines, and precision miissiles. [1, 2]
[Pete comment - Subianto's military career [early start in Kopassus and already a General in 1985, goes right back to the Suharto era (being Suharto's son-in-law). But Subianto, now a centrist President, has not turned into the right-wing, coup-inciting, dictator many feared would happen.
Indonesia continues its pattern of buying weapons from many countries: especially France, Turkey, Italy, Russo-Indian BrahMos, maybe from China - maybe to extract favourable offers from the US. The list below does not count the many other orders by Indonesia, arrived (eg. from Russia) or on their way from many other countries: eg. aircraft ships 103 Leopard 2s already here.
Indonesia's weapons are mainly focussed on internal security and regional competitors. Unlike Australia (with help from the US) Indonesia has no pretensions to get in a medium level fight against China.].
Pete Comment
Below China has voiced its displeasure
with the plans of my newly coined term "SSN Triplets" (that is the SSN intentions of Australia, South
Korea and particularly Japan). The US is doing its upmost to manipulate the SSN programs of all 3 Triplets.
Japan is the most powerful of the Triplets,
economically, militarily and arguably in nuclear weapons capability. See my "Japan's Nuclear Weapon Breakout Capability" and "Japan Long Term Planning ICBM as well as SSGN Capabilities? Hypersonic Missiles"
Japan is the only one of the 3 that has invaded China (invasion of Manchuria (1931) to most of China until 1945).
Hence the concentration on Japan in China's Global Times article below.
The good AI explains "China strongly opposes [SSN] programs pursued by Australia, South Korea, and Japan. [China views these programs] as a serious challenge to regional stability, a disruption of the non-proliferation framework, and a direct strategy by the US and its allies to contain China's growing naval power [major source]"
Article
(intelligence professionals should be aware that clicking Global Times links may trigger Chinese spyware intrusions)
An opinion piece from the
People’s Republic of China’s Global Times, of October 15, 2026, at https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202610/1372361.shtml states:
"Why Takaichi’s remarks
about nuclear-powered submarines are so dangerous"
"With her parliamentary remarks, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has pried open a crack in the thickest seal guarding Japan's postwar taboos on military use of nuclear energy.
According to Japan's Kyodo News, Takaichi stated during a session of the House of Representatives Budget Committee that in response to the "increased military activity by its neighbors," the Japanese government will "seriously consider" the possibility of Japan Self-Defense Forces (SDF) introducing nuclear-powered submarines. Sources reportedly indicate Tokyo intends to include this option when updating its key documents on defense and security later this year.
The phrase "seriously consider" does not indicate prudence, but rather serves as a prelude. While citing "limited intelligence-gathering and surveillance capabilities in the Pacific," Takaichi also singled out nuclear-powered submarine developments in Australia and South Korea - a rhetorical maneuver: She frames Japan as a "passive follower," portrays military expansion as a "defensive necessity," and casts taboo-breaking moves as a "regional trend." Her goal is to embed nuclear-powered submarines in this year's revised security and defense documents, turning a once-forbidden option into a "future initiative" in official policy texts. This is dangerous.
Successive Japanese cabinets have long barred the military use of nuclear energy under the Atomic Energy Basic Law, enacted in 1955, which stipulates the peaceful use of nuclear power. In 1965, the Japanese government issued an explicit interpretation prohibiting nuclear energy from being used as propulsion for SDF vessels - an interpretation that has remained in force to this day. "Now, Takaichi's remarks on considering the introduction of nuclear‑powered submarines mark a major conceptual breach of Japan's Atomic Energy Basic Law and the long‑standing Three Non‑Nuclear Principles it underpins," said Lü Yaodong, research fellow at the Institute of Japanese Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
He noted that this was not a spur-of-the-moment statement, but rather an intentional, aggressive step aligned with the revision of three security documents scheduled for this year, a move with significant timing implications. The proposal to introduce nuclear-powered submarines is intended to lay the groundwork for provisions in the revised security documents, push for the inclusion of nuclear-powered submarines in Japan's medium- and long-term defense plans, and pave the way for the further undermining of the Three Non-Nuclear Principles.
"Japan is using nuclear-powered submarines as a breakthrough point to challenge the nuclear taboo established after World War II; this is a very dangerous shift," Lü said.
In fact, elevating nuclear-powered submarines from a taboo topic to a top-tier policy agenda is a major step in Japan's years-long, incremental process of breaking through postwar military constraints.
Zhou Yongsheng, professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, said submarines are inherently offensive platforms for open-ocean operations; equipping them with nuclear propulsion is not merely a "conventional equipment upgrade," but a crucial step toward military nuclear capability.
Takaichi's decision to raise this issue in the legislative arena of the House of Representatives had a very clear purpose: to publicly build momentum, secure lawmakers' support, and pave the way for subsequent policy and legislative amendments, according to Zhou.
Zhou further pointed out that Japan's Three Non-Nuclear Principles prohibit the manufacture, possession and introduction of nuclear weapons. A nuclear submarine can be understood as "half a nuclear weapon": Although it is not a full-fledged nuclear bomb, the combination of nuclear propulsion and an offensive submarine platform will effectively introduce military nuclear propulsion capabilities into the SDF.
Even more serious is the chain reaction. "Once the Pandora's box of introducing nuclear-powered submarines is opened, it will set a strongly negative precedent and trigger a chain reaction of regional arms races. If this comes to pass, it will cast a shadow over the global nuclear non-proliferation regime," Zhou warned.
Today, politicians in Tokyo speak of "seriously considering" this matter as if it were no big deal, but history will not treat it lightly: When nuclear-powered submarines go from being a taboo to a legislative proposal, Japan is not merely revising an ordinary policy, but tearing off the seal on the very aspect of the postwar order that should never be touched."
Japan's government says its stepping back from plans to explicitly include the acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines in its three core security documents by [2026's] end. Instead Japan's government says its considering a scaled-down commitment to launch related research.
Meanwhile South Korea (SK) is full steam ahead on nuc sub development.
Even Trump's Russian cash bagmen can't rescue Trump's drop in US approval ratings pre-MidTerm Elections (that occur Nov 3 (US Time) 2026).
The Straits Times reports October 12, 2026: https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/prominent-republican-senator-says-trumps-russian-diesel-deal-may-be-illegal
"WASHINGTON - Republican and Democratic US senators called on President Donald Trump on Oct 11 to “reverse course” on his diesel supply deal with Russia, saying it runs counter to US law barring imports of energy until Russia ends its aggression against Ukraine.
“Congress explicitly banned Russian energy imports in 2022 to prevent American dollars from financing (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s brutal war against Ukraine,” the seven senators - four of Trump’s fellow Republicans and three Democrats - said in a statement.
They also said that the [Trump] administration failed to consult with Congress or submit any explanation of its decision, something also required by law.
“The United States should not provide Putin with a financial lifeline while Russia continues to kill Ukrainian civilians. The Administration must immediately reverse course,” the statement said.
It was only the latest bipartisan criticism of Trump’s deal, a shift from his party’s near-unanimous support for Trump’s foreign policy decision weeks before Nov 3 midterm elections that will determine whether his Republicans will retain their control of Congress.
It was issued by Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Curtis of Utah and Democrats Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
Tillis had said earlier on Oct 11 that the diesel deal may be illegal and would put American lives at risk."