On Apr 29, 2022, 3:26:00 AM Chinese/PRC Anonymous said:
"Anonymous said...
Chinese here.
I was always baffled by Australia's paranoia about our country. You are thousands of kilometers away from us and there are no geopolitical disputes between our countries. You were concerned about increasing Chinese military power and its possible influence in your region. It was an unfounded fear in my opinion. But you made it a reality yourselves. China can not watch a middle power spending a disproportionate amount of money on its military and putting most of that into American made force projection assets to be a good ancillary to the US forces in a possible war against it.
I think you guys should stop thinking about force projection and just be a peaceful country like Ireland or New Zealand. You'd spend less money and you wouldn't lose people in American "police action"s for nothing.
Apr 29, 2022, 3:26:00 AM"
Pete Comment
The Anonymous comment, voicing arguments I've never read before, may be authentic.
If authentic I feel privileged that a military and economic superpower, like China, finds the time to comment on my wee blog.
Interesting is the suggestion that:
"I think you guys should stop thinking about force projection and just be a peaceful country like Ireland or New Zealand. You'd spend less money and you wouldn't lose people in American "police action"s for nothing."
This is the type of suggestion Soviet Russia successfully made to Finland in the 1940s and "Putinic" (you saw first use here) Russia made more recently and unsuccessfully to Ukraine.
Ireland, because of its geographical position, is protected at a higher strategic level by the UK and NATO. Meanwhile New Zealand enjoys some protection by Australia and the US. Australia enjoys nuclear umbrella coverage and conventional weapon support from the US with more sporadic support from the UK, France and to an extent, India.
China is suggesting that Australia reorganise its foreign and defence policies and minimise Australia's defence spending. This Finlandization would favour China's aims for increased and unopposed strategic influence in Australia's region. Also Australia would need to rip up some long standing agreements, including those governing Pine Gap, ANZUS and, of course, AUKUS.
While I disagree with the arguments of "Chinese/PRC Anonymous" I look forward to more comments from him/her.
28 comments:
For AUKUS Chinese military expansion (?) in the Solomon islands, is unacceptable. This "business" must be smothered, in the egg. How does Indonesia feel about this? You must preserve their legal and operational ability to act swiftly and decisively when necessary. Like Israel... Regards and Shabbat Shalom!
At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, I think the PM of Solomon islands is playing way above his diplomatic pay grade and likely making a lethal miscalculation about securing his domestic position with unquestioning Chinese help (he thinks unquestioning !)...
The problem is that from Djibouti to Pakistan to Myanmar, nothing China does comes without 'strings' attached....(it is less a string and more an anchor chain around the neck)
In his hurry to secure his domestic position and also spite Australia, Solomon Islands government risks setting off a 'fire' that can easily burn out of control....
It seems to me that every 80-100 years the human race's proclivity to produce 'pyromaniac' politicians who wreck global peace is an incorrigible trait.
Hi Oleg and Ghalib
It is at the rumour stage that China may be moving towards dual use Solomons Islands airstrip improvements useable by the Chinese airforce and civilian aircraft. Give China time.
See an April 29, 2022 article at https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/chinese-companys-big-plans-for-aeronautical-hub-in-solomon-islands/news-story/d337157755e7291507c229194da11289
"Chinese company’s big plans for ‘aeronautical hub’ in Solomon Islands"
"One of China’s biggest defence and aerospace companies [AVIC] had big plans for the Solomon Islands, a new leaked document reveals.
The Solomon Islands reportedly signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with a Chinese company to transform the country into an “aeronautical hub” for the region more than two years ago.
The document, signed in China in November 2019, would have seen one of China’s largest defence and aerospace companies AVIC Commercial Aircraft upgrade almost three dozen airstrips in the Solomon Islands.
“Solomon [Islands] wishes to be part of the regional airline concept where Honiara would receive direct flights from China and become a regional hub,” according to the MOU, obtained by the ABC.
In return, the Solomon Islands government would buy six [turboprop island hop] aircraft from AVIC, with the sale depending on “further negotiations on price and concessional terms”.
While there seemed to be a “great deal of urgency in the [aviation] agreement … far more urgency than you find in many MOUs between China and the Pacific”, according to Australian National University’s Graeme Smith, no further action appears to have been taken.
The agreement was signed just a few months after the Solomon Islands ended its 36-year relationship with Taiwan, and officially recognised Beijing.
Dr Smith told the ABC he believed the agreement was likely stalled by the Covid pandemic, which impacted international travel.
He said it was also worth noting that AVIC’s commercial arm was linked with the Chinese military and might have an interest in checking out airfields and other facilities in the country.
“Defence planners (in Australia) might be somewhat concerned at the involvement of this company,” he said.
There may be concern about information being conveyed back to the Chinese military but Dr Smith said this was getting into the realm of speculation.
“Is this company going to build a base in Solomon Islands? Probably not, it’s not really what they do. But certainly, they have extremely strong ties to the Chinese military.”"
The audacity to tell another country that you should be peaceful like Ireland while forgetting the Irish civil wars. How much egoistic needs to be while opening bases on the mouth of Australia. The Chinese justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine over NATO expansion, but the same standards don't apply to others.
To Anon, those days are long gone when the Chinese were able to indoctrinate a foreign population with such propoganda. If you are a foreign national with citizenship, you took an oath. At least be true to yourself.
Hi Pete
On this subject a French SSN Rubis class and a USN SSN Virginia Bl III class (USS Indiana)have been spotted (photos) in broad daylight entering Faslane ,( RN SSN Astute base)on the Clyde on April 26 and 27.It seems to follow joint ASW exercices off the Norvegian coast
Confirmation that all available SSBN Triomphant class (3 out of 4 ) have left for patrol, L'ile Longue naval base ,close to Brest. First time this occured.(Source Ouest France the local paper)
French concern of a preemptive Russian strike? Message to Russia ?Probably both
Like others I find the comments of China Anonymous breathtaking in their arrogance and clumsy manipulative intent. China Anonymous speaks as though nothing happened before the AUKUS agreement to cause Australia to shift its foreign policy. Australia signing AUKUS was not paranoia - it was Australia finally recognising the reality of Chinese aggression. Most Australian critics would say AUKUS was too late, not too soon.
Chinese economic sanctions since 2019 have already cost Australia billions of $ in trade. The Australian wine industry alone lost over $1 billion per annum when China blocked Aussie wine. The combined cost of China preventing coal, wheat, barley, wine etc is close to $10 billion/year. Australian citizens have been held without trial in China for literally years, with no public release of the evidence on which they are held.
Then there was the Chinese list of “14 grievences” against Australia, many of which related to internal Australian laws China wanted changed. What country would tolerate that level of interference in its internal politics?
So why does China Anonymous say this? It is not for domestic Chinese political consumption. It is not likely to change Australian opinions, but only confirm perceptions. It also confirms the extent to which China monitors social media.
The Chinese intervention in Solomon Islands politics is far beyond the “second island chain”. It is far beyond the sphere of influence China says it wishes to control. It is clearly Chinese imperialism in action in geopolitics.
Hi Pete,
What an interesting comment for Mr/Ms Chinese Anonymous to make.
Conveniently not mention things they have done, and say that things will be good, trust us.
Ignore the fact that they now sail near Australia's coastline. Why do that if, by their own admission, are so far away? Why....nevermind...there's so much that could be mentioned that I think many of us know anyway.
Have a good one,
Andrew
I am the same guy. I stay anonymous because my google account e-mail is my name and surname, which I don't want to expose. I am a normal Chinese citizen living in China. I know English (which unfortunately is still a rare skill here) and I am interested in geopolitics and the defense industry. So I have nothing to do with the PLA or the government. Usually pro-China narrative on Western internet spaces is automatically considered state funded PRC propaganda so I applaud you for not calling me a bot or troll immediately. That is what happens most of the time on most military-related forums to many Chinese and pro-China writers.
That's said I disagree with your answer and generally Anglo-Saxon concept of defense (Note: Some Anglos find this term racist but the term "Anglos" is commonly used in China to refer US, UK, Australia, NZ and Canada, it doesn't have a negative meaning). Anglo concepts of defense have very little to do with the defense of their nations.
For example the US defense spending has nothing to with defense. The US government could ensure the security of its country from foreign invaders by spending like 10% of its current "defense" budget. It is a nuclear power with a 330 m population and is separated by oceans from any possible invaders. Yet it feels the need for having a comedic level overmatch against any possible country. Just 10 years ago the discussions on American think tanks, media and military blogs were about the capabilities required to bomb China. As you can imagine that means the capability to overwhelm land-based aviation and defenses of another great power 10000 km away by just using forward bases and aircraft carriers. Furthermore, the US was to capable of doing that to both Russia and China at the same time according to the media articles of the early-2010s. This is what the US means by "defense". It is about the defense of global hegemony, not the country, thus the need for an 800 billion USD budget and pleas to its allies to increase their spending.
Other Anglos except New Zealand have the same mentality to a lesser extent. For example, the UK feels threatened by its decreasing influence/status in the international system and is trying to stop that by procuring aircraft carriers and getting itself involved in Asia-Pacific affairs. Australia feels threatened by the growth of a country 6000 km away.
Continued...
Chinese comment continuing...
The thing is regardless of how Anglos define their extremely maximalist "defense" policies these policies are perceived as aggression abroad. For example from China's perception Australia's spending profile is a threat. A genuine one. Australia is clearly overspending on its military and putting most of it into expeditionary capabilities. Now that includes SSNs too. A perfect tool for a country like Australia to aid a US campaign against China. It is also a horrible use of money for defense needs (normal definition not American). They are submarines so they can penetrate the Chinese A2/AD zone, and they are nuclear powered thus 6000 km distance becomes mostly irrelevant. Of course, China is going to react this. China probably had no interest in military influence expansion into Oceania, now it definitely has. The best antidote against force projection is projecting force yourself so that the other side is deterred from joining a war against you in the first place. Also, it has them spend more on actual defense rather than force projection.
I argued for Australia's Finlandization because that's how it can avoid joining needless American actions that cost it money and lives in return for vague defense commitments. The US is protecting Australia and New Zealand from what exactly? Re-rise of Imperial Japanese? PRC invasion or bombing campaign? We have priorities such as being able to end RoC/Taiwan despite US intervention, deterring India from invading Pakistan or Aksai Chin, being able to neutralize the US air power in Japan and the Japanese air force, and in near future, securing our SLOC to the Middle East and Africa. China has a lot to gain from having these capabilities and a lot to lose from not having these. Australia was not even a discussion in Chinese military forums until the last few years. Both countries had no reason to confront each other. China had nothing to gain from having offensive capability against Australia and had nothing to lose from lacking it. In fact we had good economic relations.
Speaking of alliances, I would have no problems with China scrapping supposedly defensive relationships that are causing it to send soldiers to distant lands for no reason every few years. And for Australia's case, there is actually no such offensive commitment by Australia. For example, where is the clause about aiding the US in a Taiwan contingency or Afghanistan war in ANZUS?
Dear Arpit Kanodia
It is obvious that I am referring to Ireland's foreign and military affairs. In China, we don't universally agree with Russia's invasion as it is immoral and bad for China but we think they were provoked heavily by the USA. We also think the USA is using Ukraine as a sacrificial pawn to weaken Russia and stop Europe's drift away from the USA.
You know what's funny? Ukraine's NATO ambitions and NATO's plans to include Ukraine (which were just empty promises to provoke Russia into invading in my opinion BTW) were justified by the USA under the sovereignty of nations. It was actually one of the few times the US was consistent with international law. Isn't the Solomon Islands a sovereign nation? What gives the right to the US to visit it with a very friendly committee including the Indo-Pacific commander? We should be the ones accusing the US of applying double standards. Besides that Australia is being clearly hostile to China and obtaining very specific capabilities to harm it. Read my other comments if they are available. It started before our deal with the SI.
Hi Pete,
Off topic, France’s Naval Group bows out of P75I submarine build program.
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1520272506715660288?cxt=HHwWgICjycjyi5kqAAAA
/Kjell
Pete
The Labor opposition policy launch on the weekend included national security. They are demanding a policy review but are continuing with overall defence posture procurement.
https://www.alp.org.au/policies/national-security
Building nuclear submarines is specifically included in the list of commitments. There were some pointed references to current government failures to deliver capability on time.
To Anon, firstly there is no "WE" here. You kill our troops, and suddenly there is a "WE" now? How much more duplicious you need to be? I am telling you now, because no one else going to tell you, no common Indian trust you, we hate you. Get this thing clear. There might be some people, like Pravin Swahney, but 2-3 peole, thats it.
Furthur, Indians are more connected with west, than we ever be with China.
Now coming to Solomon Island, claiming whole Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, while propping Pakistan SL against India comes under which international law? By which international law you came to F4 of Pangong Tso? There is saying in hindi/punjabi "Sadda kutta kutta, tuada kutta tommy". Meaning your double standards are justified, but not mine? Its sound more funny in Punjabi.
So, seriously , dont even try. Its not going to work. I am going to be blunt, ultimate goal should be destruction of PRC and CCP.
After that you still think there is a "WE" here, good, it be beneficial for us in planting true spies in Shanghai (unlike those poor people).
There's a wonderful stream of consciousness from China. "The plot" as a whole repeats the stories that Putin tells the West about Ukraine. Вut here 6000 kilometers, hm...
China Anon wants to be in on the discussion because he is into the military hardware scene, but he is limited by the CCP. He has to have his current viewpoint, or he gets a visit from Big White and friends to go on a short notice long vacation.
Furthermore, he is clearly ignorant of the nature, history and promises of communism. Which makes sense, he was born into it, educated by it, and at some level works for it. They have been lying to him for years.
China Anon, if you want to make a difference, falling in line to avoid the camps is not going to work. Get an umbrella, find a tank to stand in front of, help the Uyghurs, stop beating pets to death, use your Google to learn the truth about Mao, Pot, Stalin, etc et al ad infinitum. But mostly, stop telling the free to stop being afraid of the commies that promise to take them over one day. We don't believe you.... you're a Communist.
BTW, your boys are on level with the Russians.... we Anglos are WAY better than the Ukrainians, have more combat vets, a professional enlisted cadre, and better toys. Maybe y'all should try being more peaceful.
RH Kelley USN Gator Navy Boats
Deter India from invading Pakistan or Aksai Chin??
LoL!! chinese people sure don't know about history. How will they, when ccp destroyed thier own history. You guys illegally occupy cok along with pakistani pok. Aksai Chin is part of India & china know that cpec will always be under danger in the pok section. pok is Legally Indian territory & it will be taken back. If India starts chinese kind of historical claims then you can be sure you, will be running like headless chicken.
You are for sure ccp paid but trying in vain to hide it. Your tone & way of delivering reply clearly show that. The days of dreaming of becoming the sole regional power of Asia is long gone & as they say Karma will always punish you for your evil acts. You sure are providing comedy material here. Hope ccp pays you well for your service.
I wanted to add something similar to the Chinese anonymous
1. China-India border problems can be easily fixed if Zhou En-Lai and Deng Xiaoping's 1958 and 1987 positions are implemented, namely, China gives some land back in Aksai Chin around Depsang and gets land parcels in Uttarakhand, some token land in Arunachal or 'South Tibet'. Deng called it the North East for the North West exchange (from India's geographical view). The border would have settled largely on 1956-1960 claim lines of China, funny, isn't it?
2. Problems occur as China's claim lines have shifted from Rutog in Tibet in 1951 to Khurnak/Pangong Tso in 1956 and then further west into Depsang, Kongka Pass and to the middle of Pangong Tso by 1960. How can you negotiate in good faith if the 'traditional and customary' borders of China are shifting all the time? Please visit the National Library of China in Beijing and look for yourself. There is no need to trust Indians like me.
3. China obsesses with 'not losing face', but unfathomably, denies the same courtesy to its negotiating partners. The simple problem is that Nehru misread China's domestic problems while Mao misread Nehru's naturally haughty way of speech as being diabolic. Neither position was true. If Mao or Deng or even Xi had shown some 'pragmatic flexibility' (forget tall terms like neighborly goodwill or brotherhood etc..), the border problem would have been solved long ago with China gaining a net 40,000 sq.km of land and a 3,500 km long non-hostile, tranquil border.
Instead, China went ahead and gave nukes' to pakistan and decided that simmering heat along the India border is the best tactic coupled with demands that no self respecting nation can fulfill without total loss of face and political suicide...What is so difficult about making minor concessions having gained the most important territories in Xinjiang and Tibet? Even in the best possible case for India, it is likely any concession in Depsang will get matched sq.km for sq.km in other sectors...such a pity isn't it?
Hi Everyone including Anonymous [at May 2, 2022, 4:00:00 PM]
I've been in Canberra for a few days which has diverted me from my duties at Submarine Matters.
I would liked to have said that the Nuclear-Powered Submarine Taskforce is relaxed about Australia's Federal Election (which goes to the polls, May 21, 2022) but understand trepidation rules for some.
The Taskforce is covering the whole range of AUKUS nuclear submarine matters - see https://www.defence.gov.au/about/taskforces/nuclear-powered-submarine-task-force for links.
If Labor wins its defence policy review will be a standard activity of an incoming Government.
The Nuclear-Powered Submarine Taskforce via the Secretary of the Defence Department will have to generate many Briefing Papers for the National Security Committee of Cabinet. The Taskforce are already drafting Briefs just in case Labor wins.
Regards Pete
If China Anon is authentic his comments (at Apr 30, 2022, 9:54:00 PM and Apr 30, 2022, 9:55:00 PM)
would need to be first cleared by China's vetting authorities. Two of the authorities include the Ministry of State Security (MSS) and PLA Intelligence.
Nothing gets out of the Great FireWall of the Chinese internet concerning Chinese Defence and Foreign Policy without those authorities checking it and permitting it.
So China Anon lives in fear of writing the wrong things. He may be an actual person, like a retired PLA official or maybe a Propaganda Writer still employed by the Chinese Government.
One has to feel sorry for him. He just doesn't get the idea of Australia as a sovereign democratic country that can choose its own defence alliances.
China Anon lives in doubt and attempts to spread doubt.
If we told him that he is ruled by a group of billionaire CCP capitalists who continue to rule China he might quietly recognise this but cannot reveal that he knows it.
Anyway, as Submarine Matters is an equal opportunity discussion site, even China PRC commenters are welcome.
Regards Pete
Some memorable words from Arpit Kanodia [Apr 29, 2022, 11:28:00 PM and May 2, 2022, 8:26:00 PM]
and from GhalibKabir [May 4, 2022, 4:28:00 PM]
India has the misfortune of being on China's border so Indian troops and civilians suffer China's aggression.
China's salami slicing (gradual power projection) into Indian territory should serve as a warning that other countries on China's border (Taiwan included) need to arm themselves and form alliances with powerful friends. India has built nuclear weapons against China and China's vassal state, Pakistan.
Even Russia and Pakistan may see the day when China turns on them.
China may consider itself ruled by Communists but China is a Capitalist country which coerces countries with threats, trade and Debt Trap deals.
As Russia is further weakened by the Ukraine War (of Putin's making) China will extend loans to keep the Russian economy afloat. Sooner or later China will demand the loan interest (or collateral) that Russia must pay.
If Russia refuses to sell oil and gas to China at very cheap prices one day China may annex the actual Russian territories where oil and gas are extracted.
Pete@May 4, 2022, 5:55:00 PM
It pays to remember irredentist Chinese territorial claims extend till present day Vladivostok on the pacific coast. The Russians likely are deeply worried on the inside.
That only 'maximalist claims being satisfied 100% is the only acceptable outcome' seems a rather unhelpful and frankly needlessly extremist position to be adopting...
Afterall by the same yardstick (contemporaneous Mughal era vs Qing era), India's borders should lie between Kandahar and Herat and also include large chunks of Balochistan, way deep into the western banks of the Indus..I am sure there are many traceable and equally justifiable claims all over the world that other nationalities can make.
That such issues are festering in the 21st century is deeply saddening..
PS: TKMS is unlikely to be back for the 75I SSK deal, I don't how they will handle the 'single vendor' situation with Daewoo for the KSS-III SSK, a G2G deal with SK could be one way out as the KSS-III has specs that the IN clearly is looking for in the 75I, namely, working AIP and VLS cells. One hopes Modi spoke about that to German Chancellor Scholz to ensure no IP objections from TKMS to Daewoo.
Where do we stop then? it so disappointing
The world is outgrowing energy production. This will make energy producers like the US more favorable in this environment. Not so much the PRC. As for Anon looking forward to better SLOC
from the energy producing areas, it does not look very encouraging. While some may expect the US to slog it out with PRC in the SCS that is not what will happen. The US will ably continue to control the SLOC and resist the direct confrontation. Your English is excellent Anon. I wonder if you were one of my students many years ago.
Hi GhalibKabir [at May 4, 2022, 7:21:00 PM]
Some good points. Even if Russia "wins" the war in Ukraine, Russia's military and economy will be weaker - especially compared to rising China.
This will be the subject of my first Report to Donors this month.
Regards Pete
This war will be remembered as the classic failure. Hubris. Napoleon in 1812, Hitler invading
USSR in 1941 because he thought a Stalin purge had weakened the regime. Who would have thought
that Putin would lead the second wave of deglobalization after Trump? Will wonders never cease? How long before Perth is ready for the first V? Can anyone imagine the anguish in PRC
watching the Ukraine debacle?
Arpit Kanodia
"You kill our troops,"
You killed Chinese too. So what?
"and suddenly there is a "WE" now?"
That we obviously refer to the Chinese not you.
"no common Indian trust you, we hate you. Get this thing clear. There might be some people, like Pravin Swahney, but 2-3 peole, thats it."
Of course you hate us. Your governments fed you with hate of China and Muslims to hide their dismal economic management from the electorate. Sorry for being blunt. India's track record over the last 70 years is bad. In a country with elections that means a lot of bogeymen. For India those bogeymen are China and Muslims. And no, I follow a lot of forums. Most Indians are a lot more moderate compared to you.
"Furthur, Indians are more connected with west, than we ever be with China. "
Normal. You were a British colony for centuries and you didn't have a Mao. China is a country that is being demonized for around 200 years. It never stopped for us for different reasons throughout that 200 years. And currently, you are not the challenger to the current hegemon. We are.
"claiming whole Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh,"
That claim is inherited from the RoC. Likely will be kept until China and India become more friendly toward each other. It is useful since it forces India to watch mountains rather than spending its budget on actual capabilities that can hurt China.
"propping Pakistan"
The same reason applies. Also, China's relations with Pakistan have become an actual friendship. I wish their economy was larger.
"ultimate goal should be destruction of PRC and CCP."
No, it shouldn't be. Unrealistic goals are counterproductive. India has a lot to accomplish before it can challenge China.
Naturally Submarine Matters prefers comments remain civil and respectful.
This blog's commentary is quite negative towards China. More than many forums I saw. Anyway. Indian comments are usual though...
First I would like to answer who think I will be called to the police station or something. I won't be. Criticism of the government in China is allowed. Just spend 5-10 mins on Weibo (our Twitter). And we are the country with the most protests. Since we don't vote for the government that is our primary method of displaying disapproval.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/01/how-china-stays-stable-despite-500-protests-every-day/250940/
The only two topics you have to keep clear of are the legitimacy of the CPC rule and secessionism.
There are misconceptions about China's relations to Russia. Vladivostok dispute has ended. In fact, China ended its disputes with 12 out of its 14 land neighbors, sometimes ceding territory. So that facesaving argument is moot. China's territorial claims are inherited from the preceding RoC and PRC has shown the willingness to compromise if needed. We are not going to ruin our relations with Russia for a piece of land we don't even claim anymore. But we are definitely going to aid Russia more in its incoming turbulent times to make it more Asian. Russia only started reciprocating China's friendly gestures after it was rejected by the West. Their first choice is obvious. China needs to and will treat Russia even better to have it turn its face to the east permanently. Going after their lands is just asking for pro-Westernism in Russia. That would be followed by a color revolution which means China would end up with a very hostile nuclear armed state on its border. A border that is very long and otherwise problemless... I don't know what you think of us but we are neither stupid nor evil enough to take advantage of a supposedly weakened Russia. And that "weakened" Russia still has enough nukes to incinerate China.
"If we told him that he is ruled by a group of billionaire CCP capitalists who continue to rule China he might quietly recognise this but cannot reveal that he knows it."
I can. China is capitalist. Its socialism is just a future goal that stays there to be lip service to socialists in China and beyond. After all just the existence of private property is enough to rule it out as a socialist country. And if you think China is corrupt now you should have seen it during the 1990s. We used to put cash money into folders we were submitting to the government offices, otherwise, it would wait for months to get processed. Thankfully lower and middle level corruption got eliminated. The upper level is still problematic.
Hi China Anonymous/Anon [at May 16, 2022, 11:56:00 AM]
Note that I've reproduced your comment for further discussion at "China Anon's 2nd Comment to Submarine Matters" dated May 16, 2022 at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/05/china-anons-2nd-message-to-submarine.html
Regards Pete
Post a Comment