Hacker News Reader

Comment by droopyEyelids | Hacker News Reader

My god the tone in this article is flippant for talking about the scariest part of our “eliminate all human life” deterrence system.

And stupidly jingoistic in how it scaremongers that the five chinese subs could hit the USA while being smug about how the USA deploys five times as many of them.

View on HN

I thought the article was pretty level headed. Here’s the status, here’s the future, here’s what AUKUS is doing, here’s what China is doing and is capable of doing. What smugness or jingoism were you referring to?

I actually found it refreshing to not have a “journalists’” opinions and world-view slathered all over the article. I’m smart enough to form my own opinions about things, thanks.

Not all submarines are about eliminating all human life. Some are of course, but the majority are about more conventional war where you want to eliminate the enemies willingness to fight on, but you expect to survive and be okay after the war is over. (not as good as if there was no war of course, but you don't get to choose when there is war)

What did you want, more trembling and hand wringing? This was a discussion of stealth capabilities, the problem of nukes is adjacent but not the focus.

And I believe the article said the US has 167 subs, you made up "thousands"

Edit: Actually 67, as gilleain points out

Uhm.

> The People’s Liberation Army Navy is the largest navy in the world, but it currently operates only 12 nuclear-powered submarines, a rather small number compared to the 67 attack subs and ballistic-missile subs of the U.S. Navy.

Is this the paragraph you are both referring to? So 12 and 67, not 5 and (5 * 5) = 25 ... or 167 and thousands?

Yup, will edit to correct

Forget it causal, it’s China town.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com