Darin MacDonald

Brilliant video. Wonder how much it cost to have The Witcher do the voice over? Worth every penny (or is it pence)?

@metoyou99919097 @CovertShores This is the strangest, most incoherent 'bot reply I have ever had on Twitter/X. Bravo!

@dmacdonald77 @CovertShores well the lying genocide chimp will always be the lying genocide chimp but one interacts with the physical world at scale via tools & machines

@project4_4 That'd be amazing! When can we start working on it?

@dmacdonald77 Great work! How cool would it be if you could make a story map on your Great-Uncle on Project '44, and it would live on the story map for everyone to see? That is something our team wants to explore in the future

Small thread on the main Generals behind Market Garden 🧵 Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery (British 21st Army Group): Montgomery was the architect behind Operation Market Garden. His goal was to break through German lines by capturing key bridges and crossing the Rhine. While his leadership during the war was well-regarded, Market Garden's failure cast a shadow on his strategic judgment, as many felt he overestimated the chances of success and underestimated logistical challenges.

Thank you @graham_euan for this great articulation of the value of #AUKUS. The incoherence of the surrendered sovereignty arguments are baffling. aspistrategist.org.au/aukus-and-the-…

@project4_4 @JunoBeachCentre also did a podcast interview with me that I thought turned out really well. junobeach.org/podcast/a-farm…

@project4_4 Look forward to it. Feel free to check out the Web pages I created as an act of remembrance for my great-uncle who fought through the Scheldt with 4th Cdn Armd Div, 10th Inf Bgde, Algonquin Regiment. darinmacdonald77.wixsite.com/info

@project4_4 In the end, due to the priority for assets afforded to M-G, Simonds and the Canadian Corps struggled on in thier quest to clear the Scheldt. The first ship into Antwerp did not arrive until November as a result of these delays caused by the M-G Siren Song.

@project4_4 foreseen the requirement for secure lines of communications to sustain thier operations into Germany, and ought to have understood the necessity of having thier seaward flank securely held. M-G was a case of self-delusion and strategic distraction due to hubris.

@DoggyDog1208 @DarrenWoodward @Dr_M_Davis @australian Your argument falls into a category repeatedly espoused by those less familiar with the means of combat that contends new tech will make conventional human in the loop platforms obsolete within __ years. Those processes always take much longer than the tech profits hypothesise.

@DoggyDog1208 @DarrenWoodward @Dr_M_Davis @australian I once read a book by a guy who said something similar. I think he suggested aircraft dropping bombs on cities and factories that sustain a war effort would so undermine a state's ability to wage war that armies and navies would no longer be required. Italian lad. Douhet.

Just reading the latest attack on AUKUS by Gareth Evans in today's @australian (see below), and it has me riled up, so prepare for a longish response. Firstly... Strategic context matters, and the #AUKUS critics never address this in their arguments. Instead, its always about lashing out against the US-Australia alliance. This becomes annoying, and doesn't help the credibility of their argument. They never offer an alternative that is practical or credible to sticking with the United States. Let's be clear - we can't choose to disengage from the region, and going neutral will see defence spending skyrocket. Try 5% or 6% of GDP to replace all the capabilities lost from the US alliance. The alternative is we bend the knee to Beijing, and accomodate Chinese interests at all levels. More on that below... Back to AUKUS. The reason we are getting the SSNs is to deter a hegemonic #China that is not only threatening #Taiwan, but seeks to end US strategic primacy in the western Pacific, so as to enable a Chinese sphere of influence. The SSNs are part of a suite of capabilities for the ADF to work with allies to strengthen deterrence by denial as part of a broader US led approach of Integrated Deterrence. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that approach. If we talk about being 'sucked into a war', as suggested by Evans, its important to stress that it will be a war that will be started by China to militarily impose unification on Taiwan, against the wishes of the Taiwanese people. And, Taiwan is a liberal democracy, just like Australia. Think about that. Their future does matter.  The US is not going to start an unprovoked war against China - to suggest otherwise just ignores US policy and strategic culture. Now think about an Indo-Pacific after a successful Chinese invasion of Taiwan, in which US presence and influence has effectively ended. For Australia, having turned its back on its most important ally at its hour of greatest need, we find ourselves alone and exposed, in a Chinese dominated Indo-Pacific. This future is not a good one. In 2020, Beijing issued a list of 14 demands to Australia to restore the relationship, which had they been accepted by the then Coalition government, would have seen an end to Australia as a free and open liberal democracy. We would have become a Chinese vassal. We were right to refuse these demands from Beijing. In a future where Australia has walked away from AUKUS, and in doing so, ended the vital US-Australia strategic alliance, we'd immediately come under intense coercive pressure from Beijing to accomodate its interests, that would have serious domestic and foreign security implications. That list of 14 demands in 2020 (see smh.com.au/world/asia/if-…) would be a taste of what to expect in a Chinese-dominated Indo-Pacific.  By contrast, through supporting AUKUS, we strengthen an important element of Australia's vital relationship with its most important ally, the United States. That gives Australia a greater ability to work with the US and other key allies to deter China, and to avoid that pretty dark future of domination from Beijing. There is no loss of sovereignty, as claimed by Evans and co, particularly as it actually is in Australia's interest to deter China from establishing its own sphere of influence. We should work with the US, including in wartime. Once again - it would be China that start's the war - not the US. My point is that it is better to work with the United States, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom - and other liberal democracies, including Taiwan, to preserve a free and open Indo-Pacific and deter China. AUKUS is a key part of that process. Its why I'm a strong supporter of AUKUS, and I think it should be strengthened and even expanded in scope, particularly in relation to Pillar 2. Ending AUKUS would be a huge strategic error that would leave Australia more vulnerable and insecure.   Gareth Evans, Paul Keating and Bob Carr respond to Kim Beazley on AUKUS theaustralian.com.au/commentary/why… via @australian

@redunley Rubbish 🗑

“Ever since the German U-boat campaign of 1917, the only serious form of blockade has been unrestricted submarine warfare.” How did this complete and utter drivel get published?! lowyinstitute.org/the-interprete…