6 ms·
Do we really need to OWN icebreakers? Maybe we could start a website where countries and companies who own icebreakers can operate them for the benefit of othe
by dingosity 3y ago
Do we really need to OWN icebreakers? Maybe we could start a website where countries and companies who own icebreakers can operate them for the benefit of other countries and companies who want to use them. They just walk to the shore in the Canadian north, click the "Call Icebreaker" button on the app and wait for an icebreaker someone else owns to arrive.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- omginternets 3y agoGenerally speaking, states try to avoid having critical dependencies on other states, because they become points of leverage for adversarial foreign policy. For the purposes of keeping America running, yes, we really do need to own icebreakers in the same way that we need to own powerplants, steel mills, chip foundries and and refineries.
- georgeg23 3y agoBut then market pressures for efficiency will lead to mergers and acquisitions...
- Alupis 3y agoVersus being quite literally held hostage by a non-cooperating foreign power for political gain? Things like energy independence sound cute and quaint until you find yourself being taken advantage of at best, or ground to a halt during armed conflict at worst.
- omginternets 3y agoYeah, and then we'll enter a cycle of repatriation when it gets painful enough. Generally speaking, it's precisely the bean-counter mentality of aggressive cost reduction (with a narrow definition of "cost") that gets us into this position to begin with. Robust systems need some overhead.
- munk-a 3y agoIn this case though we're talking about Canada - the Canadian and US economies are incredibly linked. Personally, I'm a Canadian who makes money examining the US healthcare market and reselling that data to other Americans - there's lot of crossover here.
- omginternets 3y agoI think it still applies, albeit much less than with an adversarial state like, say, China.
- thedaly 3y ago> Do we really need to OWN icebreakers? That would depend on one's strategic goals and priorities. Personally, I do not believe the US should be the world police so I don't think it is necessary.
- edrxty 3y agoI think in this case the US is mostly concerned with securing the increasingly lucrative exclusive economic zone north of Alaska. Anything beyond that we can use air power over sea power, now that we've given up on desert power.
- toss1 3y agoOK, the who would you suggest should be the world's police? The post-WWII world order is predicated on the agreement that the age of imperialism is over and that invasion by force to annex another country is illegitimate. It is obvious that all nations do not agree to this. E.g.: China on Tibet, Taiwan, 9-dashed line, etc., Russia in Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. Those authoritarian states think it is perfectly fine to use force or threats of force to occupy & annex other territories and peoples. The fact that we also have global shipping and travel at a relatively low cost (cheap enough to make & ship goods petty much anywhere-to-anywhere, and international travel is available to non-elites), is a direct result of US Navy keeping a lid on piracy. Anarchy, or unpoliced random aggression would be a very bad option. So, if the US does not do it, who do you think would do a better job, Putin, Xi, Kim, someone else?
- bigbillheck 3y ago> The post-WWII world order is predicated on the agreement that the age of imperialism is over and that invasion by force to annex another country is illegitimate. Why bother with the 'annex' part when you can just overthrow governments you don't like and replace them with ones you do?
- toss1 3y agoEven if that were still being done, it is obvious that the authoritarian states think annexing is very important (again, look at Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Tibet, Yuhigurs, etc.). But, nice try with the false equivalency and whataboutism.
- munk-a 3y agoAs a Canadian I fully support this approach - it's not like the US and Canada could ever effectively have highly contentious relations due to our economic interdependence... and we make good stuff up here, know how to build things that deal with ice and train our crews to deal with ice - ice breakers need special knowledge to operate safely and well.
- yardie 3y agoFun times when our Space Shuttle program shutdown we had to rely on Russian Soyuz to get astronauts to and from ISS. Well, whenever Russia didn't like something the US was doing, guess what the bargaining chip was?
- dghlsakjg 3y agoWe still are sending Astronauts on the Soyuz, even though we are also sending them up in the dragon capsule. (https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/russia-us-agree-additional-us-astronaut-flight-iss-interfax-2023-08-25/#:~:text=Under%20an%20agreement%20signed%20last,Soyuz%20MS%20during%202022-2024 https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/russia-us-agree-add....)
- Tangurena2 3y agoI was interested in Arctic tourism. Some of it happens on Russian nuclear powered icebreakers. For giggles, I thought I'd buy one if I won the powerball. No powerball is sufficient, I was looking at about $2.5 billion. And I'm pretty sure that it would be a violation of the NPT for Russia to sell me one. Although the white Persian cat with a diamond collar would merely be a violation of good taste.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago> Do we really need to OWN icebreakers? Maybe we could start a website i can't tell what is parody and whats real life
- dingosity 3y agoOh yeah. This was a snarky comment. Serves me right for trying to be clever over a text channel. It is very easy to misinterpret this as a legit comment.
- fragmede 3y agoAnyone interested in angel investing for my startup? It's like Uber, but for $50-100 million specialty ships of which there are only a handful in the world, owned and operated by only a few nations, one of which is currently sanctioned by the US government. Move fast and break ice!
- dingosity 3y agoI like the cut of your jib, @fragmede. Though it's probably more like "Move at a moderate speed and break ice." (Which DOES sound like my company's product development process.)
- dingosity 3y agoJust sort of realized I know a guy in San Francisco who owns an Icebreaker. So... I guess the answer is... yes, SOMEONE needs to own an Icebreaker.