The Anglo-Saxon Tripartite Nuclear Sub Pact - Australia's Role as I see it

My humble take on Australia, a country I admire and like very much if I were to leave her politicians aside, wakakaka, in her very recent participation in the new Biden-led Anglo-Saxon Tripartite Nuclear Sub Pact (and ampu-ed eagerly by UK) - I reckon the sad issue may just be condensed into the 4 following points:

(a) Australia's willingness to be captive to anything led by or involving the USA. Australia has faithfully followed the US global military adventures since the Korean War in the 50's. This faithfulness has been bred from a factoid, mostly a self-convincing belief that the USA came to directly help Australia in WWII, when the reality was that the Americans needed Oz as a springboard location to counter-attack the Japs in SE Asia especially in the Philippines, and then Guam, Saipan, the Marina Islands and finally Japan.

One previous Australian PM even boasted indirectly of such an subordinate subservience to Washington DC, and preened like an insufferable peacock at every praise from US Presidents. Seemingly, to be a deputy to the World Sheriff was/is considered (to him and some other PMs) a distinguished high honour. That behaviour epitomised the 'Tai-Kor'-ness of the USA to Australia.

(b) In recent times Australia has been smarting badly from the rebuffs, rejections and rebukes in trade relations from China. Oz is too proud to climb down from her highfalutin but unnecessary stand of criticizing China severely on a number of alleged issues (Wuhan, Uighurs, Tibet, South China Sea, etc) in compliant acquiescence to the political dictates of the USA. The AUKUS pact serves as a surrogate body for Oz to channel and vent her pent-up "demons" at those Chinese, wakakaka.

The sad irony of the fallout has been the USA benefiting from China's marginalisation of Australia in trade - the instigator benefits whilst the dumbo loses but blames the loss on a customer.

(c) Oz is in reality a small power limited to regional conflicts but has always fantasized about being among the super-powers in world affairs, and the AUKUS pact provides such a possible scenario.

(d) In reality, sad to say, the Yanks just needs extra (sacrificial) 'bodies' in any likely conflict with China (or even North Korea), and a willing captive like Oz does gnam gnam fulfil its sinister aim - the nuclear sub pact has been a juicy enticement, one which may even lead to the unthinkable for Australians, that those nuclear subs may (or even 'will') one day be armed with nuclear weapons. Why would one need a nuclear sub but not nuclear weapons? That's akin to being a half-pregnant woman.

Overall, it doesn't brood well for Oz. Sad that the current evangelistic but quite incompetent PM has committed Oz to a nasty nuclear pact aim at China.

P/S

There has been some misinformation about nuclear versus non-nuclear submarines - whilst it's correct nuclear subs have unlimited range and better time endurance submerged, limited only by food stocks, nuclear submarines are actually far noisier (not more silent) than diesel-electrical subs.