Today, while chillin' in the DoMain of Heas, I stumbled across an item that got me thinking. The official Chinese Xinhua News Agency reported today that a mechanical failure aboard a Chinese submarine has killed 70 crew members.
"Are SUBs really the WAY?"
This led me to thoughts of our own troubles with Subs, right here in the Great White North. My question is this: Why is the Submarine, arguably one of the greatest inventions next to the Reuben sandwich and Stealth fighter, so prone to serious bouts of whackness?
To answer this question, I have decided to study three examples of whack-ass subs, in the hopes of finding some common ground.
First off, let's take a look at today's breaking news. As could be expected, the Chinese were tight lipped about any details (please remember guys, China IS the second world power, and we ARE very much in the middle of what I like to call The Frozen War... but more on this another time). What they did tell us in their brief report was that the accident occurred "recently" on a conventional (i.e. non-nuclear) submarine in Chinese waters, east of the Neichangshan islands. For those without a remote-control rice cooker or a post-grad degree in geography, the islands are just off the coast of Liaoning province, northeast of Beijing. If you still don't know where that is, may I suggest you dig a tunnel through the center of the earth until you emerge on the other side. Xinhua also reported that the sub was on an exercise at the time and that the men died as a result of "mechanical malfunction". No further details on how the sailors died, or much of anything else for that matter. The report said the vessel had been towed back to port, but of course, which port that is remains classified.
CASE 1 Conclusion: Subs are whack.
BUT!!! While we the privileged know that subs are whack, to most, they seem very cool. Now imagine you had a broke-ass military that was basically the joke of the industrialized world. What better way to smooth over public perception than adding a few of those fancy toys we like to call submarines. Only a world-class military would have subs, right?
"Only a world-class military would have subs, right?"
So with this in mind, the Canadian government purchased 4 submarines from Britain in 1998. These subs are coming over from the reknowned and prestigious British Royal Navy. Let us all say "oooooh", "aaaaaah", and gracefully accept a pat on the back from the Public Relations folks. Not only that, but our frugal Defence Minister Art Eggleton said that the subs were a great bargain, costing only $750 Million Canadian dollars. That's about a quarter of the cost of buying new ones, so let us all say "whew", smile contentedly, and modestly accept a pat on the back from all the penny-pinching budget folks.
Except there was one problem, these 4 subs were the naval equivalent of rusty, old Pintos. The subs we received have dented hulls, cracked exhaust valves, rusting, issues with ventilation systems, and have even experienced flooding. The Australians thought about buying the same diesel powered Upholder-class subs, but concluded that they had faulty torpedo hatches and potentially unsafe power plants.
"These 4 subs were the naval equivalent of rusty, old Pintos. The subs we received have dented hulls, cracked exhaust valves, rusting, issues with ventilation systems, and have even experienced flooding"
Now assuming that even if these subs were in fair condition and seaworthy (which they are not!), do we really need them? Or is this all just PR fluff to beef up the image of the Canadian Forces? I'm afraid to tell you that it's all PR crap, it's just that this time it hit the fan. Still, our government is content to eat shit with a smile on their faces, continually downplaying this newest mismanaged military project. This adds to the pile of six other examples of misspent military money (remember the Sea Kings?), with the taxpayers footing a bill of an estimated $4 billion.
So just what do we need these subs for anyway? The government touted them as providing the capability of patrolling both our Atlantic and Pacific borders simultaneously. Somehow, increasing your complement of subs from 3 rust-buckets (prior existing subs, decommissioned in the summer of 2000) to 4, magically improves our defensive capabilities from coast to coast. Also, the subs do not have the ability to patrol the Arctic Ocean. This means their primary role will be to intercept illegal fishing and/or immigrant ships. Would we not be better served then, at a fraction of the cost, with a fleet of retired fishing vessels modified with mounted weapons and staffed with Navy sailors and former fishermen? This is the question posed by Scott Taylor, editor of Ottawa's Esprit de Corps magazine, who so eloquently states "If that's all the subs will do, they are too powerful for the job. It's like putting a sniper in a football stadium for crowd control." 'Nuff said.
CASE 2 Conclusion: Subs are whacked. And our subs are cracked.
Finally, I'd like to bring your attention to something which has received no media coverage whatsoever, but affects millions worldwide and is a fundamental infringement on our daily freedoms. I am talking about Subway's new bread cut and the mysterious disappearance of the "old cut", a cut that is these days only whispered in secrecy for fear of the severe repercussions. But I'm getting ahead of myself, let's go back to the beginning.
Since the days of Grade 7, where I habitually sneaked off of our locked-down schoolyard during lunch break, I have enjoyed the convenience of Subway submarine sandwiches. These were always cut by what is known as the "U-Gouge", wherein the Sandwich Artist makes an incision down the length of the bread, hollowing out a little pocket which perfectly cradles the contents of the sub. This was an efficient method since many people get a whole lot of messy toppings on their subs, which are prone to spilling. Recently, last year, Subway's head office conducted some market research and as a result introduced a new cut. This was explained with a small sign posted in the restaurants indicating that one could still ask for the old U-Gouge if they preferred it. The new cut was horrible resulting in many leaks (of the sauces) and dents (of the bread) as the artists tried in vain to smush the sandwiches back together after being loaded with toppings. This was all acceptable because I would simply request my favourite old cut and there was no problem.
The New Cut
Then, after a few months, something strange happened. The sign disappeared. Subway employees simply assumed everyone wanted the new cut and would slice all sandwiches as such. When asking for the old U-Gouge cut I was met with blank stares and puzzling looks. These were the same artists who less than half a year ago, knew nothing else aside from the U-Gouge. Now they were telling me that they didn't know what I was talking about, and that this was the only cut they used. I was stunned. How could something like this happen in a free, democratic society? The working class had been silenced by the brute force of the Subway Corporate Head Office. This new world order was enforced by a Gestapo-like force of undercover Subway inspectors. I kid you not. These plain-clothes officers keep all the franchises in check, by instilling terror and paranoia amongst Subway staff. Posing as customers they order food and look for violations, issuing tickets for any that they find. The punishment for cutting sandwiches in the old U-Gouge style (no longer sanctioned by Big Brother head office) is a $ 300 fine. Unreal. A paying customer cannot have his sandwich the way he would like because those that serve him live in a world of constant fear; one comparable to that of the average US citizen. Thank God for freedom.
"Hey, could you please cut that the old way?"
"Listen buddy, if you want it your way, go to Burger King."
CASE 3 Conclusion: Subs are whack. Freedom is dead.
So what does all this mean? Why have I rambled at length with no clear thesis or conclusion in sight? Well, in terms of the common ground among the three cases, and in searching for the common factor which determines the whackness of any given sub, we have made some progress. I conclude that subs are indeed quite whack, due to their vulnerability to leaks and dents, resulting in flooding and stained pants. More importantly we have delved deeply into the underbelly of Corporate America. This may be a small example, but look at how easily we have been infiltrated, and we haven't even noticed. Remember, it's the little things in life that count, and big business wants to own those little things. All of them.
Fight the powers that be. Never bow down to the man.
One Love,
- The Madd Monk
Source Material:
Report Newsmagazine, "Canada's problem-plagued submarines will come into service three years behind schedule", 05/27/02
Guardian Unlimited, "No such thing as a free sub", 05/0702
Globe & Mail, "Accident kills crew of non-nuclear Chinese sub", 05/02/03
