slick

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Iggy_Type_R

I disagree with you there. I think the biggest danger comes from not doing anything about it. Minority groups are holding the world at ransom at the moment, and no one is doing sh*t all about it. And so clubs will continue being blown up and civilians all over the world will keep dying for nothing. [/QUOTE


What is the world coming to ???

Austblue

I think maybe you misunderstood me. By visiting I was referring to tourist visits not our political presence or 'policing' force. By all means I agree that we shouldn't stand back and watch and should have an active involvement in taking action against extremist groups but my reference was to innocent/ignorant tourists wandering into potential minefields in beautiful yet dangerous areas.
As civilians in this situation we become extremely easy targets for these minority groups to make a statement.
I suppose what I'm trying to say by this is that although we shouldn't have to, given the questionable stability which we face at the moment we must exersice some thought about the travelling riskswhich we face such as this unfortunate atrocity. Just my 2 cents.

Bernie

Aus, let's both make a pledge that no matter what, neither of us will knowingly facilitate this post turning into a debate on Iraq!

Sunder, I can't say I like what you are suggesting about "regime building". What that implies is that we forcibly rebuild anyone we don't like in our own image. So much for tolerance.

Maybe if we left them alone in the first place, they might leave us alone as well.

Iggy_Type_R

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Austblue
[B]


I think maybe you misunderstood me. By visiting I was referring to tourist visits not our political presence or 'policing' force. By all means I agree that we shouldn't stand back and watch and should have an active involvement in taking action against extremist groups but my reference was to innocent/ignorant tourists wandering into potential minefields in beautiful yet dangerous areas.

AusS2000

Ahh, the ostrich 'head in the sand' approach. All I can really say to that is 'Too late!'.

2kturkey

A lot of rumour and conjecture here folks. I certainly don't know the facts and until I do know a little more I am not prepared to comment.

Right now, I feel very sorry for those who were caught in the inferno.

Sunder

Well, there are subtle ways and there are unsubtle ways, but at the end of the day, yes, you're right. Look at Korea, look at Afghanistan, look at Israel. Look at Iraq. (Oops, getting close to taboo) The United States, throughout the last half century or so, have trained locals, provided weaponery and intelligence support to enemies of their enemies. Essentially, what the US has been doing, has been removing governments that don't support American democracy and military/economic superiority, and put in place a government that does.

So... Let me ask you. Why did we have troops in East Timor? It wasn't so that we could "help" the locals put in place DEMOCRACY, the same democracy we enjoy in Australia, by any chance, was it? Why not let the Indonesians take over? Why intervene? Isn't it, in it's own subtle way, regime building?

I'm not saying that I completely approve of regime building. But if I take it back to the book I was reading, the other choice, would be to have massive defence forces, counter-terrorism forces, and an intelligence force that would be more or less Big Brother. It seems to me, the lesser of two evils, and if you look realistically (perhaps cynically) at the world around you, the lesser of two evils is what the world leaders chose.

I heard once, from a semi-reliable source, that in the late 1990s, the Australian SAS sent in a team to assasinate a local warlord in South Africa that seemed to be having some success in building a standing army and subjugating the area around him. If you knew you could prevent a civil war with one bullet, would you do it? Congratulations. You just took your first step into regime building.

EG6SiR

However you want to label it ("regime building", etc.), the moment a gov't intervenes into the affairs of another country (regardless of whether it's perceived to be for the "greater good") you can expect enemies to be made.

The most obvious and frustrating example that comes to mind is the US in the Palestine/Israel clash.

swells65

Just heard the news (I'm currently in the UK) and the first thing that struck me was a report in Time magazine a few weeks ago about al-qaeda's top man in Indonesia being captured and under interrogation saying that there were "events" being planned in the region.

I was reading a back issue on the plane coming over here which is why it is fresh in the mind.

Muz

Anybody who commits these crimes without a 'political agenda' (and I use the term lightly) would normally be hunted down and captured very quickly indeed.

The thing that amazes me is that when Howard or Downer are asked about terrorism and security in Australia they go into these simpering pathetic whines like 'any Australian who thinks they are immune from terrorism is fooling themselves' etc etc etc.

Not once have I heard a positive statement from our leaders, like 'well, we're going to spend $40M to bolster the defence forces' or 'we're going to increase the SAS numbers by 200 this coming year' or 'we're going to levy a tax to pay for increased security of our territories' or anything bloody positive at all.

If the Indonesians don't act then send the SAS in. Let's not sit on our hands.