AusS2000

What is the correct response?

Many have criticised the current governments stance on refugees, and I agree, it has been harse. But those who are suggesting we need to do more about our homeland security have to realise that these are exactly the sorts of measures that would have to be tightened up.

Many have criticised our governments response to the war on terrorism. By sticking our heads up we become a target. That whole theory assumes we are not a target in the first place. A premise that I believe is incorrect. To these people the enemy is the infidel capitalist and that means us!

Either way, suggesting that the leader of a democratically elected part is to blame for almost any event is over simplified. John Howard was chosen by the Liberal Party as it's leader, and the Australian public elected that party. Surely, by your logic, the Liberal cabinet and the voters of Australia must share some of the the blame.

BTW, I personally think it is the terrorists that are to blame. Just because you don't like the way things are going is NEVER a justification for deliberately killing innocent civilians.

goul

Aus...fair enough i agree with u, the terrorists are to blame.
As stated above i simply am not impressed with the way he has handled the whole terrorism scenario. Just stating my opinion that is all.
End of discussion for me, dont want things to get out of hand

Bernie

So who are we blaming for the holocaust? The other countries in Europe who would have been unable to prevent this or the United States as the other superpower at that time?

Germany was one of the two most powerful nations in the world at that time and they conducted genocide among their own populace. I can't see how any nation on earth could have stopped this.

Maybe the world should have stopped the Soviet invasion of Hungary, the Chinese invasion of Tibet, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan or how about this one..........the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. Or did we agree with this one all that time ago?

Bernie

That is the point, isn't it. Some of us beleive that by actively involving ourselves, we become a bigger target. Some of us, on the other hand, believe that it makes no difference and they hate us simply because we are capitalist.

A scenario - you have two neighbours who both wear turbans so you don't like either of them and they don't like you because you don't (hyothetically speaking). One of them comes and digs holes in your yard and kicks your dog. You only have one bomb. Which one of them do you bomb? I'd go for the guy who kicked my dog but some of you believe that you would still pick either of them at random.

Iggy_Type_R

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bernie
[B]



So who are we blaming for the holocaust? The other countries in Europe who would have been unable to prevent this or the United States as the other superpower at that time?

Iggy_Type_R

How about we change that he kills your daughter. I am sure 95% people would pick the one that killed your daughter and not one at random.

AusS2000

Idealistically I think the world should convene to oppose minority oppression and genocide. Unforunately the UN is a bit like a traffic cop on valium; too slow to react and often ineffective when it does. And it can be suggested that it's members are supporting their own agendas. Perhaps the US want to depose Suddam Hussein because they want better control of oil there. Perhaps the Russians and French oppose the action because they already have agreements (and have paid for infrastructure) with Iraq.

I believe incidents like the holocaust should serve as lessons that we can learn from and proactively try to avert repetitions of.

I am very much in favour of the Australian and UN intervention in East Timor. The East Timorese wanted democracy and an end to genocide and we helped that happen. I think Regime Building is too broad a term to cover that particular incident. Perhaps 'Oppression Reduction' is better.

That is why I support the deposing of Saddam Hussein. He has frequently practiced genocide against the Kurds in the north of his own country. Suggesting that we should ignore these attrocities because they don't effect our own people, and that if we do we might draw attention from terrorists is the sort of attitude that led to the holocaust in Germany. So may be we are to blame for the holocaust, and the genocide in Bosnia and Iraq. Complacency is also a crime against humanity too.

AusS2000

Problem with personal reactions is they are emotional and seldom well thought out. Fact is, if someone wearing a turban kills your daughter the common response is the drag neighbour A over to neighbour B's house and then throw the bomb in. Then bulldoze it. Over the top.

I am very much in favour of third party, non-personal adjudication in matters like this.

naishou

With respect Aus I don't think that's accurate. The most accepted opinion seems to be that their root motivations are American support for the Israeli occupation and American heavy handedness over "Arab Oil". That's certainly the only thing I've heard the terrorists themselves as being reported saying. I don't believe Australia would be a target if it weren't for our leaders' proactive oustpoken support for America. Just the facts as I see them.

I also agree that people tend to leave you alone if you leave them alone. Again, just an observation and not an opinion on the behaviour of our leaders who surely have far more to consider than I can imagine given how little of what they know, I know.

AusS2000

Fair enough, but do we support the US, or the actions of the US in relation to Iraq and Afghanistan. There's a difference.

'American heavy handedness over "Arab Oil"'. Is that with regard to stopping Iraq invading Kuwait? We supported that and i think many of us still do. And that was a Labor government wasn't it?

And let's not forget that if the US had not supported us 50 years ago we'd all be speaking Japanese. Strangely that's also the start of Israeli Occupation.