If you are reading this, thank a Teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a Soldier
…..there is only one possible response, and that is for Latham to now get right on the front foot, assume his best John Curtin persona, and demand the troops be brought home from Iraq so that our best defence assets are all focused and available for redeployment on the real front line in the ‘war on terror’, our own region.Go read the post – there are some interesting comments from readers. A couple of points Our presence in Iraq is miniscule but important politically. We currently have the following ADF assets and personnel in theatre; # HMAS Adelaide with about 240 sailors, #A RAAF C130 det of two aircraft and about 150 airmen, # RAAF AP-3C Orion det of two aircraft and about 160 airmen, #6 RAAF Air traffic controllers, #A security det with about 120 troops and ASLAV vehicle protecting Australian interests, and # about 80 training team type people. That is about 900 troops from a 100,000 troop defence force. It only leaves enough troops in Australia to wipe Indonesia off the face of the earth several times. (No – I’m not suggesting we do that – it’s just an analogy) Not to denigrate these ADF personnel currently in Iraq in any way but I can assure you that the hole they leave in our defence is likewise miniscule. Secondly – who says the front line of terrorism is here? The motivation, money and training for terrorists is sourced much further a field than our back door. It’s in the Middle East. It’s the old Fortress mentality from the eighties. The idea of defending Australia by holding all troops and assets in-country, flies in the face of thousands of years of military experience. It simply doesn’t work. The battle must be taken to the enemy and we must be the ones to choose the battle zone – not them. The Fortress mentality was linked to a ?warning time? of seven years. Sorry, it doesn?t happen that way. Labour couldn?t see it then and won?t see it now. Using the excuse that we had seven years warning before anyone could attack us allowed the ALP to downgrade our Infantry Corps from six to four battalions after Whitlam had already downgraded it from nine to six. They then had the temerity to state, with a straight face, that the reserves would pick up the slack! Not knocking our reservists but that little theory depended on upgrading manpower, equipment and training in the Reserves ? didn?t happen to any great degree. It certainly wasn?t enough for them to pick up the slack left by professional infantrymen. I was in the Operational Deployment Force at Townsville then and the ALP didn?t even understand logistics. We had enough reserve ammo for one good firefight ? we joked about sharpening our machetes for when the ammo run out. Labour and defence?yeah right! The only way to defeat any enemy is to attack their homeland. Cut off the head and the body withers. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan ? take your pick but to sit at home in the trenches and wait for the enemy to come over the horizon is something only an academic would suggest To me, this leaves the bring the troops home now! mantra as just that – a pointless utterance. It appeases the terrorists and will allow them to say – see, we have forced the infidel Australians to withdraw from our land with just three men and a bomb in Indonesia…see how weak they really are. Bringing troops home now is appeasement. The fact that we don’t actually have many there is not the point. Terrorists will see it as a victory. The assume his best John Curtin persona call is weak. It brings up images of a threatened homeland in different times. With Australian Divisions in the Middle East at the time and Japan rolling down South East Asia it was the only call for Curtin to make. It is nothing like that now. We don’t have a major part of our defence force overseas and JI isn’t threatening to invade our homeland with an Army. Given good intelligence, clear orders and free rein, an infantry rifle company could round up JI Tim Dunlop pitches in, agreeing with Chris Shiels and says;
The idea that we would somehow be less safe under a Labor government is unsustainable, and to their credit, at least since the Embassy bombing, no member of government has said this.You are wrong, Tim. With a Labour government in power, the left wing will more than likely get their wish and the troops will be rushed home. Appeasement…look how weak Australia is…see how the Coalition is falling apart…Spain, Philippines, the US next – giving life support to terrorists. Anyway, it doesn?t matter how many divisions you have sitting in Townsville or Darwin they cannot impact on three suicide bombers in Jakarta. The only way to do that is to take the Middle East apart and deprive the tentacles of the monster any sustenance. Recycling the already proven fallacies of appeasement and Fortress Australia won’t help at all.
For the first time in a Post-ABC news poll this year, a majority of likely voters now say they plan to vote for Bush. Among those most likely to vote in November, Bush holds a 52 percent to 43 percent lead over Kerry, with independent Ralph Nader receiving 2 percent of the hypothetical vote. Among all registered voters, Bush leads Kerry 50 percent to 44 percent.What to do? I know, let’s have GlobeScan poll the world. That’s better! GlobalScan managed to find people who would vote against Bush if they had the vote The Australian(no link) has an article headed Challenger’s Global Landslide stating…..In 30 of 35 countries polled by International research group GlobalScan, Kerry was preferred Leader. Not surprising but a futile exercise none-the-less. They dont have the vote. It’s still Bush 50% – Kerry 44% Meanwhile the Democrats are attacking Bush’s military record but may have been caught out in a lie. Via Tim Blair They need to attack Bush’s record as Kerry’s has been trashed. Bush might not have gone to Vietnam but at least he didn’t go to North Vietnam.
It’s not real – it disappears. What we’ve put in place is the biggest welfare-to-work package in historySomething else that may disappear is the $1.6 Billion of accrued and future non-resident super payments that is a big part of the ALP’s funding formula. Largely backpacker funded, these backpackers are increasingly likely to claim the money back. It is, after all, their money and in my travels I meet few backpackers that aren’t money driven. The Tax Office has even started a campaign to remind them the money is there and theirs for the taking and they have until age 65 to claim it. Now that’s disappearing fool’s gold Simon Crean makes a long awaited appearance and blows it by stating nine out of ten will be better off. Oops – I mean seven out of ten. The nine or seven isn’t that important but Simon’s credibility stocks, not high to begin with, will suffer as a result of his lie. By the time the backpackers claim their money it will be?Oops, I mean two out of ten. Best go back in your hole, Simon Is someone counting Labour’s lies or has the media placed that subject out of bounds. Although I wouldn’t call the ALP’s mistake a lie, under the ‘Bash Howard’ rules it is. Maybe a collective of “40 prominent Accountants” could write to the press denouncing Latham’s Lies! Just joking.
FIFTEEN union leaders have issued a declaration that their jailed militant colleague Craig Johnston was “only doing his job” and put behind bars because he was an effective unionist. The group, all senior left-wing figures from mainstream unions, said that no trade unionist should be imprisoned for taking part in an industrial dispute. Johnston, they said, had been hounded, repeatedly dragged through the courts, then jailed. Among the Victorian-based national and state officials to offer wholehearted support to Johnston are Martin Kingham, Dean Mighell, Steve Dargavel, Michele O’Neil, Len Cooper and Bronwyn Halfpenny.Go read my my previous post to get Craig Johnston’s idea of “only doing his job”.
THIS election will probably see the emergence of the Greens as Australia’s most important third party. This will be a sad and a bad day for our political culture, for the Greens represent the triumph of extremism over moderation, of the paranoid style over commonsense, and the flight from that civic responsibility which characterises a mature polity.and;
It is hard to believe 1million Australians really support the anti-growth, anti-modern prejudices of the Greens.There has been many a blog article about the Greens stupid anti-Australian policies over the last couple of days and the vision of Bob Green on TV defending his party’s lapse into another universe has done little to settle minds. It has even been suggested on some sites that this man may have the balance following the election. I can understand the Socialist Alliance type people loving his anti US/Australian/economy/defence/commerce/jobs stands but surely they would only number tens of thousands at the best. These are self-indulgent hate voters and every society has them. So where do the million voters come from? It appears there are a lot of people who vote Green because they think it’s a vote for the ecology, for the trees in Tasmania, for the cuddly Koala, for the hump back whale or for whatever species or lifestyle that has been misrepresented as being under threat. They think the Greens are an answer to these problems. They are not. They are simply dangerous.
The Greens would end the US alliance by banning the passage of nuclear-powered ships through our waters. On domestic economic policy they would impose death duties, raise every form of tax they mention, but simultaneously ensure full employment while cutting working hours but not pay. All this self-contradictory nonsense is literally an insult to our intelligence and, worse, a degradation of our politics.Thankfully, they will never get the keys to the treasury but they can still be very dangerous to our economy and way of life. Think very carefully about your protest vote. If you hate Howard – vote for Latham. If you think Latham’s a fool – vote Howard and in the Senate vote for an independant but if you have any hope for Australia don’t vote for the Greens. I note Tim Dunlop and John Quiggin don’t see the Greens as a threat but they also think Latham is a winner and judging by their comment sections, they have attracted a goodly bunch of like thinkers. Fine, but I detect some heads in the sand at their sites. Seemingly a well educated lot, particularly Tim and John – I trust they’re not just academics. Go read for a different view and be sure to check the comments. I think most of them sort of back the Greens only because it may hurt Howard but at least one reader, Gibbo, thinks the way I do when he says;
You folks don’t handle scrutiny very well do you? Finally people are being made aware that the greens have nothing to do with saving whales and cuddling koalas. They are quite simply another tired incarnation of the communist party with a few anarchists thrown in for luck. I am telling everyone I know to go and read their policies for themselves. The greens go well when their exposure is limited to bob browns’ 30 second sound bites but when you come under real scrutiny, you fold and start crying foul. I vote Liberal but I’m not campaigning on that front. I’m pushing “anyone but the greens” and man it’s fun.Which explains my headline Watermelons – Green outside and red inside Gibbo’s advice is sound. Go check the Greens website and make up your own mind.
Mr Withycombe, a serving major with the First Battalion at Enoggera Barracks….That’s Major Withycombe as he is still serving and 1RAR are Townsville based, not Enoggera. Yeh. I know – small point but I’m annoyed by journo’s getting facts wrong when dealing with the Army and if the can’t get the small things right….. They go on to report;
But senior Australian Defence Force sources last night dismissed Mr Withycombe’s claims, detailed in his campaign brochures and in claims he made in an interview with The Courier-Mail. They said the claims were either untrue or grossly exaggerated.Who are the senior Australian Defence Force sources? I ask this because in todays Australian an article by David Nason (can’t find a link) points out;
Major Withycombe was backed up by the Defence Department wich issued a statement to the National Party saying the Army had no issue with any of the claims made in Major Withycombe’s campaign brochureWho’s right- David Nason or the two CM chaps? I don’t know as I don’t have all the info but I think it’s a reasonable question.
End the lies Rallies Socialist Alliance is helping build pre-election “End the Lies” rallies across Australia to protest against the Howard government’s contempt for the Australian people, and to add to the pressure on a possible incoming ALP government not to do the same. Rally for the truth – Sunday before the elections Sydney 1pm Town Hall. 0401 900 690; 0421 322 175 Melbourne 1.30pm State Library. 0438 869 790 Canberra 12 noon Garema Place. 0438 624 744 Perth Venue TBA. (08) 9218 9608 Brisbane 1pm Roma St Forum, Saturday before the elections. 0418 715 803. Hobart 12noon Rose Gardens. March to Parliament House, Saturday before the elections. 0419 406 875, 0423 764 896Be warned – stay at home – watch on tv and count the votes going Howards way. Swinging voters will say – If these freaks hate Howard then he’s got my vote.
“I’m simply saying my recall is different and I’m also saying that what people remember about that issue is that we stopped the boats, we were very strong on border protection, and the Labor Party was weak.”Meanwhile Terry Hicks is still fighting for his son and that’s fair enough from a paternal point of view but to say;
It would take a change of government to have terror suspect David Hicks returned to Australia for trialis only stating the obvious and emphasising the fact that Labor are soft on security. He goes on to say; “The Howard Liberal government is just not standing by their citizens.” and in doing so misses the point. The Howard Liberal government is standing by it’s citizens. It’s protecting them from attested/enlisted, trained and deployed Terrorists. On lateline last night Tony Jones managed to find someone to press the alarm bells by suggesting that terrorists may try and influence the Australian election as they did in Spain.
TONY JONES: (Talking about the Spanish attacks that ended in Spanish withdrawal from Iraq) Do you suspect the same thing would apply here in Australia? We have a parallel federal election going on with the presidential election? (Please say yes!) RICHARD CLARKE: Well, Australia is a bit more like the Spanish case where you have one party saying, “Get out,” and the other party staying the course and the party in power is the one wanting to stay the course. That’s much closer to the situation that we saw in Spain and so you could understand how Al Qaeda or some terrorist group related to Al Qaeda might think it could affect the outcome. TONY JONES: Does it make it more dangerous, do you suppose, having a political position like that, opposed political positions like that leading up to an election? (Please say yes so that I can leave the message with my viewers that a vote for Howard will result in a terrorist attack on Australian soil) RICHARD CLARKE: Well, I think it opens the possibility of some terrorist group related to Al Qaeda wanting to do something which otherwise wouldn’t be the case in an Australian election. So, oddly enough, I’m saying that I don’t think Al Qaeda will try to affect the US election, but because the Australian election is so similar to what happened in Spain, I would think the possibility does exist here.If anyone sees any similarity between Australia and Spain then they are ignoring a couple of hundred years of history. In fact, I reckon the last thing Tony Jones wants is any terrorist activity during the election. It will only emphasise Labor’s soft underbelly on anything other than unions and free books for all and the voters would look to the party with a strong policy on defence – the Coalition. Update:
TREASURER Peter Costello has raised the spectre of a Madrid-like terrorist attack being mounted by al-Qaeda to disrupt the election campaign.That’s funny. The way I read the article Costello didn’t raise the spectre – a journalist did and Costello answered. As in;
When asked if Australians were at increased risk during the election campaign, Mr Costello said:….It is clear certain elements of the media want to raise the issue and try and frighten the populace. We don’t frighten easy and when we are, it is because of some fact – not some journalist’s answer wish-list.
Facebook
Twitter
