19 April 2016

ISIS - Why, oh Why?

| John Hargreaves
Join the conversation
65
australian-flag-stock-230914

I was going to post a comment on the lack of advocacy for aged people in nursing homes but I will do that later this week. I have a bit of checking to do.

In the meantime, I was enraged to see and read the fatwa from ISIS. It is the scariest threat we have had to Australian security in my 62 years in this country.

But it didn’t need to be that way. Who were mentioned in the fatwa? Christians, that’s who! And Muslims who supported the Coalition of the Coercive!

There was no threat to Hindus, no threat to Shinto practitioners, no threat to Buddhists, no threat to communists. Yeah? Well murderers don’t ask if you are a Buddhist before thrusting a knife into you if you are a random victim as described in the fatwa. We are now all Australians and targets. Thanks Mr Abbott.

The countries who have been mentioned; Australia, Canada, France, Britain are countries who blindly follow the US into wars that have nothing to do with them.

Have they been invited to the Middle East? Are they part of a UN originated peace keeping force? NO! Will someone tell me what threat we were facing BEFORE committing to the conflict?

I predicted that the SAS would follow the air strikes which preceded the humanitarian drops. I also predicted the sending of a battalion of soldiers to the Middle East. This was confirmed by a US general only last week. They “may” need “on-ground assistance”. I now predict an upsurge in security measures, further breaches of our civil rights and a body bag count we don’t want.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

The soldiers we send are heroes. The politicians who send them are responsible for their deaths.

Join the conversation

65
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

dungfungus said :

AFP and Victorian police are currently executing search warrants on houses in Melbourne suspected of containing evidence of more terrorist activity (not connected with the attack on two police officers last week).

Which is exactly how this should be handled. The more the conservative of this country push the fear campaign message and push the hatred towards muslims, the more likely we will get a terrorist attack.
By all means take action on those doing or planning to do the wrong thing. Just be tolerant of other religions and don’t take an instance of something occurring to mean all muslims want or do that.

I’d like to think we are going into Iraq to help the locals that need help, remembering other muslims are just as much victims, because they also do not want the radical muslim state to form. Hopefully it is not to help ones political standing. I have my doubts, because otherwise the stupid bogan inspiring “Team Australia” slogan was definitely not needed. Whether you/we/me/anyone likes it or not, being Australian and a muslim is perfectly Australian.

AFP and Victorian police are currently executing search warrants on houses in Melbourne suspected of containing evidence of more terrorist activity (not connected with the attack on two police officers last week).

justin heywood1:14 pm 29 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

justin heywood said :

Antagonist said :

I suggest you take your own advice. The operation never took place. It sat in the bottom of Hitler’s drawer for years and never got approval. And now the Swiss have successfully remained neutral for more than 200 years. Looks like a perfectly valid example to me. What else have you got

It sat in his bottom drawer ‘awaiting approval’? THAT’s what you’re going with?

But at least you learned something when you looked it up.

If you are going to quote me, have the courtesy to get it right. I never said ‘awaiting approval’. He flatly refused to approve it. Switzerland have remained neutral for the last 200 odd years, and none of your arm waving can change that fact 🙂

So Hitler ‘flatly refused’ to approve it? You know that is not true. If you have to twist the truth to make your argument, you haven’t really got an argument.

But anyway, anyone remotely interested in the topic can look it up for themselves.

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

Many countries have meddled with Iraq throughout history.
This link gives a brief chronology of events in the last 100 years. It looks like we have turned the full circle and we are starting all over again which we really have no choice in due the the adverse geopolitical repercussions if we do nothing.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/british-colonialism-and-repression-in-iraq.html

Sadly your link seems to concentrate on the recent period of British colonialism and neglects the centuries of colonisation and imperial rule by the Ottomans, Mamelukes & Georgians, Turkmen and Abbasids, going back to the Arab islamic invasion and genocides of the 7th century.

From the 7th century onwards, (with the exception of the Mamelukes) these genocidal regimes were far worse than the British and created a legacy of tribalism and left them in the grip of a viciously regressive religion.

The modernisation and civil society offered by the British did not take. Iraq is therefore a fiction that needs to be discarded in order to restablish stability through balkanising the area into smaller states with homogenous ethno-religious compositions.

I specifically said “the last 100 years”.
I appreciate you have a excellent knowledge of events previous to that but the last 100 years is more relevant to what the current problems are.

dungfungus said :

Many countries have meddled with Iraq throughout history.
This link gives a brief chronology of events in the last 100 years. It looks like we have turned the full circle and we are starting all over again which we really have no choice in due the the adverse geopolitical repercussions if we do nothing.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/british-colonialism-and-repression-in-iraq.html

Sadly your link seems to concentrate on the recent period of British colonialism and neglects the centuries of colonisation and imperial rule by the Ottomans, Mamelukes & Georgians, Turkmen and Abbasids, going back to the Arab islamic invasion and genocides of the 7th century.

From the 7th century onwards, (with the exception of the Mamelukes) these genocidal regimes were far worse than the British and created a legacy of tribalism and left them in the grip of a viciously regressive religion.

The modernisation and civil society offered by the British did not take. Iraq is therefore a fiction that needs to be discarded in order to restablish stability through balkanising the area into smaller states with homogenous ethno-religious compositions.

Mysteryman said :

You can clearly see the point I made with that example: just because we can’t help everyone, does not mean we shouldn’t help anyone. You’re trying to say that purely because we don’t help everyone who needs it, we must have ulterior motives in this instance.

I don’t think we do. I think the motive are open and obvious and as I suggested – “because it was requested of us by the Iraqi government (due to the human rights issues at play), and because the IS pose a credible threat to other nations like ours”.

I said our reasons are strategic. That’s not saying such reasons are hidden or invalid. As you said yourself, IS poses a credible threat to other nations like ours. If it didn’t, I do not think we would be interceding.

bigfeet said :

dungfungus said :

Many countries have meddled with Iraq throughout history.
This link gives a brief chronology of events in the last 100 years. It looks like we have turned the full circle and we are starting all over again which we really have no choice in due the the adverse geopolitical repercussions if we do nothing.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/british-colonialism-and-repression-in-iraq.html

I agree. The current problems are not entirely a result of ours, and our allies, previous actions but we ‘(the coalition of the willing’) certainly bear a large part of the responsibility. As such it behoves us to try to do what we can to fix it. The Iraqis have invited (begged) us to do something and we should, be that airstrikes, training, logistics, or even ground military operations. Even the Assad government has not raised a single objection to US and Arab air and missile strikes in Syria.

To put it in a very basic way, it is like me coming around to your house and deciding I should juggle half a dozen eggs and two glasses of red wine in the centre of your lounge room. No matter how much you try to convince me it is a bad idea I go ahead with it anyway. When the expected and warned against consequences occur it really should be my responsibility to clean up the mess. It would be wrong for me to just walk away and leved the mess, and just agree that it was an ill conceived idea in the first place.

There are several other counties in the Middle East that have had a similar history – Afghanistan springs to mind and their problems are by no means resolved.
My late great uncle fought in WW1 (the Great War as it was known then) and after being wounded in France and recovering he was posted to the Middle East. He travelled a lot while there and kept detailed diaries. He often remarked about the hospitality and warmness of individuals he met but at the same time he came to the conclusion that there would never be peace in that region because of the tribal and religious differences. That was almost 100 years ago. I think he was correct.
Regarding juggling wine and eggs in my lounge room, similar stunts in the past which ruined my carpet forced me to put in tiles so you are welcome to try your speciality (bring your own wine, glasses and eggs) and the mess will be cleaned up (with no trace left) off the tiled floor until the next time.
Maybe the Middle East needs “a tiled floor” solution. A neutron bomb perhaps?

justin heywood said :

Antagonist said :

I suggest you take your own advice. The operation never took place. It sat in the bottom of Hitler’s drawer for years and never got approval. And now the Swiss have successfully remained neutral for more than 200 years. Looks like a perfectly valid example to me. What else have you got

It sat in his bottom drawer ‘awaiting approval’? THAT’s what you’re going with?

But at least you learned something when you looked it up.

If you are going to quote me, have the courtesy to get it right. I never said ‘awaiting approval’. He flatly refused to approve it. Switzerland have remained neutral for the last 200 odd years, and none of your arm waving can change that fact 🙂

dungfungus said :

Many countries have meddled with Iraq throughout history.
This link gives a brief chronology of events in the last 100 years. It looks like we have turned the full circle and we are starting all over again which we really have no choice in due the the adverse geopolitical repercussions if we do nothing.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/british-colonialism-and-repression-in-iraq.html

I agree. The current problems are not entirely a result of ours, and our allies, previous actions but we ‘(the coalition of the willing’) certainly bear a large part of the responsibility. As such it behoves us to try to do what we can to fix it. The Iraqis have invited (begged) us to do something and we should, be that airstrikes, training, logistics, or even ground military operations. Even the Assad government has not raised a single objection to US and Arab air and missile strikes in Syria.

To put it in a very basic way, it is like me coming around to your house and deciding I should juggle half a dozen eggs and two glasses of red wine in the centre of your lounge room. No matter how much you try to convince me it is a bad idea I go ahead with it anyway. When the expected and warned against consequences occur it really should be my responsibility to clean up the mess. It would be wrong for me to just walk away and leved the mess, and just agree that it was an ill conceived idea in the first place.

Mysteryman said :

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

Many countries have meddled with Iraq throughout history.
This link gives a brief chronology of events in the last 100 years. It looks like we have turned the full circle and we are starting all over again which we really have no choice in due the the adverse geopolitical repercussions if we do nothing.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/british-colonialism-and-repression-in-iraq.html

Antagonist said :

And just so it is on record, there is nothing dangerous about being a pacifist. I enter into evidence Ghandi, although I do note with a certain irony that he was a soldier in the Boer War. Clearly he learned something from his experiences …

Ghandi. Isn’t he the guy who gave this advice to Britain in 1940?
“You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these, but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.”

Do you really think that would have worked against the Nazis?

justin heywood said :

Postalgeek said :

Intercession based on human rights is inconsistent. So a reasonable person would assume there are other factors at play.

This is the Middle East, of course there are other factors at play. Oil is certainly a consideration, as is the survival the only regional democracy, Israel, and perhaps not wanting several large countries to be overrun by fanatics intent on taking millions back to a stone-age of misery and oppression.

To say ‘it’s all about oil’ or ‘all about American imperialism’ or other such nonsense is being intellectually lazy. There isn’t just any ONE issue, nor any one good guy or bad guy. It’s the bloody Middle East, the grave for a hundred armies over a thousand years.

……..and probably the next 100 years at least!

justin heywood4:19 pm 27 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

I suggest you take your own advice. The operation never took place. It sat in the bottom of Hitler’s drawer for years and never got approval. And now the Swiss have successfully remained neutral for more than 200 years. Looks like a perfectly valid example to me. What else have you got

It sat in his bottom drawer ‘awaiting approval’? THAT’s what you’re going with?

But at least you learned something when you looked it up.

justin heywood11:51 pm 26 Sep 14

Postalgeek said :

Intercession based on human rights is inconsistent. So a reasonable person would assume there are other factors at play.

This is the Middle East, of course there are other factors at play. Oil is certainly a consideration, as is the survival the only regional democracy, Israel, and perhaps not wanting several large countries to be overrun by fanatics intent on taking millions back to a stone-age of misery and oppression.

To say ‘it’s all about oil’ or ‘all about American imperialism’ or other such nonsense is being intellectually lazy. There isn’t just any ONE issue, nor any one good guy or bad guy. It’s the bloody Middle East, the grave for a hundred armies over a thousand years.

Mods – not sure what your issue is with this one. But here is attempt # 3 anyway:

justin heywood said :

Switzerland’s neutrality was not and never was going to be respected by its enemies. It would have become yet another conquered territory if the allies, most especially the US, had not gone into Europe and defeated the aggressor.

I suggest you look up Operation Tannenbaum, then find another country as the example of neutrality we should follow.

I suggest you take your own advice. The operation never took place. It sat in the bottom of Hitler’s drawer for years and never got approval. And now the Swiss have successfully remained neutral for more than 200 years. Looks like a perfectly valid example to me. What else have you got?

Antagonist said :

Make no mistake about it – we are heading into Gulf War III. Third time lucky? I doubt it. …. would it still be coming our way if we had not just blindly followed the US-coalition into 60+ years of different conflicts? Would Australia be specifically named in the ISIS fatwa? …

Many people here are conflating two issues. Let’s just extract each issue all by itself and examine it:

1/ ISIS are brutally mass-murdering large numbers of people and terrorising everybody else, on the basis of some completely unaccaptable fundamentalist religious beliefs lifted literally from a religious document.
Here, we have a choice: do we stand by and do nothing? No. It is our clear ethical duty to use our resources to terminate this group.
I repeat: ethically, our decision is made for us. We must fight ISIS.

2/ Where did ISIS come from? Totally irrelevant to our choice in 1/, but still very important.
Firstly, here is a good read:
http://20committee.com/2014/09/25/what-if-everything-you-know-about-terrorism-is-wrong/
Make no mistake about it – our involvement in Assad’s insurgency problems was murky and predictably going to entrain dodgy consequences for the region.
Going back further, of course, was our destruction of the apparatus of state in Iraq, an apparatus that was utterly inimical to the likes of ISIS, which could never have taken off in its presence.
But, we destroyed Iraq, and this created the conditions for ISIS’s creation.
So, was the Invasion of Iraq legal? No. Utterly illegal and unsanctioned by the UN, with absolutely no justification in International law. The justifications given (fabricated nonsense about Uranium from Niger, WMDs we knew didn’t exist, and rockets that were no threat to us) were clearly intended to create a “self-defence” justification, and just as clearly complete fabrications.
What to do about this? It is obvious that Bush, Blair, Howard, and the underlings and advisors that participated in the fabrications, lies and illegalities should be prosecuted. These people are personally responsible for a far, far greater scale of barbarism, death and destruction than ISIS is. They are also responsible for ISIS. They should be in gaol. If we aspire to be a civilised nation under the rule of law, then why is this not happening?

Isolationism is not the answer. It was wrong when it was used as an excuse for the USA joining the war against the Nazis 21/2 years late, and it’s even more wrong now.

Past history is interesting, and we should learn from it.

If there is one thing we have learnt, it is that where there is friction and conflict, national borders have to be synonymised with ethnic/religious groupings.
When Yugoslavia exploded, this was the answer. Ditto with Indian independence. And this is why multiculturalism has been declared a policy failure in Europe.
Iraq doesn’t exist, it is a fiction and the first step to cooling things down in the region is to re-draw maps along lines that make sense: A Kurdish state, a Sunniiraq, and a Shiiteiraq. The biggest problems that have caused the governance vacuum that ISIS have stepped into would be solved that easily.

Postalgeek said :

Mysteryman said :

Postalgeek said :

Mysteryman said :

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

Which is why any justification for intervening in Iraq based on human rights is demonstrably spurious, otherwise we would be interceding in Nigeria, Sudan, Burma, North Korea and so on and so on.

Military action is being taken for strategic reasons.

I suppose you don’t give to any charities because you can’t afford to give to all them, right?

I don’t recall the Nigerian’s requesting assistance. I certainly don’t recall any of our PMs mentioning a call from Kim Jon Il, or Un, to send some troops over to sort out their human rights issues.

Your conspiracy theories aside, we were involved to trying to help the Iraqis establish their own democracy some time back, and they’ve requested our help in removing a threat to that same government and its people. We aren’t going in there for lols, and certainly not because we think we know better than them. We’re assisting because it was requested of us by the Iraqi government, and because the IS pose a credible threat to other nations like ours.

Yeah, I wouldn’t compare this to donating to charities…

You can clearly see the point I made with that example: just because we can’t help everyone, does not mean we shouldn’t help anyone. You’re trying to say that purely because we don’t help everyone who needs it, we must have ulterior motives in this instance.

I don’t think we do. I think the motive are open and obvious and as I suggested – “because it was requested of us by the Iraqi government (due to the human rights issues at play), and because the IS pose a credible threat to other nations like ours”.

Mysteryman said :

Postalgeek said :

Mysteryman said :

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

Which is why any justification for intervening in Iraq based on human rights is demonstrably spurious, otherwise we would be interceding in Nigeria, Sudan, Burma, North Korea and so on and so on.

Military action is being taken for strategic reasons.

I suppose you don’t give to any charities because you can’t afford to give to all them, right?

I don’t recall the Nigerian’s requesting assistance. I certainly don’t recall any of our PMs mentioning a call from Kim Jon Il, or Un, to send some troops over to sort out their human rights issues.

Your conspiracy theories aside, we were involved to trying to help the Iraqis establish their own democracy some time back, and they’ve requested our help in removing a threat to that same government and its people. We aren’t going in there for lols, and certainly not because we think we know better than them. We’re assisting because it was requested of us by the Iraqi government, and because the IS pose a credible threat to other nations like ours.

Yeah, I wouldn’t compare this to donating to charities. Anyway, simply supporting your statement, that it sounds like human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. We can now tack on if the regime invites us in.

As for conspiracies, suggesting that military action is being taken for strategic reasons isn’t exactly radical. ISIS has been declared a threat to US and Australia, so there’s a defensive strategic reason right there, if you agree with the premise.

Intercession based on human rights is inconsistent. So a reasonable person would assume there are other factors at play.

magiccar9 said :

John, I think you really need to go back to posting about cats up trees or your latest expedition to the local shops. You recent posts about this issue have done nothing but stir up dangerous comments and ignorant ideologies.

You should think a little more carefully before visiting this topic because, as we have seen, it has the potential to blow up among readers.

Frankly your ignorance and embarrassing view point on this issue make me laugh. I see you posting here just to make some noise as a forgotten Ex-MLA who is no longer socially relevant.

Playing the man instead of the ball? Weak. And just so it is on record, there is nothing dangerous about being a pacifist. I enter into evidence Ghandi, although I do note with a certain irony that he was a soldier in the Boer War. Clearly he learned something from his experiences …

Mysteryman said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Mysteryman said :

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

And of course Iraq asked for intervention in the beginning! Yeah right! Just like South Vietnam asked the US for intervention! Around the same time as the CIA murdered the South Vietnamese President in the back of a van! Invitations , my foot! Invitations organised to justify a presence and future military action!

Wake up, John. This isn’t the 60s and we’re not talking about Vietnam. The circumstances aren’t even close to being the same.

That’s right, but not for the reasoning you suggest. We only went into Vietnam once. Make no mistake about it – we are heading into Gulf War III. Third time lucky? I doubt it. Modern warfare has changed and it is now coming to us instead. And that goes to the point at the centre of this debate: would it still be coming our way if we had not just blindly followed the US-coalition into 60+ years of different conflicts? Would Australia be specifically named in the ISIS fatwa? So I say again – if we needed to make a contribution we could have done it under the banner of the UN.

Which reminds me. How are they going finding those weapons of mass destruction from Gulf War II that the US were telling us posed such a threat to the international community ??? They had a better chance of finding Harold Holt.

Mysteryman said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Mysteryman said :

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

And of course Iraq asked for intervention in the beginning! Yeah right! Just like South Vietnam asked the US for intervention! Around the same time as the CIA murdered the South Vietnamese President in the back of a van! Invitations , my foot! Invitations organised to justify a presence and future military action!

Wake up, John. This isn’t the 60s and we’re not talking about Vietnam. The circumstances aren’t even close to being the same.

John and his fellow travellers are still in denial about what is happening. They have probably never read about the Crusades and have never been to Southern Spain to see the remnants of how the world was when Islam ruled for all.
I would prefer a state of “live and let live” but it has become “kill or be killed”. Even Benjamin Netanyahu from Israel says “you can’t negotiate a peace with people who don’t want peace”.

John, I think you really need to go back to posting about cats up trees or your latest expedition to the local shops. You recent posts about this issue have done nothing but stir up dangerous comments and ignorant ideologies.

You should think a little more carefully before visiting this topic because, as we have seen, it has the potential to blow up among readers.

Frankly your ignorance and embarrassing view point on this issue make me laugh. I see you posting here just to make some noise as a forgotten Ex-MLA who is no longer socially relevant.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Mysteryman said :

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

And of course Iraq asked for intervention in the beginning! Yeah right! Just like South Vietnam asked the US for intervention! Around the same time as the CIA murdered the South Vietnamese President in the back of a van! Invitations , my foot! Invitations organised to justify a presence and future military action!

Wake up, John. This isn’t the 60s and we’re not talking about Vietnam. The circumstances aren’t even close to being the same.

justin heywood4:42 pm 25 Sep 14

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Switzerland. And you have the hide to point at others and accuse them of being ignorant of modern history.

And some of those accused have degrees in modern history and defence and strategic studies like I do. But the accusers don’t.

John, it’s a pity your studies didn’t encourage you to do some basic research before writing something down. Switzerland is a very poor example as a model of neutrality. Let me spell it out for you:

Switzerland’s neutrality was not and never was going to be respected by its enemies. It would have become yet another conquered territory if the allies, most especially the US, had not gone into Europe and defeated the aggressor.

I suggest you look up Operation Tannenbaum, then find another country as the example of neutrality we should follow.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:13 pm 25 Sep 14

1967 said :

I was as much against our involvement in the Afganistan and Iraq wars as anyone, but the thing is, we went in there and consequetly de-stablised the entire area before we left.
In short, we f#%ked it up, we should help fix it.
Not because we want to control the oil or oppress a religion or any reason other that because it’s the right thing to do, from a humanitarian point of view now.

Whilst I agree with this post, my point about not being their to f3%k it up in the first place is valid.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Antagonist said :

justin heywood said :

If every country stayed out of every war that didn’t directly threaten their shores, you would not be here making this post John, and I would not be calling you on it. I cannot believe you are so ignorant of modern history as to not understand that wars occur whether we like it or not, and that sometimes becoming involved is morally justifiable and correct. WW2 is a good example.

Switzerland. And you have the hide to point at others and accuse them of being ignorant of modern history.

And some of those accused have degrees in modern history and defence and strategic studies like I do. But the accusers don’t.

Did you ever fire a shot in anger, John?

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:11 pm 25 Sep 14

Mysteryman said :

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

And of course Iraq asked for intervention in the beginning! Yeah right! Just like South Vietnam asked the US for intervention! Around the same time as the CIA murdered the South Vietnamese President in the back of a van! Invitations , my foot! Invitations organised to justify a presence and future military action!

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

pierce said :

neanderthalsis said :

So we should step back and watch the genocide from a safe distance? The hand wringing bleeding hearts are critical of us going to war, but would be equally critical if we did nothing.

I suspect that you’ll find that the “hand wringing bleeding hearts” (because clearly they all think and speak as one) are probably wondering why governments haven’t rushed in to deal with dozens of other incidents of genocide in recent decades. Rwanda, Cambodia and Sudan spring to mind. Boko Haram if you want a more recent one. If everything else can be treated as a regional issue, why not this?

It’s funny how everyone becomes a humanitarian when oil is involved.

I did see the reports of the “terrorist attack” on two police officers in Melbourne yesterday. But where is the proof that it was a terrorist attack?

At this stage, you and the self-appointed Australian Muslim “leaders” are the only ones’s not believing it was a terrorist attack.
Oh, I forgot, ABC News also who said the teenager merely “confronted” two police officers…..”
You are in good company John.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:08 pm 25 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

justin heywood said :

If every country stayed out of every war that didn’t directly threaten their shores, you would not be here making this post John, and I would not be calling you on it. I cannot believe you are so ignorant of modern history as to not understand that wars occur whether we like it or not, and that sometimes becoming involved is morally justifiable and correct. WW2 is a good example.

Switzerland. And you have the hide to point at others and accuse them of being ignorant of modern history.

And some of those accused have degrees in modern history and defence and strategic studies like I do. But the accusers don’t.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:06 pm 25 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

I cannot believe that Australian people would post on here that we should not get involved with what is going on when Christian people are being beheaded and those who aren’t get raped and tortured.

… “To turn away from the plight of the innocent is to ally with their attackers”.

Believe it. We do not have any need to send troops as part of a US-Brit-Canadian-French coalition under the Australian flag. If there is a need to send armed forces, Australia can do it as part of a UN Peace Keeping Force at the request of the UN. In the meantime there are other ways we can do our bit, such as humanitarian aid in the form of food, medical assistance and similar. That is my take on it. Mr Hargreaves, being a big boy, can (and probably will) speak for himself.

With common sense like this, I don’t have to. Shame others can’t heed.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:03 pm 25 Sep 14

justin heywood said :

“..We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

If every country stayed out of every war that didn’t directly threaten their shores, you would not be here making this post John, and I would not be calling you on it. I cannot believe you are so ignorant of modern history as to not understand that wars occur whether we like it or not, and that sometimes becoming involved is morally justifiable and correct. WW2 is a good example.

…If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

We have been a model for cultural integration. Didn’t you recently describe Al Grassby as the ‘father of our multicultural society?’ Did he fail? Are you contending that our home-grown jihadists were radicalised because we didn’t allow them to integrate? How so?

It may be too late now to prevent a 911 here but I know who I will be blaming for it

Hmm. Don’t tell me, let me guess who you’ll be blaming for it. ..wait, it’s coming to me…Tony Abbott!!!
Do I win a prize?

No you don’t win a prize. I blame John Howard, Kevin Rudd, Tony Abbott and Bill Shorten (if he continues his stance).

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:00 pm 25 Sep 14

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

Yes, you are totally free to openly admit your hypocrisy on any issue, but it completely wipes any credibility from your argument or points when you do so.

If you’re OK with that, then I guess I am too.

I don’t see any hypocrisy. show me. I have never waivered form this position since I saw the propaganda which convinced me that the Vietnam War was the right thing to do in the name of forward defence.

If I disagree with you, the conversation should be healthy not hypocrisy. At least I am honest about from where I come. Shame others are not.

Your hypocrisy on this and other posts and threads is based on your freely admitted partisanship. If you want to bring this up as an issue then you should be denigrating your own party just as harshly as the current federal government.

But I have the sneaking suspicion that you never would have written this article if Bill Shorten was Prime Minister and not Tony Abbott.

You have the right to your own stance and opinions but you harm your argument, points and credibility with your constant and regular barracking for the ALP regardless of their position on an issue.

An examination of my public statements on asylum seeker treatment by the Labor Government, continued by this Government gives lie to your assertions. I started my opposition to the treatment of asylum seekers when John Howard was in Government and continued it when Multicultural Affairs minister in ministerial councils. If you are going to bag me, get it right.

Firstly, for better or for worse, we particiapted in the invasion of Iraq. We therefore have a responsibility to assist in their transition to a stable government. I would say that probably required a committment for a generation, but we along with out allies got out too fast, as we’re doing again in Afghanistan (does anyone in politics remember sayings like measure twice, cut once, or a stitch in time saves nine?). ISIS is a huge threat not only to the government of Iraq, but the well being of its citizens. We have a moral obligation to assist the people and government of Iraq against ISIS.

Secondly, does anyone believe that if ISIS manages to unite Iraq and Syria as a fundamentalist state that beheads non-believers they will stop there? I don’t – just look at their name change. They were the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria but are now styling themselves as the Islamic State, signifying an intention to not be bound by the borders of those two countries. They will become a threat to world security rather than a threat to regional security. We will be targets because we are different to them and they don’t believe in tolerance. Not making a small contribution towards defeating them now could lead to needing to make a big effort later on.

Thirdly in relation to oil, it is a fundamental part of our economy and the way we live. A large portion of the world’s reserves are in the middle east. If it were to fall under the control of ISIS, it could be devastating to western economies, especially considering the way Russia has been behaving lately. That is why we have to commit resources to Iraq before going after say Boko Haram. If the situation in the middle east stabilised I would be in favour of offering assistance to Nigeria, but we have to prioritise.

I was as much against our involvement in the Afganistan and Iraq wars as anyone, but the thing is, we went in there and consequetly de-stablised the entire area before we left.
In short, we f#%ked it up, we should help fix it.
Not because we want to control the oil or oppress a religion or any reason other that because it’s the right thing to do, from a humanitarian point of view now.

Postalgeek said :

Mysteryman said :

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

Which is why any justification for intervening in Iraq based on human rights is demonstrably spurious, otherwise we would be interceding in Nigeria, Sudan, Burma, North Korea and so on and so on.

Military action is being taken for strategic reasons.

I suppose you don’t give to any charities because you can’t afford to give to all them, right?

I don’t recall the Nigerian’s requesting assistance. I certainly don’t recall any of our PMs mentioning a call from Kim Jon Il, or Un, to send some troops over to sort out their human rights issues.

Your conspiracy theories aside, we were involved to trying to help the Iraqis establish their own democracy some time back, and they’ve requested our help in removing a threat to that same government and its people. We aren’t going in there for lols, and certainly not because we think we know better than them. We’re assisting because it was requested of us by the Iraqi government, and because the IS pose a credible threat to other nations like ours.

Mysteryman said :

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

Which is why any justification for intervening in Iraq based on human rights is demonstrably spurious, otherwise we would be interceding in Nigeria, Sudan, Burma, North Korea and so on and so on.

Military action is being taken for strategic reasons.

We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

We really don’t need this. We really don’t! And our multicultural society doesn’t need the hatred and suspicion that it breeds.

Firstly, we were asked to assist by the Iraqi government. It has something to do with us because our help has been requested.

Secondly, what the hell does being a “multicultural society” have to do with this? Nothing.

Large sections of that country are being slaughtered and you’re here whining about our commitment to try and stop it? It sounds like what you’re really saying is that human rights are only important when it suits you, when it’s easy, or when there are votes to be had. Sad.

If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

Oh of course… because clearly Iraq was a paragon of equality and fair treatment for all before us meddling Aussie’s got involved.

justin heywood8:57 am 25 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

Switzerland. And you have the hide to point at others and accuse them of being ignorant of modern history.

I think you’d better do some research on the Axis plans for Switzerland.

It’s Tony’s fault. Straight from the Labor text book.

You don’t have to be Nostradamus too see they will need ground troops at some time.

How is the UN going to fight ISIS ? The UN is a circle jerk, They have a headquarters in Baghdad and have done nothing so far except hide in their compound.

justin heywood said :

If every country stayed out of every war that didn’t directly threaten their shores, you would not be here making this post John, and I would not be calling you on it. I cannot believe you are so ignorant of modern history as to not understand that wars occur whether we like it or not, and that sometimes becoming involved is morally justifiable and correct. WW2 is a good example.

Switzerland. And you have the hide to point at others and accuse them of being ignorant of modern history.

John, back in 1994 we sat back and watched 800,000 to a million Rwandans die. Perhaps someone has drawn a line in the sand and said we won’t let that sort of killing happen again. Or of course it could be because the Middle East has all the oil and Shell, Texaco, BP, etc pay a lot of money to ensure nothing stops production, upsetting the share holders.

justin heywood said :

It may be too late now to prevent a 911 here but I know who I will be blaming for it

Hmm. Don’t tell me, let me guess who you’ll be blaming for it. ..wait, it’s coming to me…Tony Abbott!!!
Do I win a prize?

Yeah…I mean, why blame the guys who actually carry out the attack when Tony Abbott is available to pin blame on?

wildturkeycanoe10:14 pm 24 Sep 14

Antagonist said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

I cannot believe that Australian people would post on here that we should not get involved with what is going on when Christian people are being beheaded and those who aren’t get raped and tortured.

… “To turn away from the plight of the innocent is to ally with their attackers”.

Believe it. We do not have any need to send troops as part of a US-Brit-Canadian-French coalition under the Australian flag. If there is a need to send armed forces, Australia can do it as part of a UN Peace Keeping Force at the request of the UN. In the meantime there are other ways we can do our bit, such as humanitarian aid in the form of food, medical assistance and similar. That is my take on it. Mr Hargreaves, being a big boy, can (and probably will) speak for himself.

Food drops, fat lot of good they do. How does a medical kit bag stop someone losing their head? Did you not see the footage of a humanitarian aid helicopter trying to evacuate people about a month or two ago? The innocent people there do not want just food and water. Life is more important than survival, evacuation is preferable to being dead.
As for the U.N., it is a figurehead role, that is only there to control money, not human lives. When half the U.N is pro democracy and the other half is communist or dictatorship, what good can come out of it? As much as I am against the world dominating ego of the U.S, it can’t be worse than what is coming out of the Middle East.

Ben_Dover said :

Rollersk8r said :

Small issue of Australians leaving the country to take up arms with ISIS. This is ok? Still none of our business? Come and go as you like?

We should encourage more of them who support ISIS to go.

The we should strafe the place.

For a starter, anyhow.

wildturkeycanoe said :

I cannot believe that Australian people would post on here that we should not get involved with what is going on when Christian people are being beheaded and those who aren’t get raped and tortured. … “To turn away from the plight of the innocent is to ally with their attackers”.

Believe it. We do not have any need to send troops as part of a US-Brit-Canadian-French coalition under the Australian flag. If there is a need to send armed forces, Australia can do it as part of a UN Peace Keeping Force at the request of the UN. In the meantime there are other ways we can do our bit, such as humanitarian aid in the form of food, medical assistance and similar. That is my take on it. Mr Hargreaves, being a big boy, can (and probably will) speak for himself.

justin heywood8:37 pm 24 Sep 14

“..We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

If every country stayed out of every war that didn’t directly threaten their shores, you would not be here making this post John, and I would not be calling you on it. I cannot believe you are so ignorant of modern history as to not understand that wars occur whether we like it or not, and that sometimes becoming involved is morally justifiable and correct. WW2 is a good example.

…If we had only kept out of this in the beginning, if only we had decided to be a model for cultural integration, if only we had been regional in our geo-political approach, we would not be in the mess we are right now.

We have been a model for cultural integration. Didn’t you recently describe Al Grassby as the ‘father of our multicultural society?’ Did he fail? Are you contending that our home-grown jihadists were radicalised because we didn’t allow them to integrate? How so?

It may be too late now to prevent a 911 here but I know who I will be blaming for it

Hmm. Don’t tell me, let me guess who you’ll be blaming for it. ..wait, it’s coming to me…Tony Abbott!!!
Do I win a prize?

wildturkeycanoe7:45 pm 24 Sep 14

I cannot believe that Australian people would post on here that we should not get involved with what is going on when Christian people are being beheaded and those who aren’t get raped and tortured.
John Hargreaves – “We are not the world’s policemen on human rights abuses, we are not even the deputy sheriff with a mandate to protect Christianity.” This is a ridiculous statement. We are humans, regardless of our faith or location on the globe. If we believe that killing innocent people is wrong, which apparently it is according to our laws, then we should be actively trying to stop that wherever it is occurring in the world.
The Iraqi government has asked for assistance to stop these terrorists, as their own army has been overrun. These fanatics have broken their own country’s rules and those of their own religion, according to the rest of the true followers. How can you say we aren’t supposed to be involved?
Your “head in the sand”, “keep out of it” attitude may keep us out of the limelight for the time being, but if our allies do the same thing and let a bunch of fanatics expand all over the globe, we will eventually have no way of countering their onslaught. These are people who believe with every bit of their soul that anyone who is against them should be slain. They believe the world is theirs to take – by deathly force. Ignorance is not the answer. Diplomacy obviously isn’t either. Whatever a group of countries with some respect for human life does, is better than the whole world closing it’s eyes to murder. At the risk of plagiarism from something that I am unaware of, I will say this,”To turn away from the plight of the innocent is to ally with their attackers”.

HiddenDragon5:30 pm 24 Sep 14

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

Yes, you are totally free to openly admit your hypocrisy on any issue, but it completely wipes any credibility from your argument or points when you do so.

If you’re OK with that, then I guess I am too.

In a sense, this is a non-partisan view on John Hargreave’s part because federal Labor has thus far supported Australia’s involvement in this latest international coalition – so it is not (yet?) a partisan issue, even though it is clearly divisive. It is difficult to imagine that Australia’s position would have been materially different under a federal Labor Government.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

If the current Government had not taken a leaf out of the “embarrassed” (not contrite) John Howard, we would not have this stuff in our beloved country. Where is the threat to NZ? they have the good sense to stay away.

Took the words right out of my mouth. +1.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

Yes, you are totally free to openly admit your hypocrisy on any issue, but it completely wipes any credibility from your argument or points when you do so.

If you’re OK with that, then I guess I am too.

I don’t see any hypocrisy. show me. I have never waivered form this position since I saw the propaganda which convinced me that the Vietnam War was the right thing to do in the name of forward defence.

If I disagree with you, the conversation should be healthy not hypocrisy. At least I am honest about from where I come. Shame others are not.

Your hypocrisy on this and other posts and threads is based on your freely admitted partisanship. If you want to bring this up as an issue then you should be denigrating your own party just as harshly as the current federal government.

But I have the sneaking suspicion that you never would have written this article if Bill Shorten was Prime Minister and not Tony Abbott.

You have the right to your own stance and opinions but you harm your argument, points and credibility with your constant and regular barracking for the ALP regardless of their position on an issue.

“Have they been invited to the Middle East?”

Only by the Iraqi government.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA3:45 pm 24 Sep 14

chewy14 said :

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

Yes, you are totally free to openly admit your hypocrisy on any issue, but it completely wipes any credibility from your argument or points when you do so.

If you’re OK with that, then I guess I am too.

I don’t see any hypocrisy. show me. I have never waivered form this position since I saw the propaganda which convinced me that the Vietnam War was the right thing to do in the name of forward defence.

If I disagree with you, the conversation should be healthy not hypocrisy. At least I am honest about from where I come. Shame others are not.

Rollersk8r said :

Small issue of Australians leaving the country to take up arms with ISIS. This is ok? Still none of our business? Come and go as you like?

Leaving Australia is fine by me – when they try to get back is when the problems start.
I guess the largely now unemployed asylum seeker lawyers will see the opportunity to rush to the High Court to enshrine the human rights of the returning jihadists by getting orders against the Commonwealth so they can re-enter Australia to spread their special sort of goodwill.

Rollersk8r said :

Small issue of Australians leaving the country to take up arms with ISIS. This is ok? Still none of our business? Come and go as you like?

We should encourage more of them who support ISIS to go.

The we should strafe the place.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

Yes, you are totally free to openly admit your hypocrisy on any issue, but it completely wipes any credibility from your argument or points when you do so.

If you’re OK with that, then I guess I am too.

Small issue of Australians leaving the country to take up arms with ISIS. This is ok? Still none of our business? Come and go as you like?

I sympathize with the sentiment and would agree if it was 1975 or even 1985, however, at the very minimum we owe it to the world to at least try and round up the terrorists who were bred here.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA11:24 am 24 Sep 14

pierce said :

neanderthalsis said :

So we should step back and watch the genocide from a safe distance? The hand wringing bleeding hearts are critical of us going to war, but would be equally critical if we did nothing.

I suspect that you’ll find that the “hand wringing bleeding hearts” (because clearly they all think and speak as one) are probably wondering why governments haven’t rushed in to deal with dozens of other incidents of genocide in recent decades. Rwanda, Cambodia and Sudan spring to mind. Boko Haram if you want a more recent one. If everything else can be treated as a regional issue, why not this?

It’s funny how everyone becomes a humanitarian when oil is involved.

Pierce How right you are? My issue is not that ISIL are not a bunch of psychopaths who are bent on a jihad. I agree that their behaviour is unacceptable.

Your point about not being involved in other genocidal issues is a good one. Boko Haram are just as fanatical. kidnapping 200 schoolgirls and threatening to rape them is heinous in anyone’s language. But did we send in warplanes and SAS to “teach” those opposing them?

I did see the reports of the “terrorist attack” on two police officers in Melbourne yesterday. But where is the proof that it was a terrorist attack? Do you believe that the shooting of that guy at Bondi cos he had a knife and looked middle Eastern was thwarting a terrorist attack? And an 800 strong force to capture one 18 year old? A bit OTT, methinks.

If the current Government had not taken a leaf out of the “embarrassed” (not contrite) John Howard, we would not have this stuff in our beloved country. Where is the threat to NZ? they have the good sense to stay away.

We are not the world’s policemen on human rights abuses, we are not even the deputy sheriff with a mandate to protect Christianity.

It may be too late now to prevent a 911 here but I know who I will be blaming for it!

And reiterating a previous stand. No… I don’t support sending our troops, airmen and sailors half way across the world to fight someone else’s war. What part of the Vietnam War don’t you get?

Incidentally, the Vietnamese don’t talk about the Vietnam War, they talk, about the American War.

And a Viet Cong ex soldier I spoke to told me, when I apologised for our presence, that the Vietnamese didn’t know we were there. We were too small a force for them to notice. So the 521 died for what? Not again in my name, it won’t.

And finally, before people accuse me of being too political, I am a life member of the ALP, a 15 year Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Labor Party and a 5 year Minister in said Government. I don’t want to be non partisan. But my right to express my views is sacrosanct. Those who don’t like it can suck it up or stay away from reading my posts.

John Hargreaves Ex MLA11:11 am 24 Sep 14

chewy14 said :

So you don’t agree with the Labor party’s wholehearted support of this action either I take it?

Nope

I guess we should be sending soldiers into Indonesia and the Philippines to hunt down Jemaah Islamiyah, which has killed more Australians than IS.

justsomeaussie10:51 am 24 Sep 14

>We followed Britain into World War I, and II; we followed the US into Vietnam; we followed the US into Iraq in two Gulf wars. Why, oh why do we follow anyone into a war which is nothing to do with us?

Wow. What an ignorant comment. Moral beings have a duty to ensure that justice is served by those who oppose it.

We “blindly followed” or as correctly put, honoured our allegiances with other like minded countries to serve a greater good. A good beyond our shores.

Should we have sat back and allowed Hitler to take Europe or ISIS to slaughter the Kurds and Azeris?

John Hargreaves would prefer our leadership to have perfect hindsight; hindsight is of course looking out of your arse.

It’s easy to look back at the past and pick out the mistakes others have made with knowledge that you have today, instead of realising that leaders made decisions based on what they knew, their culture and values of the time.

John Hargreaves appears to think that we should be isolationists, just worrying about our own backyard when our neighbours are raping their children next door.

Australia is a part of a global community and we are respected in that community. Like all community members we are expected to chip in and help out when the going gets tough.

Not curl up into a ball and stuff our heads up our backsides and hope it doesn’t affect us.

neanderthalsis said :

So we should step back and watch the genocide from a safe distance? The hand wringing bleeding hearts are critical of us going to war, but would be equally critical if we did nothing.

I suspect that you’ll find that the “hand wringing bleeding hearts” (because clearly they all think and speak as one) are probably wondering why governments haven’t rushed in to deal with dozens of other incidents of genocide in recent decades. Rwanda, Cambodia and Sudan spring to mind. Boko Haram if you want a more recent one. If everything else can be treated as a regional issue, why not this?

It’s funny how everyone becomes a humanitarian when oil is involved.

Were you aware of terrorist attack on two police officers in Melbourne last night before this was posted?
If you weren’t, have you now changed your stance?
I mean, how much evidence do you need, ISAS is here in Australia, now. Expect bigger and nastier things.
It was brought to my attention yesterday that ISIS have modified the computer game Grand Theft Auto to include the methods ISAS want to use to kill us non-believers. I saw a trailer and it was very disturbing. Thanks to some well meaning people, the video trailer has now been expunged from YouTube.
This ISAS “game” has been globally distributed to young Muslims as an education tool.
Contrary to your assertion that we should not get involved, we already are and the politicians are addressing the situation correctly.

So you don’t agree with the Labor party’s wholehearted support of this action either I take it?

neanderthalsis9:00 am 24 Sep 14

So we should step back and watch the genocide from a safe distance? The hand wringing bleeding hearts are critical of us going to war, but would be equally critical if we did nothing.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.