The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Conscription was an abuse > Comments

Conscription was an abuse : Comments

By Bruce Haigh, published 22/1/2013

The Judicial Inquiry should look at the ethics, effect, equity and justice of conscription. It was an abuse of power and of people.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
I won’t enter into a discussion of the central thrust of Bruce Haigh’s article, but I think it is worthwhile to question the accuracy of certain issues he addresses in passing.

As Bruce Haigh states, conscripts did fight in Papua, on the Kokoda Trail, and Papua was Australian territory. However, conscripts were required to serve in a much broader area known as the South West Pacific, which extended North from Australia to the Equator and included many islands which had no formal connection to Australia.

Bruce Haigh comments that they ‘… fought … stopping the Japanese just short of Port Moresby …’. Militia conscripts were certainly there, but Bruce Haigh ignores the far more numerous volunteer AIF battalions which also fought there.

He also speaks about the conscripts being ‘ … abused by the head of the army, General Blamey … ‘. I presume that referred to Blamey’s infamous ‘running rabbits’ speech. However, that speech was addressed to volunteer AIF soldiers, and about their performance.

Bruce Haigh contends that conscription was introduced to support the commitment to Vietnam. Was he aware of conscripts serving overseas in Malaysia during and after Confrontation, and in Papua New Guinea?

Bruce Haigh is completely in error when he refers to some being allowed to join the Citizen Military Forces (now the Army Reserve) because they were in reserved occupations. There were no reserved occupations. However, anyone could opt to serve six years in the CMF as an alternative to two years full time service, as long as they enlisted a year before the conscription ballot, and served six years whatever the result of that ballot.

I would agree with any contention that these issues are not critical to the main thrust of Bruce Haigh’s article. However, he chose to mention these issues, and his argument is not stronger for errors of fact.
Posted by Chris Pratt, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 2:09:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm a Veteran and was a Regular (joined in July, 1960), I certainly don't agree with the Author's views at all. However, I don't propose to resurrect any discussion on the merits or otherwise, of whether or not, we should've been in South Vietnam.

My only comment really, more of an observation if you like, the majority of people who represent the most vocal on the entire Vietnam War issue, never actually served there. In fact many were never in the Armed Forces, yet they're prepared to lecture even pontificate on just about every issue associated with the War.

I couldn't give a damn if they discuss the broader issues, the policy etc, and similar, that's fine, but when they make these vague unsubstantiated claims, asserting them as facts, it does tend to annoy me appreciably !
Posted by o sung wu, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 2:36:52 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi there RATTLER...

You speak with a great deal of venom from your
days in 3 RAR, a very proud and noble Regiment
to be sure. What tour was yours may I ask ?

Surely, you would've been associated with some
great blokes, provided of course, you 'fit in'
and was accepted. Sure, in my time, there was
the odd bloke who wouldn't or couldn't mix with
other members of his section, even platoon, as
such, you'd never put him on the M60 eh ?

Anyway, I guess having drawn the short straw,
you'd be pretty angry, nevertheless you weren't
alone, and I had some terrific 'nasho's with us !
Equally as good, and efficient, and reliable, as
any regular or other 'Nasho' ? Still, I just can't
understand your enormous acerbity towards
both the system or the Regiment ?
Posted by o sung wu, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 2:57:22 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Personally I think it would be a good idea to reintroduce it, especially for anyone who is unemployed longer than 12 months.
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 3:15:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A great thought JAMES H, trouble is many wouldn't
or couldn't accept military discipline in any of it's
forms. Nor do I suspect the sparten, though very
healthy, way of life.

Nevertheless, a really good idea though JAMES H. !
Posted by o sung wu, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 3:27:42 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The rule of the army is "You don't think, we think for you".
So because a person is unfortunate to find a regular job, they should be persecuted, by having their independence taken from them.
Having had my own freedom taken from me for two years, after graduating from Uni and forced into the British National service system, in the first six weeks made to walk like a prat, shown how to shoot somebody dead and accept demeaning bullying by the NCO's, plus receive a pittance in payment.
The remainder of my National service time was painting kerbs, washing windows and serving "officers" in their mess.
No gentlemen those less fortunate than others should not be persecuted because of their circumstances, but respected.
Posted by Kipp, Tuesday, 22 January 2013 4:20:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy