Julian, I am categorically not just “thinking only of Australians”. I am asking you for a sense of proportionality and reason.

If you wish to make a case, based upon the tragic death of an ADF member at the hands of an alleged terrorist within the ranks, that’s fine, but to do this against a background of a perceived threat against us because of our ADF presence, is quite something else.

I find it obnoxious that the terrorist propaganda machine promotes this “threat” of more terrorism of we don’t stop letting the terrorists terrorize, and that some amongst our own promote the same propaganda. If anyone is supporting more atrocities it is those activists who promote terrorist propaganda.

Terrorism is a product of power struggles within failed States. It is often exacerbated by the presence of foreign troops but only to the extent that we are getting in the way of “their” struggle for power. Terrorists are not willing to go to the ballot box as it is contrary to their interests.

Unfortunately for the “great causes”, the international activism industry is, at every level, miserably inept, emotionally dysfunctional, ill informed, manipulated and totally irrelevant, other than to the immense damage they inflict upon perfectly valid public concerns.

One of the great tragedies of modern times and one of the greatest evils perpetrated upon the peoples of the underdeveloped nations, is the notion that their pain, suffering and poverty is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of the developed world. This is the message that terrorism and our own activists chose to promote.

In truth, the absence of social justice and inequity in the third world is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of their own leadership, which is the primary cause. That is not to say that the actions of the developed world have no negative impact however, they are not the primary cause and it is quite malicious to suggest otherwise.

This is being confirmed as we write, by the rebellions of Arab peoples against their own leadership, not us.

Hmmh, some are starting to see what many of us have been seeing for decades. All the so-called brain-drain to such countries along with providing them with education & weapons is nothing short of suicide by compassion. All we want is peace & so do they but without us on the face of the planet. All those intellectuals going over there to educate those who want to do away with us should not get our support when the crap hits the fan. how much more evidence do the intellectuals need to get thrown at before they wake up ?

Actually when I saw the article heading I thought this would be something to do with Global Warming......

The AGW thing being basically dumped by all sane countries... noting Gillard and Co, as an insanity, seem intent on losing government over it

So with no "AGW"/Carbon gas - what could be the next apocalypse campaign for the collectivist left to dupe their useful idiots with?

I think this article is shalow and simplistic, adding nothing of substance to the debate.
When the US asserted that someone living in Afghanistan had organised a significant attack on them, it was their rponsibility to produce the evidence for their assertion and initiate deportation, if the US and Afghanistan had a deportation arrangement. Because there was no such arrangement, and the suspect did not give himself up to US authorities, and continued to claim responsibility for the attack, the US chose to invade Afghanistan to apprehend or kill the suspect.
As far as I understand international law, this is lawful on the US' part (if highly unpopular and almost certainly unwise). Furthermore, such an invading force has the responsibility to provide the minimum security of the state apparatus which it destroyed - the Afghan state - and to remain doing so until the Afghan state can resume this responsibility. This is also an obligation under international law.
Many, both inside and outside Aghamistan, wish foreign troops to leave, but they can only morally do so once minimum security is re-established. It may be that the present foreign troops can never do this, but they must make the attempt or organise others to do so. At present they, and especially Australian forces, are committed to training Afghan troops to replace them. That (some of) those troops may attack foreign forces is no reason to stop the training. It is only Afghan troops and police who will ultimately provide the necessary minimum security.
Many outside Afghanistan, and some inside, worry that fanatical religous leaders - Taliban and others - will take over Afghnistan and return to the days when Osama bin Laden and others like him were free to do as they please, turning Afghanistan into something resembling Saudi Arabia and Syria. This may eventually happen, but it should be, if ever, with the consent of the Afgh people. It will certainly happen if foreign troops leave without re-establishing minimum security, and it will not happen with the consent of the Afghan people, but over the dead bodies of any dissenters.