This was a useful article but like sso many contributions to the issue fails to acknowledge the origins of the current war. It did not begin with the so-called terror attacks of 9/11. Rather American interference in Afghanistan's affairs really began in the 1970s when Brzezinski persuaded Carter to follow a plan that would give the Russians "their own Vietnam". The Americans teamed with fundamentalist Islamists to undermine the leftist government of Afghanistan which was pursuing such radical policies as education for women, trade union rights, minimum wages etc. Space precludes further analysis on this point, but those truly interested in how we got into this shambles should read Fitzgerald & Gould's Afghanistan's Untold Story and Peter Dale Scott's American War Machine.
The decision to attack Afghanistan was made before the events of 9/11 and had more to do with the politics of oil,drugs and geostrategic aims of the US than the nominal reason of the Taliban government allegedly sheltering the perpetrators of 9/11. That wasn't true, but even if it was there was no justification in international law for the attack much less the occupation and continued ravaging of that country.
Gillard neither knows nor cares about such issues and the Coalition is no better. Thus she is never challenged on the appalling triteness of her views and policies as other writers above have noted.

...All the points of this article state the obvious and it does not present any new approach, or new information, relevant to countries occupied by the USA. Using the death of the latest two Australian soldiers in Afghanistan to highlight a perceived conspiracy theory, which accuses the Australian Government of hiding the truth from public view, is weak.

...Whether Bruce Haige agrees to the ideology of the West or not, the Middle East presents the front line between communism and the West. This is a front line controlled by despot regimes knowing nothing but war. Including war on their own populations, as an acceptable vehicle for maintaining that power, and, of course, controlling the vital oil fields so vital to our existence in the West. The US maintains a war of Ideology which has raged since cessation of hostilities of WW2: A war in which America invested the lives of 450 thousand servicemen and women, towards the freedom of the West.

...Another 37 thousand Americans died in the Korean conflict; and in a continuation of holding the line of the Western Ideology, Vietnam conflict inflicted another 58 thousand deaths of Americans in that war. If we compare the losses in the Iraqi war, at five thousand, and the contribution to Western freedom in Afghanistan, another fifteen hundred deaths, They rate as small.

...Australia has an obligation, as a member of the Western allegance, to face the foes with the same courage and determination exhibited by our allies, the US. Where is the fault?

The Taliban offered to give up OBL if the US could offer evidence of his role in 9/11. No evidence was forthcoming.
There was no case for the invasion of Afghanistan in the first place, and there is no case for the continuing occupation.
If the West is concerned about the status of women, why did it foster the defeat of the Soviet presence which was a modernising force?
Meanwhile the father of the Taliban, Zbigniew Bzrezinski, sleeps soundly in his bed, while thousands of innocents die for this hangover from Cold War madness.

Here is a passage from today's release from Veterans Today in the US, which is clear enough.

Gordon Duff....

"President Obama is now exploring avenues for a faster withdrawal from Afghanistan. American is flat broke, busted and our allies in Afghanistan have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they are far worse than our enemies. Karzai can’t bring his army up to speed because he is an American kleptocrat and oil company stooge making presidential noises nobody wants to hear.

A bigger issue we wish the president would face is the farcical nature of the war itself. Notwithstanding that Osama bin Laden was never a terrorist leader, died in 2001 and never took credit for 9/11 despite Barak Obama's entire Pakistan charade. Overthrowing a government whose only crime was tough oil company negotiations isn’t a first for America. Neither is the corruption and drug dealing that followed the American occupation. Still going strong.

This isn’t a war, it was and is an occupation. There was no substantive enemy to fight, not until we occupied the country and put a usurper into office. Then the people rose against us, kicked our tail and here we are, years later doing the Vietnam thing again.
If Obama had done what was right, investigate 9/11, and talk facts instead of his “you can’t handle the truth” game, we could have cleaned our own house back here instead of losing thousands and killing countless innocents.
When you take over office from a pack of war criminals, (you can’t call Bush and gang anything else), you don’t do more of the same. Doing what war criminals do, imprison, torture, murder, wage aggressive war, this makes you a war criminal too.
How must it feel having a Nobel Peace Prize when you can read the papers every day and learn how many children you have killed?"

Anyone see the irony here?

Yet another Australian death today. Another sad indictment of Howard's ego and Gillard's personal agenda as a stupid US sycophant, both a disgrace, unworthy of being called patriotic Australians.

rexw:

...If you read the list of comparative war causalities in my post above, it may allay fears that the Afghanistan war is not, in anyway, resembling another Vietnam.

...I believe veterans certainly have a right to voice opinion, but not the right to a casting vote on the subject of “reasons” for war, as you imply: After all, joining the services both here and in the US is a voluntary choice.

...It appears to me a bit late to complain about a dislike of a war (as does this letter from the veterans), after freely volunteering. The time for protest in this case, is before the event wouldn’t you agree?

The Mindless Mantra: Peace Activism.

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 dictators, terrorists 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.

Apologies for cutting and pasting from a previous post but quite frankly Bruce, it’s all your article deserves