@Otokonoko:
I think I posted the links regarding farmers' complaints in my previous post. Go look it up if you wish.

@Liz45:
The vast majority of Indonesians consume local beef which is cheaper. Australian beef is mostly for middle to upper class Indonesians or served in gourmet restaurants. Beef is highly substitutable with abundant chicken or lamb. And no, we can get undiseased beef easily from many parts of the world, the only troublespot is India. Hence, Indian beef is not allowed to be imported to Indonesia.

The thing is, your links didn't support your argument, and didn't say that Indonesia purchases 70% of our cattle.

The first states that Indonesia accounts for 60% of our LIVE beef exports, which (based on my sources) means 60% of 5% (the 5% being the percentage of our cattle that are exported live). That's 3% - a far cry from the 70% you claimed.

The second didn't offer a percentage at all.

I've said before, and I'll say again: some farmers will suffer considerably, and some may go out of business if this isn't handled appropriately. I have stood alongside you all along in saying that this is a rash, knee-jerk decision. Where we have differed is your unsubstantiated statistical argument, and your gleeful prophesying of doom for our industry. It simply doesn't stand up to any scrutiny at all.

There are many people in the world that compare humans to cows. The cow is our Mother. We drink her milk for our whole life. How long did you drink the milk of your human mother? This is why in India it is illegal to kill the cow in many states. To think some one is insane because they see the cow, that provides us with her milk for our whole life as our mother, is very limited thinking. Just because someone has a different and broader understanding of other species and races than our own does not mean they are insane. In 1860 anyone that preached that the Negros of the Southern USA were not meant to be slaves, even though they had been bred to be slaves, was considered insane and prosecuted or killed by the slave owning farmers. But times have changed and the social consciousness has advanced.

Now anyone that does not agree with killing cows may be considered insane by some of the meat eaters. At least we live in more enlightened times and we are not prosecuted for our believes to protect the cow. Society has learned to recognize the sufferings and rights of races other than our own. The banning of the life cattle trade from Australia is a positive sign that the Australian society is learning to recognize the sufferings and rights of species other than our own. Indonesia as a whole is apparently not as advanced in this regard as they are not calling for the people who tortured these cows to death to be prosecuted. Some other societies are on the whole more advanced than Australia in the consciousness that removes us from the base consciousness of eat what taste good and care nothing for the suffering of others. The consciousness and lack of selfishness on the whole varies greatly from one society to the next on this planet. Please try to understand other points of views and levels of consciousness. Simply calling some one insane because they think differently from myself will not help our personal development.

@Otokonoko:

Well, if you think so it is up to you. The welfare of Australian farmers is not Indonesians' responsibility.

@lilasuka:

I don't think one country who still eats and slaughtered cattle is any more "advanced" than any other country what does exactly the same. Your analogy with slave trade is pure logical fallacy.

@ Proud to be Indonesian:

Clearly, if Indonesian abattoirs wish to slaughter livestock inhumanely, they should buy them from somewhere other than Australia. I note that you continue to show little concern for animal welfare.

Unless Indonesia can show that live animals sourced in Australia can be protected from indifference to cruelty such as you diplay, there should be no live exports to that market. If the industry isn't sustainable for humane reasons, Australia can live without it. The vast majority of Australians are apparently against live exports anyway.

There is a great difference between the rights of animals in one country and in another. Dogs can not be bred and eaten in Australia. Cows can not be bred and eaten in many states of India. But some one in Indonesia can torture a cow to death on film and face no recrimination. The consciousness of the societies in the different places determines what practices will be allowed.

The analogy of slavery is simple. In 1860 slavery was justified because "they were bred to be slaves." A similar argument is still used to justify the slaughter of cows. "They were bred to be slaughtered." Just because someone has bred an animal or human for a certain purpose does not make that purpose justified. Slavery was once claimed as needed for the economic survival of the farmers. Killing cows is now claimed as needed for the economic survival of the farmers. Both of these arguments are false. Try to see a greater variety of social attitudes and a greater span of history. Than you can have a clearer understanding of these issues without personal bias interfering so much.