I understand we provide foreign aid to Indonesia. Perhaps, instead, we should be hitting them with the bill for all the costs associated with the boat-people problem - for surveillance, rescue, detention, and legal aid, and for repatriation of those few who are sent back 'home'. Also, Aus could possibly make a case for the Indonesian government to be indicted by the UN for crimes against humanity - or for manslaughter - even if such a case would be unlikely to go ahead. Certainly their government must take some responsibility, and a bit of a scare has to be worth a try.

Indonesia's role cannot and should not be ignored. (And they have a terrible human rights record, as demostrated in East Timor and West Papua, and including regarding the Balibo 5.) They need to seal their borders, as do all other countries along the chain, all of whom are eager to send the 'problem' next door, with Aus at the end of this particular line.

We know the basic problem is prevailing conditions in the refugees' countries of origin, as compared with those in Aus (and elsewhere) - and exacerbated by our reluctance or inability to repatriate more than one or two here or there, and then only after a long legal battle at taxpayers' expense.

There is no easy solution to the problems in these originating countries, but I'm sure a lot more could and should be done in that regard. Look at the situation developing in Iraq, now that the allied troops have withdrawn. It appears we could be expecting even more refugees from this quarter - as well as possibly from Syria, Libya and Egypt.

The UN needs to take a stand! But, as a global force for good, the UN is proving recalcitrant, toothless and indecisive, and perhaps even a total waste of time and money.

The refugee crisis is a global problem, and requires a global solution. Wars, repression and abuse of power need to end, and a new world order begin. The crossroads is not nigh, it is here and now.

Duncan Graham,

Here you are!

Now, if you had known that all Australians were bestowed with the sentiments displayed by the above nineteen comments, would you have wasted the ink to write about boat people?

Fortunately the average stature of the common Australian is by far higher.

Thank you Skeptic,

But I don't think you needed to be so personally unkind to Mr Graham at Christmas time. Mr Graham is no doubt as valuable as those whose opinions differ.

I don't know that his stature is any less than the majority (If you are at all logically inclined then you'd realise that the majority would tend to equate with average on this issue) of Australians.

And merry christmas to you too.

Isn't it interesting Skeptic, that it is the most stupid who we find are most "up themselves"

imajulianutter says "The Liberals had and still have a consistant humane solution."

I've knocked around other threads on this topic and read many a newspaper letter, but not seen one other person use the term "humane" in relation to the Coalition solution to deterring boat-people.

What exactly is humane about turning unseaworthy vessels overcrowded with asylum-seekers back out to danger at sea? I can accept the adjective "consistent", but "humane"?

The unsafe, immoral and illegal use of force was effective in deterring asylum seekers in boats. However,to return to it would be a very sad day for our nation.

Labor is trying to implement a deterrent that does not forcibly endanger lives at sea or compromise our navy, which is responsible under international law for the safety of those it encounters.

Why does the Coalition, irrespective of the national interest, push Labor towards implementing its own position on the use of force when Labor's swap alternative has a high likelihood of success?

I am saddened by dark-hearted comments of some on OLO towards their fellow man. They assert Australia should give nobody sanctuary, often justified by uncertainty over whether all claimants qualify or concern that we have our own unfortunates to worry about. I would venture that some holding this outlook care little about our own, let alone outsiders.

If Australia wants to save lives......DO NOT! EXCEPT PEOPLE FROM THAT ANGLE.

What is wrong with you people?....I'll tell the truth whats behind it all.

See, if the cash-registers don't ring....our econ collapses, so bring more people in, just has that small ban-aid effect. Now, most want the, and the all, singing with the tunes of constant.....however in the long-run...the fall of Rome will happen....unless....we take the "just pay for the costs and run the econ, not as profit, but as a turn-over....just for a while.....or we keep going and burn everything until its all destroyed......thats not very smart, is it?

We all have the responsibility's and families to run, just take life as slowly/timely, and after 25 years of nonprofit....just checks and balances, you and your sons/daughters will see....that just living and the planets repair, is the best course action, and you know it.....or A third world war!

Which one do you want?

CACTUS