A stimulating article though my lack of faith in politicians, even Ministers of the Crown, remains - hence I don't agree on all points.

I agree though that the "Defence Organisation" which may be synonymous with DMO, is fairly represented.

The key piece of evidence against Min Smith is of course the (Maj Gen retd) Cantwell article of March 10, 2012 http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/politics/lack-of-respect-cuts-both-ways-with-minister-20120309-1upmu.html . It moves from electrical knowledge issues to a detailed time, place, record of dialogue regarding Minister Smith.

I see the Cantwell details (I'm sure other witnesses, particularly from the US Army could come forward) as more compelling than the perceptions of loyalty, good intentions and good characters of the many previous defence ministers (who, as an indicator of loyalty, all moved quickly out of their Defence portfolios...).

I have an alternate theory regarding Minister Smith's conduct as recorded by Cantwell. That is:

- Smith was and is overwhelmed by his portfolio (he can’t leave it in the short timespans achieved by his Defence Minister predecessors),

- Smith was also exhausted by the plane ride, jet-lag and agenda of his lightning tour of Afghanistan.

Smith may also have resented a frequent trait in military briefings which might be summarised as certain of “facts”, cut and dried, clipped, but with perceived condescension. However the military briefing approach might be understandable in a profession where ambiguity may cause fatal hesitation.

Particularly briefings from those who risk their lives...

It seems Smith didn't grimace enough, nor make enough empty promises, to get the same respect as Faulkner. The "do you still beat your wife" question from the soldier that was expected to be answered with a "yes" or "no" was perhaps answered better than reported by Cantwell, who clearly has the knife held out and a conservative political leaning held in.

Smith is an unemotive nuts and bolts man, incisive and clear minded, not an ardent presser of the flesh. He obviously asks questions behind the scenes, if he does not do so in briefings, which clearly upset top brass. It may dislike his bedside manner but, by now, should have learned not to underestimate his conceptual abilities.

I can't believe this garbage.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but as I get it, we have a new officer recruit who is perfectly happy to sleep around. They object however to being made a film star while doing so.

We have this same recruit charged with previous drunken behaviour.

Some idiot politician decides that because some of this recruits foolish behaviour has been caught on video, the charge for drunkenness should have been dropped. Why?

The recruits commander is suspended from his post, because he did not drop the previous charge. Of course if the commander had dropped the charge, he would then have been interfering in normal military justice.

If these facts are true, Smith must go. There is no other alternative. He has interfered in matters which should have nothing to do with him, or his roll, & has displayed total incompetence.

I wonder how much of the bull dust is because the recruit in question happens to be female? A great deal I believe.

Smith is being criticized for trying to straighten out the military.
The criticism came from retired personnel. People that should know better.
Now of course the opposition has got to get on the band wagon. Just in case there is some dirt lying around.
This mob will do anything but talk about the economy.

Hasbeen what consenual persons do is nobodies business, and in this instance persons of poor social intellect exploited this person for their amusement.
Your derogotory comments towards this person, is a sad reflection on your own social comprehension of the understanding of respect.

There are strict no-sex rules for cadets at ADFA. There are a mass of other rules - in an environment of military discipline (one hopes).

Unlike normal uni students cadets are paid – an extra incentive to abide by the rules.

Kipp, the mere fact of existence does not entitle anyone to "respect", at least not from me it doesn't.

If you, this cadet, or anyone else want my respect, earn it. It is not bestowed indiscriminately, as you appear to think it should be.

If you behave as this cadet, & her co-star have, you'll have a really hard job, from such a starting point, gaining mine.

I respect you as a fellow human being, but not for your derogatory comments towards others who are not in a position to respond.

In that case Kipp, you should condemn Smith for denigrating an officer who is prevented by his position from defending himself.

This officer fulfilled his duty as required by military law. We then have a "B" grade politician, who obviously doesn't understand military law, despite his position, decides to do a bit for the women's vote, & makes as fool of himself.

Worse he is still making an ass of himself by being churlish in the extreme. The man is unfortunately not enough to apologise for his fool mistake.

While Smith's intentions were good, he essentially pilloried and hung out to dry one of the most respected members of the defence, to gain political capital in the media, and subsequently was shown to have over reacted.

That no one presently employed in the defence force is in a position to comment means that it is left to the retired members who without exception have indicated that Smith is despised by most in charge of the defence force.

Even given Gary Brown's indication that things need to change in the defence force, Smith has handled it so badly that his ability to handle his portfolio is severely compromised.

Perhaps he should have the foreign affairs ministry considering that Carr is stuffing it up royally.

The ADF need to be reminded they are the employees of the Australia Taxpayer, and not above the same rules and moral standards the Australian taxpayer must respect.

Yes Kipp, the DOD sometimes forgets who it is working for and has always been in danger of being a law unto themselves. As for the DMO, it should have been scuttled years ago, the waste and poor decision making in that arena is enough to make any Defence Minister stay awake at night.

It is a courageous politician who would go up against an embedded culture but it takes a courageous politician - even if Sir Humphrey would be turning in his grave at the thought.

I'm sure that Smith and the greens will whip them into the politically correct, kind and nurturing organization that we want from our defence force.

Well done Mr Smith, there should be far more honesty and plain speaking about the nitwits who run our defence forces, and those equally brain dead lumps who order the equipment, that never works.

As for the Kamp Kommandant of the ADFA brothel, he is in charge of a training facility that constantly, constantly, makes the news for its stupid activities, be they sex related or just the usual sort of military nonsense others call 'bullying'.

That said, what do we want? Knuckleheads who kill and order others to kill on commamnd, or genteel soldiers who understand and appreciate the finer points of philosophy?

Time for an end to the three separate forces with their reliance on tradition and esprit do corps (read, high regard for bullying within the ranks and a total disregard for those outside the military).

A single, modern, defence force, with a single line of command, burn the flags, break the swords, dump the regiments and sqaudrons, begin again.

As for Australia spending money on junk equipment all the time, what's the problem there?

They're all too busy boozing in the officers mess to know how to buy a car never mind a tank, sub, ship or helicopter.

If I was Smith, I'd have 'em in my corridior on the red seat doing lines every day till they understood what their jobs were.