"What we seem to forget that 30,000 to 40,000 people a year
should not be an issue."

I don't think the number is an insurmountable issue, Lexi, but nor are boat arrivals, deaths, and the equity issue for refugees awaiting resettlement around the world. All need equal attention.

The difference between now and the 70's is the growth of irregular maritime arrivals and the huge pressure of 45 million behind it.

Luciferase,

"The difference between now and the 70's is the growth of irregular maritime arrivals and the huge pressure of 45 million behind it."

So there's more pressure at the moment.

You don't think that may be the cause of so many taking to the boats?

Remembering that less than 1% of refugees in camps are resettled annually throughout the world.

I'm doubtful that Australia can raise the drawbridge - under the circumstances.

Yes, Lexi,

Whatever opinion one has on asylum seekers....there can be no doubt that both the major parties are engaging in "dog-whistle" politics bigtime!

Moir's cartoon again for those who missed it.

http://www.smh.com.au/photogallery/federal-politics/cartoons/alan-moir-20090907-fdxk.html?selectedImage=0

Sums it up beautifully.

Getting back to the main topic, do most Australians understand that turning boats back "when it is safe to do so" involves the deployment of military force?

Is what is described below what Australians should support? It takes nearly a fortnight from Indonesia to get to Christmas Island in a crowded unseaworthy vessel, then:

The log of HMAS Adelaide was tabled before a Senate committee on 21 February 2002. Extracts from that log relating to the inception of Suspected Illegal Entry Vessel 4 in October 2001 are below:-

6 October [2001]

1813 First warning given to master of vessel.

7 October [2001]

0153 Second warning issued.

0216 Boarding party ordered by Commanding Officer to prepare to board SIEV-4 when vessel enters Christmas Island Contiguous Zone.

0258 Adelaide made close pass down SIEV-4 starboard side.

0335 Adelaide directed by CJTF to conduct a positive and assertive boarding.

0402 Warning 5.56 mm (cannon) shots fired 50 feet in front of vessel.

0405 Warning 5.56 mm shots fired 75 feet in front of SIEV-4.

0409 Warning 5.56 mm shots fired 50-100 feet in front of SIEV-4.

0414 Boarding party advised by CO that if 50 cal machine gun warning shots do not stop vessel, boarding party is to aggressively board SIEV-4.

0418-0420 Twenty-three rounds of 50 cal (20 rounds of automatic fire) fired in front of SIEV-4.

0430 Close quarters manoeuvering by Adelaide, SIEV passed close astern to Adelaide port quarter and reduced speed/took way off momentarily.

0432 Boarding party issued final warning (to SIEV) indicating that if they did not allow boarding party to board, Adelaide would not let them enter Australian waters.

0442 Boarding party effected a conducted non-compliant boarding of SIEV-4.

0445 Boarding party in control of SIEV-4.[1]

Other SIEV accounts talk of later boats being scuttled and their occupants being collected from the water, which we can assume will again become orthodoxy.

In choosing between approaches to stopping boats, let's understand the true meaning of "....when it is safe to do so." ahead of polling the electorate over the PNG question.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s moral leadership
was demonstrated by the Fraser government assisting
Cambodian and Vietnamese refugees.

There are patterns of global movements of refugees which
explain boat arrivals. People risk their lives to get
to other countries in order to flee persencution and other
dangers. Immigration experts and political commentators
tells us that half
the asylum seekers to Australia in the last 15 years have
been Hazaras fleeing the Taliban.

Our government needs to demonstrate moral leadership.
For a country like Australia, re-settling 30,000 to
40,000 people a year should not be an issue. It never was.
It is as stated earlier only a trickle of humanity.

What I find somewhat puzzling is - the Coalition makes
a a big deal out of having a three star general running the
show (despite admitted problems to be faced with the
chain of command). Yet, the Coalition knocked back the
recommendations of a four star General - Houston, and his
Report under the Gillard government. They wouldn't have
a bar of it. It makes their current move somewhat superficial
and more dog-whistling to out-do the government in punitive
measures. All this seems
like a vote-grabber by both parties. I can't help but wonder
whether the tactics would be any different if this was not an
election year?

Will people who advocate that we should take refugees please get in touch with the Dubai Sheiks in the Emirates running the place, there are thousands of empty flats there, no one to take them, just empty, why on earth are these refugees wanting to come here when accommodation is available there, same religion, so what is the problem.

The problem is that the Sheiks are so oil rich that they do not want the scum to live there, so they raise outragesly high rents to live there, perhaps people like Marylin Sheperd could write to the oil rich Sheiks and persuade them to accept refugees.

Perhaps when people wake up to the fact that untold wealth is not being distributed in the correct manner to the less fortunate, as an example, the press had two pictures on the front of the Sunday mail this morning, one of a refugee child, and one born into the wealthiest family on earth, so there's the problem.

It is time people woke up to the fact that adulation of the extreme wealth is not the way to go, but most of these people think they are God's gift to earth, but they definately are not.