The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Iraq government's situation is very complicated > Comments

Iraq government's situation is very complicated : Comments

By David Harding, published 16/6/2014

Iraq and the region are a patchwork of factional fiefdoms, and finding a way of keeping them together is difficult once they have started to run.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. All
The situation is moving quickly with sunni ISIS insurgents moving far south of Mosul - meaning Mosul is no takeable set piece bastion.

Latest seems to be that a major massacre by ISUS insurgents has occurred far south of Mosul around Tikrit.* This and other massacres may:

- increase the evacuations south from Baghdad

- increases chances of US air and drone strikes on ISIS insurgents.

- perhaps lead to cruise missile launches from Western naval units in the Persian Gulf and maybe in the Mediterranean.

* see http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-16/isis-insurgents-publish-photos-of-mass-execution-in-iraq/5525342
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 16 June 2014 11:17:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Complicated, is the understatement of the century.
Look, all we can do is use our technological target acquisition advantages, to completely understand the military movements of this mass murdering Jihadist group.
And then attack them from the air, with extreme prejudice, when they are massed and strung out in the open. And then only if officially invited to do so!
And for now, there's plenty of open space between, where they are now and Baghdad?
We, should attack them with stealth airborne resources, once so exposed, light them up and then just hit them with surface to ground Armour piercing missiles and dozens of thousand rounds a minute mini-guns, and from all sides!
Napalm also is acceptable for this group of mass murderers, to light them up and maximize both the terror and confusion, that is still necessary, to complete the military objective!?
We want them running in absolute terror, in all directions, not actuating and lining up SAMS!
Better a thousand of them than millions of innocents!
The main attack, second and third waves, gunships, coming in hard on the heels of stealth resources?
In one way out another, so as to pack the scene with as many warships as poss?
We simply cannot return to acceptable collateral damage, as a tactic, as none is actually acceptable.
One suspects there is still respect for strength and a show of resolute implacability in the middle east, and is all that can ever sway the miscreants.
One can't imagine anything so extreme, as to be too extreme for alqida.
Or indeed, a need to deal with them as robustly as possible, as soon as is possible!
Once the aforementioned mission, is mission accomplished, then surely the local regular army, must be relied on to mop up and complete the mission, as if it were their mission!
That said, I'm just not sure that the west has enough resources there out the moment, to make a successful mission possible, or simply minimize and restrict the casualties, to the intended target!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 16 June 2014 11:49:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well I guess Rhrosty, your plan is at least likely to stop too many of the Iraqi regular army joining the insurgents.

The real question is, where do you find someone strong enough, tough enough & ruthless enough to control the country & bring peace even if only by fear.

Yep, where do you find a Saddam Hussein when you need one?
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 16 June 2014 12:23:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As Pete says, the atrocities committed by these terrorists (how come that term is being avoided lately ?):

- increases chances of US air and drone strikes on ISIS insurgents.

- perhaps lead to cruise missile launches from Western naval units in the Persian Gulf and maybe in the Mediterranean.

I certainly hope so. If that doesn't work too well, I wouldn't be surprised, as the terrorists get much closer to Baghdad, that Iran will send in crack-troops - with conditional US approval to push out to Fallujah and Ramadi, and up to Tikrit (the birthplace of Saladin, Salah-ud-Din, a Kurd after all), where - IF they are successful - Iranian forces will confront Kurdish forces. Of course, the US worry is that the Iranians won't leave afterwards, but consolidate its control of all of Iraq south of Bakubah or even Tikrit, and east of Fallujah.

But that will be another story.

ISIS may be beaten back, but the problem will still be how to completely destroy it, and remove a bunch of murderous fascists and utter reactionaries from the face of the Earth - and similar thugs, such as Boko Haram.

Another problem will be what to do with ISIS returnees to Australia (if they could be identified) - now that ISIS has clearly committed war crimes, and crimes against humanity, I would certainly support arrangements that any returnees be detained until they have been proven, chapter and verse, to have had nothing to do with these sorts of crimes.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 16 June 2014 12:55:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Iraq government's situation is very complicated.

No it's not.

They are all #uc%wits & the Middle East is getting what it deserve.

Let's not forget they are all innocent civilians that are doing the fighting & killing. If the US get's involved then they will say that THEY killed all the "innocent civilians." Best to just sit back & laugh. Close the Borders so no one can get out. Let anyone in who wants to be there.

None of the Wests business. We tried & they made it fail. Stiff Doo Doo.
Posted by Jayb, Monday, 16 June 2014 1:09:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Rhrosty

Your theories of peace through war are beguiling.

Yeah the West raining symbols of peace on the baddies may well sound like "throwing a grenade into the proverbial burning building" but Hey Chuck "Puke" Hagel is deep in the Situation Room planning. Balance should not hold back Crusaders vs A-rabs.

The following weapons may force peace to break out, or else:

- the AC-130 gunship, a Hercules chock full of bullets and shells, boppy music, http://youtu.be/QBGRhI4WtiA ;

- the A-10 Warthog in Action. An equalizer - Great for trucks, even tanks http://youtu.be/eCnjWmtfvFo ;

- and who can forget the "Highway of Death" Gulf War One, the Score Peace 1, Evil 0. http://youtu.be/hhmXleZXAr0

Go Team!
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 16 June 2014 1:15:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet: - the AC-130 gunship, a Hercules chock full of bullets and shells, boppy music, http://youtu.be/QBGRhI4WtiA ;

Well snoopy is still around but in advanced versions, but the A10's have been retired, unfortunately. Maybe they'll drag 'em of the Desert floor & refurbish them.

I got supported by Snoopy on night. Put on a great show. Pity they were dropping 50 million Candle Watt flares, 6 at a time, at the time so the light show wasn't as good as it should have been.

Still, the West should stay out of it otherwise the likes of Poirot & the usual Terrorist supporters on here will be accusing the West of killing the innocent civilians that are killing the innocent civilians.

Waiting...... waiting...... ;-)
Posted by Jayb, Monday, 16 June 2014 1:39:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Jayb

Getting into this serious boytoy weapons techno-porn biz for us toyboys I'm not sure if all A-10s are actually retired - see http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473159/father-and-son-share-a-10-legacy.aspx .

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 16 June 2014 1:49:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pete,

I don't think this is a game - terrorists who line up and kill 1700 people in one go are not playing games. I fervently hope that both the Iranians and the US obliterate these reactionaries from Iraq, pursue them into Syria and obliterate them there too. What more do the terrorists need to do to demonstrate that they are very serious about exterminating any who oppose them, that they are eager to use terror itself as a weapon, in order to convert or eliminate ?

Jayb,

I don't think even Poirot would be naïve enough to come out in support of fascists like ISIS.

But you never know - look ! there's Abbott doing something !

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 16 June 2014 2:10:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I still think the West should stay well out of it until there is no one left standing. Then the place could be repopulated with decent people.

Although, why anyone would want to live in a sand pile, I don't know. Even Israel. The Promise Land? The Gods must have been laughing their head off when they did that.

We MUST refuse to take any refugees from the Middle East, with the exceptions of the Christians, only, & maybe some Jews? We don't want them bringing their aggressive overflow here.
Posted by Jayb, Monday, 16 June 2014 2:25:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If there is one thing obvious from the armchair general fantasies of the contributors above up to and including JayB at 2.25pm is that relentless ignorance and an inability to grasp even the basics of Middle Eastern history over the past 100 years is alive and well.

Have any of you faux warriers actually read any history? Are you aware of how the seeds of the modern day devastation were laid by British and French imperialists anxious to carve up the Middle East between themselves for the oil and gas riches that lay under the sand?

Have you applied any thought to how the 2003 invasion, based upon lies about weapons of mass destruction, destroyed a civil society with the highest living standard in the Middle east? That more than a million Iraqis were killed between 1991 and 2012 and a quarter of the population displaced.

Have you given any thought to the fact that the US is arming and financing jihadi terrorists in Syria, and claiming they are opposed to the self same groups in Iraq?

No of course you haven't. Instead you fantasise about wreaking more death and destruction to compound the felonies already perpetrated in Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria and elsewhere. The only beneficiaries, at least in the short term are the US military industrial complex, Saudi wahabi extremists, and the State of Israel that sees the progressive destruction of all societies in its neighbourhood that might pose a threat to its own expansionist ambitions.
Posted by James O'Neill, Monday, 16 June 2014 4:28:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James O'Neill matey

Just because we don't follow your arrogant leftist, West hating, agenda doesn't mean we don't think. I've read a great deal of history cobber.

Including that about Arab tribes and Persians having their own world views, own evil, own war-like spirit and culture separate and long before your racist Western-centric determinism.

People's can be evil and make mistakes without the US or Europe being the cause - or is that impossible in your small ideological world?

Read the history of the Iran-Iraq War* of Saddam Hussein gassing Kurds and of Iran using kids for mine clearance.

How do you explain honour killing of those women who seek to choose who to marry?

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War#1980:_Iraqi_invasion

The Western media admits the West's sins while your pure Middle Easterners restrict information - supporting your prejudices.

How bout reading this? http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iraq/report-2012

Happy?
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 16 June 2014 5:22:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh, the French and British empire building expansionist were the to blame!
Sure they were, and that expansionism, include the murderous activities of the black and tans, the highland clearances, and turning early Australia, into a feared, world away, prison colony.
So, following your impressive logic, James o'Neil; people of Irish or Scottish extraction, should proceed to their ancestral homelands, with all possible haste, and proceed to massacre, torture, mutilate and rape at will, and punish all and sundry, that dare stand in their path, or simply plead for normal human compassion.
It was once our land, so we have all the rights you so generously confer on this brigade of mass murdering Jihadists?!
Do you also seriously suggest, we leave allies out, hanging to dry, as this brigade of mass murdering brigands descends on them, dispossessing them yet again, of what little the so called imperialist left.
What would you do, leave mass murdering brigands to attack all and steal what they will, like a modern day black and tans brigade, or should we intervene, if asked to, by a legitimate govt?
Personally, it's a wonder, the war rooms in the Pentagon, don't have at least one scenario, for nuking the whole dam lot, as a shortcut, that just helps them achieve their never ending evil intentions, or attempts to completely wipe each other out.
As for their oil, if it were still really important? The USA, would do as it did last time and invade, if only to secure essential, self defense energy supplies!
I still don't have a problem with the idea of eliminating this inherently evil group of mass murdering Jihadists, too extreme for even extreme Alqida, any more than I would have any compulsion, of destroying a wild rabid dog, predating my flock of relatively helpless sheep!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 16 June 2014 5:50:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jo'N: an inability to grasp even the basics of Middle Eastern history over the past 100 years is alive and well.

my reading of the ME goes quite a bit beyond the last 100 years. I know it's a bit hard for you arm chair Philosophers to grasp but they have a testable History that goes back about 6000 years (not Biblical) One thing the people in the ME are good at is squabbling over Miles of Desert. If it wasn't for the Oil it would be totally useless. The Promise Land? Yeah right!

JO'N: People's can be evil and make mistakes without the US or Europe being the cause - or is that impossible in your small ideological world?

Yep, that's why I say stuff 'em. The sooner it happens the sooner it's over. The only thing the West should have to do with it is to guard the Borders to stop anyone from expanding the area of the War outside the ME. Lock the gates & let 'em go for it. Just think all these fighters are just innocent civilians when they get killed with a gun in their hand.

JO'N: Have you applied any thought to the 2003 invasion. and a quarter of the population displaced.

The West went in at the request of the millions of Refugees who escaped (displaced) the Saddam Terror regime. I guess the West thought it was doing the right thing at the time & it thought if it stabilized the area the people would go home. Yes, we were fools.
Posted by Jayb, Monday, 16 June 2014 5:54:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hullo Pete.

You actually reinforce my argument, which if you read it without automatically wanting to attach you're evidence free opinions and prejudices about my alleged views you would see.

I didn't argue that the Arabs are free of fault. What I was saying was that interference by western powers (and Sykes Picot was a French-British deal with not an American in sight) have made the situation in large areas of the Middle East immeasurably worse.

Neither did I suggest that Saddam Hussein was an angel. He did however create a secular al Qaeda free relatively advanced society that western greed, ignorance and criminality destroyed. The perpetrators of that particular criminality incidentally, remain free and Australia won't even hold an inquiry,unlike the British.

In the Iran-Iraq war you overlook the fact that Saddam was armed and supported by the US.

If you think the "western media admits its sins" then you, matey, have not been paying attention.
Posted by James O'Neill, Monday, 16 June 2014 5:57:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@JayB: re your final paragraph. If you really think that then further discussion is pointless because you are either so blinkered or irredeemably stupid that nothing will persuade you.
Posted by James O'Neill, Monday, 16 June 2014 6:05:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes James O'Neil, I do read a lot of history, and that is why your opinions are potty.

Every advanced civilisation has expanded it's borders into barbarian lands, which is how civilisation has spread. The reason was often self defence, as barbarians covet the material goods of settled people and covet their prosperity. On this and every other planet where civilisations exist, there comes a time when the advanced civilisations will realise that ending human barbaric degradation through imperial conquest is ultimately beneficial to the conquered peoples. As Churchill said." What more progressive enterprise can an enlightened people have, than to bring peace to warring tribes, to strike off the chains of the slave, to bring the fruits of modern medicine, and to begin in entire peoples, the first stirrings of commerce, agriculture and enterprise."

Somebody had to do it. It became the white man's burden to enlighten the world, and at least as far as th British Empire, they did a damned fine job of it. It was Britain who created Iraq because all of the petty khans and sheiks wanted all of the Middle east to become their personnel fiefdoms. The Arabs and the Iranians supported Hitler in WW 2 because he hated the Jews almost as much as they did. The reason why Britain invaded Iraq in WW2 was because the Iraqi government allowed the Luftwaffe to base bombers in Iraq to bomb the Suez canal. The reason why the British and the Russians occupied Iran is because the Iranians were trying to enter the war on Germany's side. Of course we deposed their leader and installed a puppet Shah.

Your problem, is that you think that the Arabs and Iranians, who are religious fanatics who are devotees of the most dangerous and warlike religion on this planet, think just like everybody else. And that the reason why they are failures is because the white man has "oppressed" them. That is total baloney. But you can bet that the Jihadis lap it up. They need someone to blame for the fact that their religion is a failure.
Posted by LEGO, Monday, 16 June 2014 7:01:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi James,

Why do you think that the only dynamic is Sykes-Picot, from which all subsequent evil springs ?

There are, and have been for a thousand years, a multitude of dynamics in the Middle East, nationalism versus religion, Sunni versus Shia, Arabs versus Persians and Kurds and Turks &c., traditionalism versus modernity, tribes versus state centres, tribe versus tribe - which pre-dated any western imperialism, and have post-dated it as well, to a large extent as if it hadn't occurred.

The fact remains that salafism or even more brutal interpretations of Islam, have a hold in much of the Islamic world, and currently is butchering its way through Iraq - and today Nigeria, Kenya and perhaps other parts as well. The question for you, as for all of us, is: how to combat and extinguish this ghastly movement ?

Ultimately, if we have any respect whatever for human rights and people's lives, we're all on the same side, which may also include the US, Iran, Russia, Israel, 'moderate' Muslims, Left and Right.

ISIS - can you get this through your head ? - is an extreme Rightist movement, ultra-traditionalist and fascist. It is only incidentally anti-US, in that it opposes everything the modern world stands for. It explicitly flouts any Geneva Conventions - or are they too bourgeois for you ?

This is a fascist movement of the modern world but one which - I suppose, don't they all ? - has its roots in a pre-modern, reactionary way of thinking, way of life, ideology.

If you want to apologise for it, don't ever again call yourself 'Left'.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 16 June 2014 7:10:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Continued.

I am presently reading 'The Malakand Field Force" by Winston Churchill. You should read it, it might wake you up. To start with, it is beautifully written, and the logic is sound. Did you know that the Taliban existed in 1897? Here is Churchill on that.

"The Talib-ul- ilms are protected against their critics as the skunk is to the hunters. They are safe because they are too filthy to handle, and too loathsome to approach."

"All are held in the grip of a miserable superstition."

Their demand that the outside world simply leave them alone, would carry much more weight, if their love of plunder and brigandage did not compel them between planting and harvest, to engage in raiding and extortion. Had they kept to themselves, they may have lived forever within their fortified and loopholed hillside hovels, in barbarian squalor and ignorance."

The Yanks were quite chummy with Saddam Hussein. They helped him with satellite intelligence which told Saddam just where and when the next Iranian offensive would take place. They never "armed" him. If you say otherwise. What military equipment did the yanks sell him? All of his equipment was Soviet, Chinese,, Brazilian, South African, and East European. The only American stuff he had was equipment captured from the Iranians, or bought off the Israelis. The yanks knew that it took a psychopath like Saddam to keep a multicultural cesspit like Iraq together. And Saddam kept the local jihadis under control. If he had grown a brain and just kept his murderous inclinations to his own people, the yanks could not care less. But the yanks were not going to tolerate him grabbing 70% of the worlds oil supply. And why should they? Once he was defeated, he should have grown a brain and behaved himself. But no, the stupid oaf just had to keep pulling the yanks beard until they got rid of him.
Posted by LEGO, Monday, 16 June 2014 7:38:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Having just read my way through the above comments, I reckon James O'Neill is playing the rest of you on a break.
I especially like the references to Churchill, who used early airplanes after WWI to drop gas bombs on some of the areas more recalcitrant tribesmen.
Or that we deposed a government in Iran to install "our" Shah because the Iranians entered WWII on the side of the Nazis, and not that we did it a decade after WWII ended to pinch the oil from a nationalizing government with some communist sympathies.
And we can all reference events in history to support our side of this argument.
Can't quite see how it is logical to berate the ISIS for being barbarians while advocating that we butcher them, thereby becoming barbarians ourselves.
The old map is gone. To find our way in the new one I suggest we make an ally out of Iran and give Saudi Arabia a miss - they are not our friends and do not have our interests at heart.
And then give Israel away for the exact same reasons.
And I'll wager that last comment puts the cat among some of you pidgins.
Posted by halduell, Monday, 16 June 2014 8:36:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hal,

Yes ? No ? Should one use extreme measures against such brutal terrorists or not ? How easy it must be to sit back and pretend that it does not, and can never, affect you - and why won't it ? Because you are anti-US, and that will save you. Good luck.

Yes, of course, the US and the Iranians should co-ordinate efforts to exterminate these vile reactionaries (do you remember what that word used to mean, Hal ?) And if the Iranians, why not Israel ?

And since their main Arab ally is also fighting the salafists, why shouldn't the Russians get involved somehow ? Perhaps they could approve some of their arms flows to Syria and Iran to be used against ISIS in iraq.

The Yanks could even put pressure on the Saudis to get off their holy @rses and put some of their money where their mealy-mouths have been for so long, supposedly opposing the salafists.

That would be an interesting alliance - Iraq, Iraqi Kurds, Iran, the US, Israel, Russia and the Saudis.

We'll see. Of course, it won't be all over even when ISIS is defeated - there's still al-Shabab (i.e. as in Kenya today), Boko Haram and the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban. Etc. Etc. That's how it is, Hal, nobody has to manufacture enemies these days. Settle in, it's going to be a bumpy fried.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 16 June 2014 8:55:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once more the septics shoot themselves in the foot.
After arming the rebels in Syria they are now shocked to find them destabilising Iraq.
Its almost like this was why the whole syria thing happened.

The stupid americans have been played like the fools they are. Manipulated and conned like gullible children. And it looks like the iranians might be the ones to pull the united states of idiots out of the fire and sort the mess.
How humiliating america.

And they want us to follow them. When will we learn?
How many more 911s will it take for america to learn.
Nothing good ever comes from arming extremists to fight your enemies.

FIGHT WAR
NOT WARS!
Posted by mikk, Monday, 16 June 2014 11:13:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Haldual. I had never heard of your allegation that Britain used poison gas on the savages on the North West frontier, or anywhere else. So I checked WIKI and their article claims it is BS. Where did you get that? Pravda, or the Green Left Weekly?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_in_Mesopotamia

The fact that we deposed Nazi sympathising governments in Iraq and Iran came from two books I read written by decorated soldiers. Unlike you, soldiers are no BS people. They write what they see with their own eyes, and they are not interested in propagating political fantasies. The fact that the Iraqis were helping the Germans was clear to author John Masters (The Road Past Mandalay) on account of the fact that he was strafed by Me-109's operating from an airfield that the Iraqis had helpfully given to the Germans. Didn't know that, did you?

The coup to topple the Iranian government, that was plotting to allow Hitler the use of their oilfields, was recounted in that wonderful book by that remarkable man (who you never heard of) Fitzroy McLean. As a soldier and a diplomat, his amazing book (Eastern Approaches) recounts the entire political situation in the Soviet Union, the Middle East, and Yugoslavia during the war. If you had read books like these, your brain would now be inoculated to the debilitating effects of communist propaganda.

The British empire at its height was the greatest civilising force that the world had ever known. Since Britain's retreat from the responsibilities of Empire, much of the world has reverted back to barbarism. Those that didn't, usually hold the British in high regard.

But don't worry, the western pax Americana is coming to an end. Too many parasites, many of them imported, are rorting our welfare systems and sending the western world broke. But if you hate the British and the yanks, and dream of their inability to police the world, I don't think you are going to like what is coming next. Like so many resentful savages, you will one day wish that the Brits or the yanks were back.
Posted by LEGO, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 3:39:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A quotation attributed to Mr Churchill: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes."
Charming fellow! But it seems that no gas was ever dropped from the planes, and I stand corrected.
Apparently the Brits relied on aerial bombardment and punitive burning of villages to achieve their quest for the control of Mesopotamia's oil following WWII.
The CIA and M16 engineered 1953 coup in Iran, which overthrew the elected government of Mohammad Mosaddeq, is amply documented and no longer denied by the Yanks at least. Don't know if the Brits have fessed up yet or not.
And today we may be coming full circle if the US and Iran join forces to stabilize the rapidly emerging new alignments in that oil-cursed part of our world.
What's coming? A new map for starters. And a multi-polar world?
Posted by halduell, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 8:04:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Halduell. Thanks for the timely reminder that the 1953 coup in Iran was engineered by CIA and MI6. Lego seems under the bizarre impression that the coup was to prevent Hitler using Iranian oilfields! Rather, it was on behalf of the Anglo-Persian oil company (now BP) that didn't like the nationalisation of the oilfields by Mossadegh. Lego's grasp of history is as reliable on that as on all other points. Any reliance on the memoirs of old soldiers is at best dubious.

@Loudmoth. Joe, I don't think Sykes-Picot is the wellspring of all evil. It is rather a good illustration of what happens when countries are created for the benefit of western imperialism with a complete disregard for the culture, religion or history of the affected citizens of those territories.

There is a relentless disregard by most of the commenters here to ignore the fact that western policies have exacerbated (and in many cases created) the problems. To detail them would exhaust OLO's word limit, but reading Seymour Hersh's 2007 article (The Redirection; New Yorker magazine) would be rewarding for those actually interested in what has happened and is happening now rather than those who use articles in OLO to give vent to their ill-informed prejudices.

We can see the policies described by Hersh being played out today in the Middle East. Patrick Cockburn and Robert Fisk (neither of left wing persuasion) are two contemporary commentators who have a relatively clear eyed view of the realities, certainly more so than any of the BS in the Oz media.

Continued
Posted by James O'Neill, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 9:33:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi James,

I think you are confusing two events, the removal of the old pro-Nazi Shah:

[from Wikipedia:] 'Reza Shah ruled for almost 16 years until September 16, 1941, when he was forced to abdicate by the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran. He established an authoritarian government that valued nationalism, militarism, secularism and anti-communism combined with strict censorship and state propaganda.'

[and of course the German armies were fighting their way across North Africa, in order to move into the Middle East and seize the oilfields.]

and the anti-democratic overthrow of Mossadegh (and, I think, his later murder by the CIA).

But that was then, this is now. Shah, Anglo-American, Hashemites, Ibn Saud, etc., etc., are all history which has nothing much to do with the rise of salafism.

In fact, one could surmise that the rapid rise of the most reactionary forms of Islamism has been a response to the threats - and opportunities - thrown up by the Arab Spring, by the most backward elements in Arab and Islamic society.

If this is so, perhaps what we are witnessing is the sort of ideological ferment - and reaction - that Europe experienced 400-500 years ago. Perhaps, the leap to more modern values won't take the Islamic countries quite so long.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 1:35:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JO'N: That more than a million Iraqis were killed between 1991 and 2012.

Are you saying the Allies shot & killed ALL of these Iraqi people? I think you are. Or, was it the Iraqi people themselves that created most of the civilian deaths by fighting amongst themselves & they still are. Has that escaped your attention or have you chosen to ignore those facts.

JO'N: Have you given any thought to the fact that the US is arming and financing jihadi terrorists in Syria, Did they or was their just talk about support. All talk, I think. A bit of private support from Terrorist supporters in the US but that's all.

JO'N: the State of Israel that sees the progressive destruction of all societies in its neighbourhood that might pose a threat to its own expansionist ambitions.

If I was an Israeli I'd see it that way too. Nothing wrong with that.
JO'N: @JayB: re your final paragraph. If you really think that then further discussion is pointless because you are either so blinkered or irredeemably stupid that nothing will persuade you.

JB. The West went in at the request of the millions of Refugees who escaped (displaced) the Saddam Terror regime.

Are you saying that there were no refugees from Saddam's regime? Strange I remember specifically, (on TV) an Australian woman & others begging Australia & the West to do something to help them. Are you saying there were no refugees coming to Australia at that time? You must have been very young or had your head in a Philosophy book at the time. Either that or you didn't want to know. The latter I think

JO'N: Neither did I suggest that Saddam Hussein was an angel. He did however create a secular al Qaeda free relatively advanced society that western greed, ignorance and criminality destroyed.

It was OK if you were a Sunni or brown nosed Saddam. Everybody else was disappeared or put into torture chambers, gassed or just plain shot in the Plain of Reeds. I wonder why people were leaving in droves to become refugees.
Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 2:16:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A précis of "Background to Dunsterforce." by WJ Preston. RSL News.
Many educated & Patriotic Persians supported steps to democracy. Due to corruption the Upper Classes & the Public Service were divided between Russia & Britain. It concluded with the Angle-Russian Convention of 1907 splitting the Country between themselves. The Mejlis refused to ratify the agreement & the Russians overthrew the Government. In 1909 the previously corrupt Government was restored to power, not forgetting that Persia was Bankrupt at the time.
The Caspian Oil fields had been abandoned by the Russians, so the upshot of this was that the hated Russians were out of the north & the less hated Brits remained in the south. The Dunsterforce was deployed north in the previously held Russian area.

The founding of the CIA was a combination of all America's Secret Agencies (about 5 in all, SAS, SES. SSS. & a few others) happened after WW2 & was in response to the rise of the Communist Party in China. The CIA was to help the Nationalists but they had no money. That's where the Golden Triangle comes in. But that's another story.

JO'N: @JayB: re your final paragraph. If you really think that then further discussion is pointless because you are either so blinkered or irredeemably stupid that nothing will persuade you.

God I love it when I'm right. You may not agree with what I say, but I can't force you to be right. ;-)
Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 2:46:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is worth a read if you haven't seen it, by Boris Johnson the conservative Mayor of London.

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/tony-blair-is-mad-to-deny-iraq-was-a-tragic-error-20140616-zs97h.html
Posted by warmair, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 5:05:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
continued:

@Jayb, Rhrosty et al. Of course the atrocities committed by Islamists with a medieval mindset are deplorable. For all their killing however, they have stiff competition from the Americans and their allies. Half a million Iraqi children died due to western sanctions on Iraq between 1991 and 2003. See Madeleine Albright's callous rejoinder: "it was worth it".

Total Iraqi deaths caused by the west between 1991 and 2012 are more than one million according to a study done by Johns Hopkins University and published in The Lancet. More than 3 million Vietnamese died during what the Vietnamese aptly call the "American War". Not to mention depleted uranium, the gift that goes on giving (Iraq) or Agent Orange (Vietnam)

And then we have Obama's drone program, a weapon of terror as an instrument in a policy of terror (Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere).

When you express the same level of outrage at western atrocities as you do for Islamist atrocities then perhaps, only perhaps, your views might garner attention.
Posted by James O'Neill, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 5:10:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So the USA installed a pro-oil Govt because they stole Iraqi oil. Iraq has been plagued by religious tensions for centuries.

Which country created Saddham Hussein ? Yes the USA. But Saddham got out of control and started selling oil in Euros instead of US $ and he want Iraq to be independent. This is why he had to go. Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and there were no weapons of mass destruction.

This mess is the fault of the USA, Britain and the Banking,Military Industrial Complex which controls it.
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 5:29:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James O'Neill & Arjay,

Why do you think everybody is a puppet, all controlled by the Yanks, and completely unable to think or do for themselves ?

Do we have to trawl back through the politics of the entire Ottoman Empire and ever since ?

And Saddam was his own man, his own thug, long before he started working with the Yanks. Remember how he had all of his Cabinet shot in the seventies ? What, that was on the orders of the US ? Or his own ?

Come down to the recent past: the reaction of conservative and fundamentalist Muslims to the West, in the elaboration of groups like al-Qa'ida since the eighties and even more recently, their alarm at the growth of democratic ideas, however partial, since 2011.

The question is not how does the US create and manipulate these reactionary groups - they've never had that power or inclination - but how have these groups sprung up within Islam, developed quite endogenously and independent of any outside forces (except in reaction to them) and turned into one of the most dangerous and anti-Left forces in the world today.

Fight them today, or fight a bigger and more vicious force tomorrow, that's the dilemma.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 5:53:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay: This mess is the fault of the USA, Britain and the Banking, Military Industrial Complex which controls it.

You must be right Arjay. It's got nothing to do with the their Medieval Religious spat, Tribal Tensions or their love of fighting anyone & everyone or the people being backward & living in dirt because the rich Arabs won't share their wealth with their common people.

No the Russians, British, French, & Americans are personally responsible for any atrocity committed anywhere in the Middle East. Even the ones being committed by the innocent civilian ILIS shooting anyone they can get their hands on. Even if the Taliban, Al Quidia, Muslim Brotherhood or any other Terrorist group kill people it the Wests fault. "The Devil made me do it."

uran1d10t.
Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 5:53:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Haldual.

If you get captured by an Afghan, what they do to you is this. First, they cut the tendons in your arms and legs so that you can't move. Then they prop you up on a boulder and slit your belly open. They want you to see the wild dogs approaching who are going to rip your guts to pieces as they feed on them. And you wonder why Churchill in considered it appropriate to drop poison gas on these savages to stop them raiding, raping, torturing, robbing and pillaging?

Remember, it was only after WW1 that the idea of poison gas should not be used in war was agreed upon by most civilised nations. Prior to that, poison gas was considered just another weapon of war.

In his book "The Malakand Field Force", Churchill recounts the fate of peaceful people who think like you do, when confronted by barbarians who really do want to destroy them. When the British Brigades entered Waziristan, they were amazed that there was ample evidence of a prior Buddhist civilisation that had been completely destroyed by the savage hillmen. Those people who do not want to dirty their hands doing what is necessary to survive, and who want to live in lotus land and go to sleep in the sun, usually wake up with some barbarian bastards foot on their necks.
Posted by LEGO, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 8:20:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is the full speech of President Dwight Eisenhower in 1961. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBwFDevJ7ls

Dwight," In the council of Govt, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted power whether sought or unsought by the Military Industrial Complex. The potential for disasterous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination, endanger our liberties and processes."

All the fears and trepidations of Dwight Eisenhower have come to fruition. Bush with the Patriot Act, Obama with the National Defence Authorisation Act, legalised assassination,illegal wars and many other signing orders have trashed the US Constitution. John Howard here brought back the Sedition Laws which negates habeas corpus. Anyone of us can be gaoled indefinitely without legal representation if our Govt defines us as a terrorist.

I'm tired of the stupid morons who refuse to see the reality.
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 8:28:21 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
arjay: legalised assassination, illegal wars.

Hmmm. I suppose the likes of the Terrorists groups in the Middle East & in Africa are all legal so they are OK as log as the West doesn't interfere with their aims. Is that so?

arjay: Anyone of us can be gaoled indefinitely without legal representation if our Govt defines us as a terrorist.

Sounds like a plan but they would have to prove in a Court that you belong or belonged to a Terrorist Organization with intent of causing harm in Australia.

Here is a scenario. Your kids are going to school & you have seen some suspicious person hanging around the school. He looks familiar. Then you recognize that he is a raving child molester that has just shifted into the neighbourhood. He is known to pick up kids near schools & molest them.

According to your theory you'd invite him home for tea to meet your kids. I love your thinking ;-)
Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 9:22:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
arjay:

"Anyone of us can be gaoled indefinitely without legal representation if our Govt defines us as a terrorist."

And that's happening, is it ? How many in Australia ? How many in the US ?

And how many Iraqi soldiers have been slaughtered in the past week ?

And you know what ? They weren't working for the Yanks either.

Face up to the real world, not some idiotic fantasy. Al Qa'ida - and ISIS - are their own men, they didn't need the Yanks to create them. And they don't need them to tell them what to do. They are reactionaries, terrorists, in their own horrific way.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 11:53:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Susan Lindaur was an Ex CIA asset who was the second non Arab to be arrested under Bush's Patriot Act.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G43zl4fzDQg Susan was gaoled for 12 mths and endured a mock trial that lasted 5 yrs and was gagged for another 5 yrs.

Susan was the go between CIA agent that talked directly with Iraqi officals.The decision to attack Iraq was made well before 911.Susan wrote a letter to Bush's Secretary of State saying why the attack on Iraq would be a disaster and so was arrested for being an Iraqi agent.

Susan was warned by the head of the CIA not to go to New York as a miniature nuclear device could well be exploded there. When Susan contacted the US Govt and told them about the planned 911 attack the Govt then had no "plausible deniability".

It is interesting that the CIA got Susan to ask the Iraqis constantly what they knew about this impending terrorist attack. This is the CIA well before 911 trying to tie the Iraqis to 911.

The Iraqis were being very co-operative with the USA because they did not want war but the Military Industrial Complex could not make profits out of peace and they wanted all of Iraq's oil.

This presentation by Susan is well worth watching. Amazing!
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 1:31:10 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you Loudmouth, for displaying James O'Neill's ignorance of history. And this is the same character who piously claims that he knows history and we don't!

But I would not waste my time on Arjay. I think you can glean from his last post that he is completely off the planet with his conspiracy theories. The CIA was going to put an atom bomb in New York!

Hahahahaha.

The best thing about Arjay is that he is the best argument we have that lefties are potty. Actually, Arjay, a friend loaned me a fictional book who's plot was about a secret arm of the US government who were plotting to do just that. Of course, some retired ex detective superhero discovers the plot and gets on the trail of the malefactors. I didn't bother to read past the first twenty pages because it was just too ridiculous. Arjay probably read the same book and thought it was an historical manuscript. He probably thinks that the X Files are a documentary.

Too many young people adopt the left wing view purely for vanity. They really do believe that always opposing mainstream opinions is what "intelligent" people do, and they have a compulsive need to think that they are intelligent. But when they read the sort of crap that Arjay writes, it must cause them to reassess that particular premise.

Keep it up, Arjay. You are the best argument that we have. What's next? Is the USA being run by an android Elvis Presley, who was cloned by the Martians?
Posted by LEGO, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 4:20:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LEGO your credibility speaks for itself. Ad hominem is your choice of attack. Susan Lindaur wrote a book about her experiences called, 'Extreme Prejudice' Ray McGovern is another ex-CIA asset who knows the truth.

Another author you should read is by Sibel Edmonds,'A Classified Woman'.She was an FBI translator who was gagged by the US Govt under the official secrets act for her knowledge of what really happened on 911.http://www.boilingsfrogs.com/
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 6:59:32 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Arjay: Richard, you are wasting your time trying to persuade Lego of anything. As a very large number of posts by him conclusively demonstrate, if something does not accord with his idiosyncratic world view it is immediately labelled left wing, usually, as you point out, accompanied by ad hominen attacks.

@Loudmouth. Joe, it is not a sufficient argument to respond to criticism of western policies with variations on the theme that certain Muslim groups (I am sure you don't mean to slander 1.3 billion adherents of that faith) are infinitely worse.

It is of great concern to many people that the so-called war on terror, more accurately a war of terror, has been used to justify the progressive dismantling of centuries of hard won legal protections. The NDAA in the US eliminated habeas corpus, probably the single most important protection we have against arbitrary government power. The post 9/11 Howard government introduced an extraordinary range of repressive measures. Whether they have been used here or not is not the point. We claim to be a democracy based on the rule of law. That is a claim under serious attack. I for one will not stand by and watch the current enemy du jour (it used to be communists) be used as an excuse for the inexcusable.
Posted by James O'Neill, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 8:10:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen says

"The real question is, where do you find someone strong enough, tough enough & ruthless enough to control the country & bring peace even if only by fear.

Yep, where do you find a Saddam Hussein when you need one?"

Can u hear yourself?

I have a fair yet unconsidered proposal –
Rather than as everyone seems to assume and with no explanation, why ALWAYS is the USA looked to for every world problem?
Let’s test this new look world we have today and invite China and India to deal with the problem, let them take their military and invade.

Anyone?
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 5:25:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
TO JO'N

Australia once had the White Australia Poicy, a socially cohesive nationwide community with a very high degree of what constituted correct behaviour. It is people of your ilk that wanted multiculturalism. The result has been spiralling crime rates and even terrorism. Successive Labour and Liberal governments have been forced to enact wide ranging reductions in our civil liberties in order to combat these problems that people like me predicted and which could have been easily avoided.

I am amazed at your mentality. You demand that Australia adopt policies which are guaranteed to cause endemic social problems, and you then have the gall to criticise the people who have to try to remedy the problems that you created with your own stupidity.
Posted by LEGO, Thursday, 19 June 2014 6:46:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What James O'Neil is really worried about is, that he'll lose his easy money as an Advocate for Potential Terrorists seeking Asylum & he'd have to go back to EARNING a living. Lawyers are like that.

He'd have to wait 6 months to get the Dole too. ;-) Waiting...... waiting.
Posted by Jayb, Thursday, 19 June 2014 8:56:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem with people like LEGO and Jayb, is they have a whole lot of pieces but are totally clueless on how they fit together.

Well chosen pseudonym LEGO.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 19 June 2014 10:07:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
arjay: The problem with people like LEGO and Jayb, is they have a whole lot of pieces but are totally clueless on how they fit together.

Yes we have a whole lot of pieces, it's just that some people don't like the end result when they are assembled correctly. Boom, boom.
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 20 June 2014 8:40:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, the usual trolls are really scraping the bottom of the barrel now. Lego wants a return to the white Australia policy. Tell us Lego, (as Arjay says, a singularly apposite pseudonym) were the original inhabitants of Australia consulted on that policy? No? Thought not. After all, those superior aged white males ensured that they enjoyed the same classification as fauna, thereby avoiding pesky inconveniences like voting rights. Does it occur to you that there are some fundamental problems with the fact that it took until 1976 to recognise that they were in fact humans.

Jayb, you really ought to consult the law of libel. There is a distinction between disagreeing on policy options and flailing around with ignorant allegations. Not a distinction you recognise obviously judging by your history of comments on this site.

For the record I have worked for a living for 55 years. 30 of those years have been as a barrister. It's quite possible that some of the people I have represented were potential terrorists, although when you think about it that covers just about anyone, particularly given the elastic definitions of a "terrorist" used by the Obama regime to justify killing of civilians by drone strikes and other acts of governments over the years.
Posted by James O'Neill, Friday, 20 June 2014 10:04:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@James,
<<were the original inhabitants of Australia consulted on that policy? No? Thought not…>>
So from this James by extension deduces that the descendants of those settlers have no right to determine immigration policy—that should be the exclusive prerogative of James and his elite.

PS James there was no monolithic class of “original inhabitants”, they came in successive waves—dare we use the word “invasions”.
Posted by SPQR, Friday, 20 June 2014 10:23:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JO'N: Jayb, you really ought to consult the law of libel.

Hmmm, Drawing a long Bow here, must have hit a raw nerve. "Is that a threat, is that a threat!"

I see that the Law profession is 39/50 on the "Most or Least Trusted List." I would have thought it would have been further down along with Politicians & Car Salesmen at 48/49. Still.

JO'N: It's quite possible that some of the people I have represented were potential terrorists.

You said that you have been representing Boat People, then obviously you have at some point. Have any you represented returned to help out in the ME? I assume, it's more than likely. Will you be representing them when they are refused re-entry to Australia too?

As I said, representing Boat People would have been a lucrative easy pastime. Pity it'll dry up soon. I suppose you'll go back to University to study some more Philosophy. Oh! wait a minute, You might have to pay for it now. Damm! Still, with all that easy money you've been earning, you should have plenty.
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 20 June 2014 2:26:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James,

As a lawyer of fifty years' experience, you would know that the so-called White Australia Policy had little directly to do with Aboriginal people, and was in fact never even called that, but something like a Restricted Immigration policy, aimed at non-British, non-Whites, especially Chinese.

I recall, in Darwin as a schoolkid, that it was already being 'relaxed' in the late fifties, when it was announced that any Australian-born Chinese could apply for citizenship which might be granted if they waited fifteen years. One of my first funerals was for a Darwin-born Chinese man, born in about 1894, who had died still not ever being an Australian, quite appalling really, especially considering the enormous contribution that Chinese people made to the development and prosperity across all of northern Australia and elsewhere.

And before somebody jumps in, yes, I have to agree that it was the Menzies government, with Opperman as Minister for Immigration, which began the process of dismantling that iniquitous policy, against the opposition of the Labor Party's Caldwell.

Roughly contemporaneous, Aboriginal policy was in the hands of the states until the 1967 Referendum when 90 % of Australians agreed that the Federal parliament could make laws in relation to Aboriginal people. But the struggle there was - and still is - how to get control of Aboriginal affairs out of the hands of the states and into federal hands.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Friday, 20 June 2014 3:54:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe, thanks for your civil response. I have been a lawyer for "only" 30 years, but in the paid labour force for 55. I agree with your summary, including the Aboriginal issues. There is a deep seated racism in this country and the White Australia policy, obviously beloved of some commenters on this site, is but one manifestation of that.

Can I respectfully recommend a book "The Seven Daughters of Eve". No-one can read that book with an open mind in my opinion and still harbour any illusions about the merits of whites or any other colour that our gene history bequeathed us.
Posted by James O'Neill, Friday, 20 June 2014 4:46:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Brothers (and sister O'Neill) redemption is at hand at today's highly intelligent, Friday, Iraq article - at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=16422

OK :)

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 20 June 2014 5:14:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gee, that's funny, James O'Neill. Just in case you have not noticed, there is a "Black Australia Policy" operating in every 'Aboriginal" apartheid area in Australia. This is to "protect" black culture from white culture. Of course, this does not operate the other way around. Aboriginal people can leave their "dry" reservations and make a complete nuisance of themselves getting sheet faced drunk in white areas, in the name of "equality."

If aboriginal people were not granted equality with whites prior to 1967, did it ever enter your tiny mind that it was for a good reason? If aboriginal people had had the right to drink alcohol prior to 1967, then the present appalling situation of aboriginal drunken dysfunction would have occurred a lot earlier.

Women in Australia were not equal with men either. A woman received less pay than a man for doing the same job, and women could not obtain credit without a male guarantor. Certain occupations were unavailable to females, and women could not even frequent bars. You don't hear women today complaining about that. But people like yourself never tire of complaining about how beastly white people are towards the poor black victims of white oppression.

If aboriginal people can protect their own stone age culture by discriminating against whites, why is it wrong for Australian white people to do exactly the same thing with foreign cultures? To say that blacks can do it but not whites, is racist and discriminatory.
Posted by LEGO, Sunday, 22 June 2014 7:54:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LEGO: To say that blacks can do it but not whites, is racist and discriminatory.

Reverse discrimination has been around for a long time. Especially in Courts. If it your word against an Officer of the Law, Member of the Clergy or even a CEO of some description then your word counts for nothing. I know JO'N, you'll say that we are all equal in the eyes of the Law (on paper) but in the real world, this is not so. Men are often discriminated against in favour of women.

A good friend of mine in Townsville, a chief Magistrate, told me once that the higher up the Legal Profession the more distant you get from real people & the real world. because they are afraid that it will compromise them in a Court Scenario some day. Their only friends are other members of the Law Profession. He was the Patron of the Vietnam Veterans Association.
Posted by Jayb, Sunday, 22 June 2014 9:10:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy