That's another undisclosed cost of multiculturalism, when a western government intervenes in a "troubled" land they run the risk of inflaming an insurgency on their own soil involving disgruntled expatriates and immigrants from that region.
All of the trouble in the world at present stems from the ideology of Islam and all of the "troubled" societies with the exception of central Africa are predominantly Muslim so any intervention in any theatre runs the risk of sparking a backlash at home.
Westerners will tolerate military casualties up to a point but public beheadings,shootings and the myriad oppressions and humiliations of day to day life alongside a Muslim minority are rapidly wearing out our patience and I'd guess this rising anger in the community has not escaped the notice of politicians.

Countries 'needing' intervention are victims of their own dysfunction. They should be left to live with what they have brought on themselves, or sort it out for themselves. There is no reason why civilized countries should risk their people doing it for them.

Agree with most of what you say and the case for early intervention you make!
Without which we have instead managed to make over 50 million homeless refugees!

Simply put a small U.N. sanctioned task force equipped with ultra reliable intell, and night sight equipment etc, could have simply surgically removed the power hungry dictators one by one, Who have been and are responsible for all the the genocide!

To that end, the paralysing power of veto must be removed form the security council and replaced with say, a two thirds or better majority in favor?

And that would require the agreement of most of the U.N. And therefore, just not doable?

Which if remotely successful, well might result in a dictatorial land grabbing, resource purloining Putin being removed When vulnerable, as the only available solution to the Ukrainian crisis or genocide?

Say as a S.A.M missile or missiles, that brings destroys his aircraft and sabre rattling entourage midair, when flying over neutral territory; seems not only apt, but perfect justice?
Rhrosty.

Rhrosty it's the power hungry dictators who keep the peace, when you have to govern populations with a median IQ of 80 the use of force is necessary, besides, what happened when they removed Saddam? Straight away the Shia people turned Al Sadr's Mehdi Army and the Sunni minority to their various armed Sheikhs and tribal Mujahideen for leadership.
Just get used to the idea that 95% of the people in the world don't care for liberalism, democracy and human rights but prefer dynastic hierarchy, patriarchy and religion.

The entire population of Africa, the middle east & eastern Europe are basically a waste of space.

We must not waste a single Ozzie serviceman's life on any of them. It is time to get out & let them stew.

If people like our author want to stick someone's nose into other peoples affairs, let it be theirs. Our defence force is just that, not a moral policeman for idiots.

Rhrosty why do you expect any sensible action from that disgusting cesspit that is the UN. It is controlled by the war lords & despots that rule much of the world, along with a good helping of "leaders" of tin pot republics that masquerade as elected governments.

If we want any sense or justice in the world, the UN should be the first target, not the arbitrator.

What to do to help?
Maybe if we let countries spend their money on social services like health and education, rather than the IMF and World Bank insisting on slashing social spending, and privatising essential utilities, that might help. Maybe if we practiced debt forgiveness to free innocent people from unjust debt often obtained by corrupt governments - the poor who saw none of the money but are left to pay for generations to come - that might help.

Surely if we have learnt nothing else, we have learnt you can't bomb people to freedom. It causes chaos and misery. It doesn't address the issues of extreme poverty and corruption which is at the heart of the problem.

Unfortunately the status quo suits those in power so things are unlikely to change.

We will continue to bomb countries so their resources can be extracted (eg oil,gas) by corporations. Our leaders will tell us we need to go to war to give the people freedom - we would never support these wars otherwise. But how many times have we heard this line? (fool me once ...) Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya - how come they never get the freedom and the prosperity they were promised? Is it possible the real purpose isn't freedom? How many corporations have enriched themselves during these wars? Ask yourself who benefits?

John Perkins was an economic hitman whose job was to corrupt various leaders, for the benefit of US corporations. Here is an interview in which he outlines how the West corrupts governments to get what they want. And if they don't play ball, then they are overthrown or assassinated. While tyrants who play the game are protected eg Pinochet, House of Saud etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVsB07CcSNw

R2P is a sham. If we really cared about people we would send more foreign aid, not bombs. If we really cared we wouldn't turn our backs on the refugees our wars have displaced. Once we get what we want out of a country our desire to protect the people seems to evaporate. Isn't that strange?

War is Peace donchaknow

Love Peace Justice

What J.O.M., like the Rwandan self appointed dictators? Ditto Somalia?
Rhrosty.

I find this whole mess the world is in very frustrating.

By not trying to assist those African or Middle East countries that have declined into dreadful civil wars, followed by droughts and famine, we now have the almost impossible situation of 400, 000 refuges having made it to Europe from those countries this year alone - according to the ABC news. Many others died trying to sail to Europe.

Western countries have refused to help those unfortunate warring countries at their own peril, and now the world is left with massive numbers of refugee consequences.
I don't know what the answer is, but I am glad I don't live in Italy or Greece right now.
They were already in enough financial trouble before having to deal with the refugee crisis across the ocean.

J.O.M. I find your assertions absolutely and entirely unconvincing, given the oppressed are just never consulted by their oppressor, and then when they are? If ever, 50% of them simply have no say!

The never ever defeated mujahedin fought against a superiorly armed and equipped enemy to avoid (the longed for oppression)!

And the Arab spring refutes as inpossible to misinterpret action, everything you say!

Simply mindlessly parroting what the oppressors assert, in no way somehow makes it true no matter how loudly and aggressive they/you bellow?

Your criminal/like minded fellow travelers in the Taliban, even tried to repress dissent by shooting an unarmed young school girl with a mind and thoughts of her own, in the head, to try and shut her up.

But not only failed dismally, but ensured she gained a martyr's world wide audience for her views! Which by the way replicate mine!

You have a nice day now y'hear.
Rhrosty.

I agree with HASBEEN on this issue. SUSEONLINE has also put it correctly when she opined '...I find this whole mess this world is in very frustrating...' ? So do I.

I often thought if only we (the West) could target those at the top, who're are causing all this misery when millions of their fellow countrymen and women wish to flee, often taking their very lives in their hands in doing so ? No doubt the world's a mess and somewhere behind this massive mess, lies ISLAM !

O Sung Wu, it takes two opposing sides to make a civil war, so I think the non-Muslims in the warring countries appear to be giving as good as they get, don't you?

Humans of any colour or creed tend to be greedy, wanting more land/minerals/oil/whatever, than they have.
So blaming Islam is not really enough is it?

The Vietnamese, Korean, Cold War, and Irish conflicts didn't involve Islam, and neither did either of the world wars either, as far as I know?
People died terribly, just the same.

Hi there SUSEONLINE...

There are elements of legitimacy in what you say, apropos human greed, notwithstanding any religious or cultural significance ? Still I can't help wondering whereever there're Muslims there's trouble ? Even within the very epicentre of the Islamic religion, Saudi Arabia, there's much bloodshed in the form of public executions usually held in the main City Square, in Riyadh. Many of these executions are in the name of Islam itself, against innocent men and women who 'dared' to commit some innocent infraction within the view or hearing of the feared 'Religious Police'.

I've no doubt there are many decent, good people who are practicing Muslims. It's not them we should fear, it's the faceless zealots who commit these barbarous acts invoking the Islamic Sharia laws as justification. Some insignificant Imam's only needs to get his knickers in a knot over some minor matter and he goes of his head directing all and sundry to take some imaginary Sharia action, against the hapless individual ? I couldn't imagine anything worse than living in a Muslim country. Always nervous about a knock on the door, anytime day or night, and a contingent of religious police carting you or yours off, to who knows where ? It's a worry for sure.

O Sung Wu, I do agree that I would also feel unsafe living in a Muslim country right now, especially as a woman. I have had no wish whatsoever to holiday anywhere in the Middle East or in many African countries.

However, I lived in Southern Ireland during the 'troubles' there, and was frightened at that time then too! I wonder if it seems like the Muslim countries just seem to be going through particularly bad upheavals themselves right now, or whether the Western World is now just involving themselves more closely with these countrie's affairs?

As a complete skeptic, I think the Western world Is far more worried about the oil in that region than anything else, and the Western Politicians know that a good war increases ratings amongst their voters if they feel 'protected' by that Government...

Susie on line

I disagree with your comment about the West only going to war over the oil.
They could have seized the oil fields in the East and refused to hand them back
To the Arabs at any time.

And if it wasn't for the fact that they are not allowed to bomb civilian towns where
Isis hides they could have destroyed isis in a matter of weeks.
Australia's own head of air forces made this statement on Q&A one night,
But I already had worked this out before I heard it confirmed. It's bleeding obvious
Isn't it, that the most powerful army on earth can't defeat Isis who managed to
Defeat everything in sight in a few short months with their ruthless, give no quarter
Methods. Why can't America defeat Isis and take Syria quickly as a much
Superior fighting force.

Because they are always trying to respect human liberties, even while fighting a bloody
War, for God sake. That's the same reason they haven't just anihilated countries and taken all the oil. They could have in the last 10decades.
What about the Saudi shieks maybe they should sell a few world banks and give the money to the poor Arab or African countries.
I don't think as a civilIan you would take too kindly to having to pay $200 to fill your petrol tank every week plus having the cost go onto all your groceries,
So it is not just the big American oil companies that benefit.
In fact America has forced the oil prices down recently by stepping up there at home production, and converting very rapidly over to gas in a lot of areas

To the author of this article,
All the ethnic genocide, and people fleeing from ethnic genocide,(the refugees)
Are fleeing from tribal territorial warfare. This has continued unabated across
Human history, the United Nations has failed to stop it or slow it down
To any great degree. And no matter what good people try to do it will
Continue. It's like trying to shut down the sex industry. Can't be done.

Because the two big driving forces of nature, the sexual instinct and the territorial
Instinct can't be permanently shut down, heaven knows they tried hard enough to to close the sex trade but it continues unabated like it has since early times.

I would seriously advise against multiculturalism, given that in the predominantly
Dual ethnic makeup of Germany, one tribe,the Germans, absolutely slaughtered the other And the Germans were one of the more advanced educated people. Didn't
stop them committing genocide though. So this idea that education can stop
This happening is shown to be flawed.

The Muslim religion is fascist, in the fact that they state, they want a Muslim caliphate(state) worldwide.
Now what did the fascist Germans want, all together now, say--- we want a German state worldwide.

It's not all that hard to ferment a civil war in a country. All countries have their political faultlines.You just find the faction that best suits your interests, then you finance and train those factions to stir up all kinds of unrest, so that the ruling government cracks down on them (as any government would do) and ... presto ... you have a full-fledged reason for 'humanitarian intervention' to save civilians from impending genocide or whatever.

The media then goes to work to do its job of making a strong, and largely unchallenged, case for sanctions, no-fly zones, last-minute UN peace talks etc and sending in 'advisors' to help the favoured faction to institute regime change - as if they weren't there all along, but the dutiful media won't go into all that.

What we then end up with is a once-functioning society that is now a shattered and destroyed country, with those civilians on the losing end rendered desperate to leave. Throw in an much publicised atrocity and a few massacres. And ... oh, dear. We now have a refugee crisis. Who would have thought it?

But always remember ... we are the good guys, who always have the best of intentions.

Yes Killarney.

What we can expect when good men only need stand and do nothing!

The Muslim Miscreants kidnapping schoolgirls in northern Nigeria, need a world wide reaction, not the painful snail pace inadequate reaction; that allows these bloody minded murderous and worse monsters, to entrench their position behind their civilian human shields!

The best way to treat a burn is drench it in cold water as fast as possible!

Had we done just that with ISIL, when irt was was out in the open and advancing, we could have eliminated this problem with a couple of C130's equipped with multiple mini guns!

And comparable with completely removing a single benign tumor before it becomes Malignant and inoperable, having metastasized.

It's okay to build dream castles in the clouds, but not move in as permanent residents!

Perhaps if your daughter, sister or dearest friend, had been one of those kidnapped, trembling in trepidation girls, used in the most horrible unimaginable way?

You might have been at the head of the queue demanding a hostile blood for blood, with extreme prejudice, reaction?

As like, say a properly planned Israeli action that liberated a plane load of passengers.

We could have taken a leaf out of your book and talked them out, you think, as one hostage was killed by the hour?

The menace of entities like ISIL cannot be understated!

Nor can there be a bloodless solution, however endless prevarication and the usual, let's give priests a chance, can only ever enable the monsters to further entrench an entirely intractable position!

However we need more than precision bombing to avoid repeating the outcome in Libya, where we used war planes; and then with the bombing task completed as far as possible; left the field to more of the same!

We the free world occupied both Germany and Japan for years for good peace related reasons reasons.
Rhrosty

Rhosty, that all sounds very well in theory, but remember the West tried to tame civil war and violence in both Afganistan and Vietnam for years, and failed and had to leave.

Short of completely destroying whole countries of people in Africa or the Middle East , what would you have the West do? There are millions of people in those countries, and always another violent man ready to stand up for their crazy ideas after the last one has died.

Does the West go over for a spot of rampant genocide ourselves?
Won't that mean we are just like them after all?

Suse the war in VIetnam failed for many reasons; first and foremost, for not staying the course and finishing what they started; and trying to suppress local dissension by mostly peace loving Buddhists (confused as communists) who when pushed deep enough into a corner, will fight!

Secondly the experts on the ground, (allegedly, the generals) repeatedly overruled by politicians too timid to take the fight to the north?

Which should have occurred as a counterattack military objective, when Charlie had all but used up all his resources in the very nearly successful tet offensive?

Even so, the management of that operation was all wrong, with kids barely out of college sacrificed as the human cheese in military mouse traps; set to get charlie in the open and able to be mown down by aircraft equipped with lethal miniguns.

Had we stayed the course in Afghanistan, we could have ended the Taliban?

But instead, pulled out critical resources to prosecute a less than well thought through war in Iraq?

Which had it been properly conducted, wouldn't have left the local resistance hanging out like a shag on a rock, to be subsequently butchered by the butcher of baghdad, who should have answered for his war crimes there and then!

Nor should the local army and police have been disbanded the second time round, just made less corrupted with integrity testing?

And tasked with keeping Iran or Turkey from imposing their unhelpful influence?

And there are some cases where, I believe, surgically removing a local death dealing warlord, would be absolutely righteous and essential!
Rhrosty.

Hi there RHROSTY...

Your comments concerning why the US and it's allies failed in Vietnam were in part quite right in my opinion. There were many variables in that war that the US failed to recognise, mainly the absolute opposition to the war by those back home ?

It's my firm belief we failed in prosecuting the war successfully because we lost it in Times Square, Washington and Martin Place etc. A military force can't possibly succeed if their fellow countrymen are against them ? We all heard of the huge demo's occurring back home in Oz, even in Vietnam ? And that was pretty unsettling and particularly destructive upon morale.

Worse, I remember we were outside the wire on one instance, having called for a routine 'dustoff' and even the 9 sqn. crew informed us of all these massive demo's happening back home ! Fragmented news and rumours, ostensibly emanating from official sources back home, was often much worse than no news in those circumstances.

I 'think' if all the allies had their various populations behind them during the Vietnam war, the result would've been very different indeed ?

Rhrosty

You, and so many like you, take official bad-guy media rhetoric completely at face value. For an ex-soldier, you are remarkably naïve about how imperial aggression operates.

But then again, soldiers are trained to address (i.e. shoot at/bomb) each crisis event as it happens, not to question what or who is behind it, and certainly not to look at the bigger picture or at who really benefits.

Imperialism operates in much the same way as the mafia. It creates a dangerous environment, so that those in harm’s way are forced to pay protection money to keep themselves safe. First, create the problem, then ‘benevolently’ supply the solution.

As for how I would react if my own daughter was kidnapped by Boko Harem, my first concern would be to get her back and my second concern would be to learn as much as possible about who Boko Harem is, where it comes from and where it gets its funding.

Inviting a Western military superpower to escalate the situation by bombing, destabilising and possibly even invading my country is a scenario I would NEVER entertain.

O Sung Wu/Rhrosty/Suse

Despite all the official rhetoric, America did not ‘fail’ in Vietnam, neither was it ‘defeated’.

The war in Vietnam was the third part of the US/UK Cold War trifecta, beginning with the Malayan Emergency in the 1950s and then the Indonesian massacre of the PKK in 1966 via the CIA-controlled Suharto coup. The object of these operations was to cripple any future advance of communism or socialism in SE Asia.

On this basis, the US was extremely successful in all three countries. By the time the US left Vietnam, it had achieved all its objectives. Vietnam was left diplomatically isolated, financially impoverished, emotionally damaged, and its infrastructure and land mass virtually destroyed. Over time, it had no choice but to capitulate to capitalism.

Mission accomplished.

I'm surprised this author isn't the head of the U.N or something similar, because this issue seems so easy to solve, and look back on in a few paragraphs.

This person could be the answer to nearly all of the world's problems.

A number of years ago (later friends of my parents) were a couple who were 'anglo saxon' and farmers living under the rule of Robert Mugabe.

Upon returning to their property, the woman was shot so many times in the stomach (by government authorities) that one of her intestines fell out and she picked it up off the ground and the couple rushed to hospital.

When they both got there (the woman) was told by a doctor, she should be dead and that she was lucky to be alive.

These people later applied to be refugees and were accepted into Australia (very quickly by the way), and that is why there is no 'line' in terms of refugees - people are accepted in terms of need - and these people could not live in Zimbabwe because of this country having a very extreme and 'race related' government.

"There will come a day when (president) Mugabe will not be there and people will regret and miss his leadership," the state-owned Herald newspaper quoted Grace (his wife) as saying. Absolute vile.

http://www.news24.com/Africa/Zimbabwe/You-will-miss-Mugabe-Grace-tells-Zimbabweans-20150828-2

What is happening in other countries, compared to Australia is nothing short of appalling, and this authors article (for this site) adds nothing realistic or serious to the issue of international affairs.

Well said Killarney.

For those who are concerned about the rise of ISIS, there is much evidence that the US and its allies are behind it.

Below is an an interview with Michael T Flynn who is a former Pentagon Spy Chief, retired US Army Lieutenant General, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency who saw intelligence reports in in August 2012 that the US was supporting radical muslim groups eg the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda to help oust the Assad regime in Syria - as well as the risk these groups might form a calaphate, but nothing was done - not just ignored, but worse. The US knowingly armed and supported the very groups that turned into ISIS.

You can see the entire interview here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG3j8OYKgn4 - you need to go in about 8 mins.

This is a surprisingly frank admission from a former spy chief stating there was no Intelligence failure, the rise of ISIS is due to a deliberate policy decision from the White House.
How cheesed off must he be to say this?
What does it tell you about the MSM that this wasn't front page news?
He isn't backing away from his comments either.

ISIS seems to be a rerun of Operation Cyclone - the CIA program that funded the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s to fight the Soviets. It gave rise to Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban.
Here is a youtube clip of Hillary Clinton admitting the US is responsible for Al Qaeda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw

Look up about the ties between the Saudis and the US and British. Why is Saudi Arabia the US's closest Muslim ally when most of the 9/11 hijackers came from there. Bin Laden was a Saudi. They export the most extreme form of Islam, Wahhabism. It is an Absolute Monarchy. It is a known funder of global Islamic terrorism. Why are the US and Brits such close buddies with the Saudi's? Look into this and you will be surprised what you find.

To Really Combat Terrorism, End Support for Saudi Arabia
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/31/combat-terror-end-support-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalism

Love Peace Justice