Shonga

Thanks for the hilarity. I am too hot, tired for succinct comment. This poor l'il victorian would never seek asylum in tropical climes, the humidity would melt me.

Guess what, folks. The Government makes decisions on foreign policy, and if you think they are going to take against Indonesia because of the touching scene of a little boy wearing underpants several sizes too large and a bag over his head, you are mistaken. Indonesia is a valuable partner in the war on terror, and it has, belatedly perhaps, agreed to contribute to the policing of illegal fishing in Australian waters.

East Timor was a one off. I still cannot understand how we got away with, or whether it was really worth it. They started complaining about us straight after we ‘liberated’ them. I think Indonesia would lose patience if the same action were taken in West Papua.

There will always be a softly-softly and carry a big stick relationship with Indonesia, but it is a vital and convenient relationship, which only a lunatic would attempt to break.

The Indonesian fellow is angry. Perhaps what a minority of Australian ignoramuses say about his country irritates him. These Australians, generally, also rubbish their own country and chunter on about cultural relativism, but when Indonesia acts relative to its culture and laws, they get stuck in, particularly if Australian criminals are involved. They also sneer at Australia for being America’s deputy sheriff in the region, but clamour for Australia to interfere with Indonesia.

What hypocrites!

Who's 'chuntering on about cultural relativism'?

Genocide is genocide, whether it's happening to Jews Kurds or West Papuans. The Indonesian bloke can rant and rave all he wants, but it doesn't alter the fact that his country is clearly in the wrong here.

Anyway, advocating that we accept a couple of refugees isn't quite the same as callling the military liberation of West Papua.

Leigh:

I agree with the others-You are irritating to debate with because you think you are alot smarter than what you are. How can you have an 'opinion' based not on facts but on false assumptions, and expect people to take you seriously? My frustration and I expect the frustration of many posters is that you cast judgements based on emotion, are totally inflexible and are content to be heard rather than contribute meaningfully.

You have a ridiculously simplistic concept of foreign affairs (amongst other things) and most are probably quite embarrassed for you.

PTBI

Sukarno created an archipaelego 'nation' on a whim and without any great foresight or precision. In doing so he trapped many different people of many different cultures and national identities- if Indonesia is so great to these people then why are there separatist movements from Aceh to Bali to West Papua? Why does Indonesia ignore the pleas of Balinese for greater protection from East Javanese terrorists while devoting huge numbers its armed forces to struggles against poorly equipped separatist movements?

Indonesia has become a liabilty for the US. America is only interested in Indonesia because it owes it huge amounts of money, and has allowed itself to become a training ground for Islamic terrorists. Indonesia has very little prospect of repaying its debts. Senior government ministers in Indonesia refuse to make JI illegal and actually dined with its spiritual leader instead of helping their country negotiate its financial crises.

With this sought of background do you seriously believe that Indonesia is anything other than the laughing stock of both the West AND the East

PTBI,

Why not lay-off the 'my army's bigger than your army' bit?

We all know it outnumbers ours 9 to 1, so what's the point of repeating what we know or abusing people about their feet? Of course we have dirty feet, its a wide, brown, sandy, dusty land and we love it! We don't really understand suggestions there's something wrong with the sole of your foot, some feet are quite attractive, none should be knocked for their hard work :)

I think we should also try to use the same information as a starting point. One article well worth reading for an exhaustive explanation of our foreign policy relationship is:

Birmingham, J. 2001, ‘Appeasing Jakarta - Australia's Complicity in the East Timor Tragedy’, Quarterly Essay, Issue 2, Schwartz Publishing, Melbourne

Note, the Australian author is very critical of Australian foreign policy. Note, nobody here has murdered him yet.

What we try to achieve is evolution not revolution. Revolution is the desperate tool of the murderer and it hurts the weakest in society most and first. We aim for change not hatred, debate not violence. Look closely at our reaction to Bali, did we invade? Obviously not. Were we sorry for the poor Balinese? We are. Did we laugh when Amrozi suggested bikinis and booze caused it? Yes. The Hindus Balinese had no problems with them, only with unwelcome assassins.

Lastly, I recall Yudhoyono took around TWELVE cabinet ministers to Australia with him last time. Indonesia is well liked here and we readily distinguish between accepting refugees from invading the country. Conversely, we gratefully accept the cooperation and friendliness that we receive from your President. However, we also know that he knows that not all the President's men are loyal...

I mean this sincerely when I say that until you and citizens from some other countries live in democracies and cultures where there is no 'eye for an eye', where disagreements don't lead to bombing and you can take insults on the chin from another with a different opinion you can't begin to know what it means to be free.

WRE,

You are right about one thing. I am inflexible in my views. Like others, I am a product of my experience, and I make up my mind - not emotionally, but on cold, hard facts and careful consideration. What am I supposed to do? Throw away over six decades of thought and experience to agree with someone who has all the trademarks of a spoilt brat?

And what’s this “debate” nonsense? Since when did OLO stand for On Line Debate?

I am happy to just express my opinion, and leave it at that. I don’t feel threatened by other posters who have ideas completely different from mine. I believe we are all entitled to our views, which, if they are worth having, shouldn’t need to be backed up with lecturing and abuse of other posters and their views. We can all adequately have our say by addressing the content of contributors’ articles. They are the ones with something to “sell” us, and they are fair game. I’m interested only in what they say and what I think of it. Not what you think. Perhaps you would feel better about yourself and your opinions if you did the same. I will continue to post when I wish to, and what I wish to, irrespective of your attitude to freedom of speech.

Finally, I don’t frustrate you. You allow yourself to be frustrated by my opinions. The simplest solution - don’t read my posts. And if you want to debate, join a debating club.