So, this clown has a mind capable of condemning a set of future actions in 2007 based on the activities of one partner's Grandfather between 1945 and 1968?

The most important attribute of SWB for both the Australian and US military is it's very wild, undamaged, nature. The adverse impacts of training operations on an area of that size are minimal. The fact that it is large enough to allow "fallowing" of areas so they can recover is another important value that both countries understand the importance of preserving.

Our own State Labor governments routinely sign off on housing developments that cause the permanent loss of habitat of a character and scale that dwarfs anything that is likely to impact on SWB.

And I can state, first hand, that it has been the essence of good military field craft since at least 1960, if not much earlier, to vacate an occupied site leaving as little evidence of your units presence as possible. Any tiny piece of information about the unit's occupation of a site is useful "intelligence" for an enemy. Even the location and size of a field latrine has been subject to detailed prescriptions as to distance from creeks etc, for more than 50 years. And I can recall, even at school cadet level in 1970, making certain that there was no visible evidence of our unit's occupation of a site before we left it.

I have minor doubts that US units may not follow this doctrine as thoroughly as Australian units but the fundamental training imperative still applies. SWB is not, as the author claims, a designated chemical dump. It is a training area of unrivalled value to not just the Australian and US mailitary, but also our Singaporean and other allies.

So get back to the mud pies, Bozo. There are feral pigs doing more damage to Byfield National Park than a whole Company of soldiers will do to SWB next door.

Perseus bores us with his boys-own fantasies, perhaps he should have read the article first. Bishopric cites the contamination and illness in Guam and Puerto Rico, I think Subic Bay (former USAF base Clark) in the Philipines deserves a mention too http://www.safetyforum.com/mtw/ . But i'll bet Perseus still will see no evil, mindless obedience is like that

perseus, the trees may grow back, but getting further enmeshed in american foreign/military policy doesn't appeal to me. i think that's the point here. are you afraid of indonesia? they haven't invaded anyone lately. i am afraid of the yanks- they have, often.

when the kiwis told the yanks to move on, the sky didn't fall. what is so hard about following their example?

So, Demos, SWB is just a surrogate for your political preferences. The training facility has nothing to do with it. They are our allies, so is Singapore, we share things with our allies. New Zealand only got away with severing links with the USA because they still had backdoor access via Australia. And whether you like it or not, most Australians like to bitch about the US but most also understand the importance of the common ground we share.

And most of us have much more in common with the average American than we do with some of the bombed out blog wonkers that tend to frequent this forum from time to time.

the 'common ground' being queensland. when the exercises are held around canberra, will the pm be even more polite to our great and good friends? if the exercises were held inside canberra, as they are in bagdad now, will you still love them, perseus? unconditional love, is it?

I travelled to Yepoon in early 2006 to interview some of the local people about SWB. The management of the area before and after it was used by the military was a hot topic. One local (Alby Wooler) who worked with Landcare was seriously concerned about the lack of consultation re: the management of the area. Basically He was concerned that the Department of Environment has granted a blanket approval for all future joint training exercises (under the Environmental Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999) to be conducted by the US & Australian government without any independent Environmental Impact Study.

As Steve said in his article:

"Recently the Australian Government changed the way it administers Environmental Protection Legislation, removing the usual need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for all ADF and foreign military training and infrastructure development in SWBTA if the ADF deem it unnecessary. The EIS is replaced by a Public Environmental Reports (PER), commissioned by the ADF, paid for by the military, reviewed and released by the military."

I think this a serious issue, regardless of where you sit on the fence politically there are a number of threatened species that live and breed in the area i.e. dugongs, turtles, birds. While the locals have been making alot of noise there has been very little said in the media or in parliament. We need to speak up