From SM: "Firstly you claim (with no proof whatsoever) that the entire success of the Pacific solution was that the coalition turned back a handful of boats."

Nauru, a euphemism for removing the right of appeal from asylum seekers, didn't work and won't work again. That is the advice of the Immigration Department after having talked to a few more boat-people than you obviously have, SM. Force is what did it and Mr Abbott knows that even if you don't. I'm not going down this path with you again, been there done that ad nauseum. Look me up in users and go over all my posts and links therein.

"Next you claim that the navy are likely to disobey an order to safely turn back boats, that according to your own reason would save 100s of lives a year. (it is estimated 1000 have perished since 2008) based on a statement from an EX naval commander."

How do you think some boat-people did make it all the way in during the time boats were being forced back a decade ago, SM? Desperate actions by boat-people caused the Navy to forget the orders of the Gov't and adhere to maritime law.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/11/07/the-consequences-of-turning-boats-back-siev-towback-cases/

Why do you think the Navy wouldn't act similarly now? It was, and will again be, compromised in similar situations only they will be much more frequent to the point that standard policy will be to escort boats in or bring boat-people onboard. Chris Barrie is stating what we already know, in support of a Navy that agrees with him.

Only you, SM, can key in your last paragraph without hands shaking uncontrollably with mirth. The master of weaving lies and half-truths into fabric strikes again! Surely you write stuff like that just to see what happens next and I for one don't feel like picking you apart at the seams, yet again.

traveloz, do I detect a hue of Green in your comments?

When the Coalition wins a ruling majority on the back of this single issue, Green's will be able to congratulate each other on standing firm on flawed principle all the way to oblivion. So much then for open discussion and argument vs unfettered power.

The vast majority of voters will not support an open border policy, for good reason, and wishing otherwise won't change that. As bitter a pill as it is for Greens to swallow, the Malaysian swap is the lesser of two evils for them.

Remaining relevant in Australian politics is about more than sentimentality and unbending, flawed principle. If Greens want a significant hand in shaping Australia they must overcome lemming instincts and cutting off their nose despite their face. It's time for them to evolve.

Luciferase,

Now I have caught you in a lie.

The immigration department did not claim that the pacific solution or Nauru as part of it did not work, ever.

As for its future, only one person in the immigration department (headed by Chris Bowen) claimed that Nauru would not work as well. Notably the same genius that claimed that the Malaysian solution was legally sound.

Your previous posts never managed to explain the more than 30 x increase in boats since the lifting of the Pacific solution, and your claims of unpicking my arguments are laughable, as you have yet to provide any proof other than you own twisted opinion.

Traveloz Gday welcome, and thanks, truly.
Haveing you tell me my post is rubbish is a badge of honor I will wear it with pride.
And re state my view Australian voters have been disfranchised by the hung Parliament.
I with the exception of Wilkie and Xenophon think the independents are ok.
But Australia may not think so.
You will be unhappy, but DEMOCRACY was never intended to be government by the minority of the majority.
You too, and others,will be repelled by me for this, but Greens now and forever are intensely disliked, and unwanted, in fact considered extremely dangerous, to more than will EVER vote for them.
It is true,SOME within the Greens are great folk, dreaming of better, but trapped in a party too infiltrated by the loony left /radicals, to ever gain traction.
In my view, a poll held today, asking these questions, would give the results I use here.
1
Would you be happy to see the Greens party no longer exist!
65% yes
Are you committed green?
6% yes
Are you an ALP voter protesting by voting green then seeing it goes to Labor
6% yes
Now for my view of reality, just as the DLP kept conservatives in power,by betraying those they claimed to support,Greens best serve Conservative Australia.

A desperate SM, writes: "Now I have caught you in a lie.

The immigration department did not claim that the pacific solution or Nauru as part of it did not work, ever."

I had written, excluding what I now add in parentheses: "Nauru..... didn't work (my opinion) and won't work again (the Department of Immigration's opinion accepted by senior Coalition members)."

My statement derives from the article http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-plan-still-possible-says-ruddock-20111220-1p421.html where it is written: "....senior Coalition sources said yesterday Mr Abbott should acknowledge Immigration Department advice that opposition policy for processing on Nauru alone would no longer act as a deterrent."

I admit to being clumsy in not parsing my sentence to make clear where my own opinion stopped and the ID's started. However I would ask that if the ID thinks Nauru would have no future effectiveness, why would it think it had any in the past? As I said, it has had countless discussions with refugees past and present in coming to it's opinion. In any case, the desperate actions of refugees in many SIEV encounters to fight to be under Australia's care, regardless of where, is indicative enough of the lack of Nauru's deterrent effect on boat arrivals.

Neither I nor the Immigration Department ever tried to claim the Pacific Solution's only effective working part, the forceful turning back of boats, was ineffectual.

Enough from me on that topic already covered in other threads.

If I may come again to the main point of this thread, are there any Green's out there who wish their party to maintain a hand in shaping this country by supporting the Malaysian swap arrangement. Or, by adherence to flawed principle and sentimentality, are they going to continue to pave the way for a Coalition ruling majority built on this issue and thereby make themselves irrelevant?

Well, a week has passed on no reply from a Greens supporter. Nor was there a reply to a similar challenge in a thread a month ago.

Conclusion? Greens don't read OLO? Greens don't feel they can or need to defend their position? Feel free, anyone, to add their own suggestions here. I give up.