What needs to made clear here is that the average Indonesian, taking into account everyone's background, is quite a lot more sensible than the average Australian. There are 220 million people vs 22 million. Ever tried to visualise 220 Australians & how things would be then ? The one & only reason why Australia is a good country is solely due to it's small population. Keep that in mind every time you propose population growth.
Also Indonesia is a nation made up of several thousands of islands with to an Australian unimaginable logistics. We have great difficulty in dealing with about 30 islands of meagre population. I rather live here at this stage but if suddenly we were to have a huge population I'd rather have an Indonesian at the helm than some academic of questionable sex.

Steven,

You seem to identify the problem as being with the regime: <<Indonesians are not "monsters"… But the regime, as distinct from the people, seems to be turning into something monstrous>>

But what of Sam Harris’s proposition that the fault/cause lies at the heart of Islam?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNndF8RP7Lw

“Of course, millions of Muslims are more secular and are eager to help create a global civil society. But they are virtually silent because they have nothing to say that makes any sense within the framework of their faith. (They are also afraid of getting killed.) That is the problem we must keep in view. And it represents an undeniable difference between Islam and Christianity at this point in history.”
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/islam-and-the-future-of-liberalism

@Danielle,

<<csteele,
Did you read the article in its entirety - or just cherrypick an obvious diversion?>>

Probably the latter--I noted her propensity to do that, on another thread.

SPQR,

I'm sure csteele gets a giggle from the fact that you think he's a "her" : )

Anonymity sure is fun. I remember surprising a few when I came out of the closet and revealed Poirot was a girl. ALGOREISRICH retorted: "shouldn't you be quieter then?"

Of course, fundamentally it shouldn't make any difference, but somehow it seems to - don't you think?

Csteele wrote:

>>Dial it back mate. You are at a 10 while the evidence you have put before us is worth a 2 at a stretch. >>

Christian fundamentalism in South Korea may be appalling for South Korean Buddhists. But how is this a threat to Australia?

On the other hand if Islamic factions gain the upper hand in Indonesia that country MAY, as I've explained above, pose a threat to this country.

I am NOT advocating the development of nuclear weapons in Australia now. I am saying we need to keep in being a corps of scientist capable of developing nukes should the need arise in the future. My suspicion is that is the real rationale for the new Lucas Heights reactor.

Nukes are the great equaliser. They are the only way a small country can credibly deter aggression from a giant neighbour.

Of course Indonesia is not the only reason we should keep a corps of nuclear capable scientists. But it does seem to me to be the most immediate.

However note please I'm talking about keeping the scientific know-how. I'm not advocating doing anything radical with it for now.

Danielle and csteele,

Frankly how the Indonesians go about electing their president is only of interest to me to the extent that it provides some clues to the way that country is likely to evolve into the future. Will it become a sort of Jihadi state or will it settle down?

That, not the inherent justice or injustice of Indonesian politics, is what concerns me.

It is clear that the auguries are not good.

SPQR

I agree with Sam Harris that, whatever may have been the case in the past, CONTEMPORARY Islam is qualitatively different – and more dangerous - than other religions in their CONTEMPORARY form.

I have no idea how Islam will develop into the future and neither does anybody else. I regret that an antipathy to Islam has somehow been conflated with racism. So called "Islamophoba" is simply a recognition that Islam is a dangerous ideology. It is not the only one.

Poirot,

I had always imagined CSteele --judging by his/her style --as a sort of Kenneth William character: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Williams

Then Jayb came along and ruined my image by saying Csteele was a female.

But as you say, what does/should it matter. Male or female, CSteele, serves up mighty good baloney.

I do however have a huge chuckle every-time I picture you with a little Poirot-style mustache.