With the recent announcement, that the Malasians won't accept the boats being towed back, one has to question why we are helping them, with foriegn aid, WITH BORROWED MONEY mind you, and I would suggest that at the very least we should stop this aid until they stop the boats leaving.

Indonesia said they would not take the boats back, simply stop foreign aid to both countries. If they are stupid enough to let them in they should suffer the consequences rather than deliberately palm them off to us.

Australia's foreign aid program is designed to deliver aid to ordinary people in third world countries to improve their basic standard of living. Many of our programs make the difference between life and death for people, including children.
These two would deny aid, which literally saves children's lives, use that denial, and the deaths of children and babies, as a political weapon to force third world governments to toe the line. How insensitive can some be? Then again for these conservatives it just an extension of their "gun boat" mentality.

Paul1405 - Quote "Many of our programs make the difference between life and death for people, including children."

While we pay for there citizens well being they can use more of there money to build up there military capabilities, money which they should be spending on there own citizens.
Isn't it great to live next to an idiot called Australia.

2 years ago we were giving aid to Indonesia who at the time were in monetary surplus while we were Billions in debt.

Malaysia are $22,800,000,000 in surplus yet we give them money.

Paul, surely your not nieve enough to think the aid actually gets to those in most need.

Paul please. Anyone who is old enough to post on the net is definitely too bloody old to talk such bull dust.

If you want to talk to adults you have to talk like one.

I can think of a solution to this problem which won't cost a cent, pull out of the treaty on refugees, egalitarianism is an archaic and anachronistic worldview, it's based on the world as it was in the 18th century, not as it is now.

OK geniuses, how much do we pay Malaysia?

Under what programs is the money spent?

That is, who gets the money we spend on Malaysia?

Bugsy,

How dare you come here and point out the minor detail that Malaysia isn't an Aus aid recipient...at least it doesn't seem so from this:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1301.0~2012~Main%20Features~Where%20we%20give%20aid~218

Aid to Malaysia stopped around 2010 - 2011 except for a small amount in around 2012 training 60 or so teachers.

Sorry Rechtub!
But lets leave out the screaming and talk sense.
We both want the boats stopped.
So only in passing will I mention it is not Malaysia but INDONESIA who will not let the boats be towed back, or turned around in their waters.
It is and always was no chance.
We do not want war with three hundred million on our very door step, or do we?
Now the impending election of a coalition government, will stop half to three quarters of the boats dead! believe me it will be so.
BUT for the exact reason the Malaysian solution would have worked.
People under stand Labor is softer than Liberals, no soft touch says the cash spent is too big a risk.
So? less boats.
Stand by! I honestly can think of nothing Abbott can do, that is not a regional solution.
So he may hide all current CLEARED refugees by letting them in.
Then go to Malaya and return saying he has got enough commitment to use that system.
I will get many grins , while not hiding my party got it wrong, out of seeing the fewer boats but knowing it is no easy task stopping them.
Stop them we must, no country can let others say who will migrate.
And no party can keep faith with tens of voters by seeing hundreds leave,ALP note.

You are all forgetting one fundamental fact.
Indonesia cannot refuse the entry of Indonesian flagged vessels !

There is I think another tactic that can be used.
A naval vessel cannot enter Indonesian waters without permission.
It needs the use of a civilian vessel to tow the boat back into
Indonesian waters.
Then cast them off just off the port.

The civilian vessel would need a crew of civilians also, perhaps
immigration officers would be civilians.
I am sure a crew of volunteers could be assembled.

Here we have the usual suspects with their simplistic 19th century "Fortress Australia" approach to foreign affairs. Their real agenda is no aid to the 3rd world what so ever, no aid to non whites. Wait for the howls of protest as I say, their protests are racially motivated, How do I know this? These so called concerned Australians never post a whimper of discontent towards the thousands of people, mostly white, who fly into Australia every year on 'holiday' visa's and overstay their welcome, where are the howls of indignation about these "illegals". What attitude would they take if Americans or British people required a safe haven in Australia, they would be dock side with a brass band and forming the welcoming committee.

"Paul please. Anyone who is old enough to post on the net is definitely too bloody old to talk such bull dust. If you want to talk to adults you have to talk like one."
Hasbeen with your child like simplisticism when it comes to complex matters of international foreign affairs, I question your understanding of adult concepts in relation to this issue.

To the usual suspects: Even your man Abbott when in power is not going to cut of aid to anyone in retaliation for failing to tow the
Australian line on this, so why not stop pissing in the wind and come up with some well thought out solutions to what is after all a difficult problem.
Maybe you have been fooled by the throw away one liner, "I'll turn the boats back!" that's a line for bottom feeders its not policy.

Paul seems to assume that we should just accept what Indonesia does
and be afraid to say boo to them.

Indonesia is allowing boatloads of undocumented persons to leave their
territory and head to Australia.
I cannot put my finger on which international law is involved but I bet
quids it is there. It certainly applies to aircraft and cruise liners.

Which leads to his point about visa overstayers, well they do get sent back !

Also his racially meant rant has it wrong again.
It is in fact religiously based, as it is the Islamists to which people are now objecting.

I shudder to think how many Paul1405's & Marilyn Sherperds' there are trying to help ruin Australia & destroying peoples' lives by pretending to help others. It also makes me shudder to think how many less off Australians could be helped with the resources we waste because of people like Paul & Marylin. What they advocate is nothing short of treason. On the other hand they're probably to stupid about what they're doing.

@ Poirot & Bugsy

Yes, you are absolutely right, Malaysia is no longer an aid recipient.But it was for a looooooog loooooong time, it has only recently graduated to the non-aid recipient class.

However –and, on a matter close to your hearts – it no doubts anticipates jumping back on that gravy train real soon when all the climate change packages, you both have been spruiking, get handed out.

_________________________________________________________

@Paul1405,
<< "Fortress Australia" approach to foreign affairs.>>
What, as opposed to your soup kitchen Australia approach!
If wanting to control who crosses our borders gives us a “fortress” mentality than most of the rest of the world share the same affliction –but I guess you hadn’t noticed that!

<< never post a whimper of discontent towards the thousands of people, mostly white, who fly into Australia every year on 'holiday' visa's and overstay their welcome, where are the howls of indignation about these "illegals".>>
They don’t have to raise a “whimper” because people like you invariable trumpet it each time illegal immigration is raised
And each time, you are told the reason.
But next time, right on queue, you are at it again.

So here it is one more time: the huuuuuuuuuuge majority of tourist visa over stayers invariable are rounded up and sent packing , or leave of their own accord -- never to be heard of again.

On the other hand, the huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge majority of your illegals , burn their IDs, boat in any old -time of the night or day, and get to stay indefinitely .

The smugglers have had a free go for years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0MHRSFz6FM

come on!
First how many of these wrecks are flagged?
And just how will we go with them blokes?
The Indonesians? if we declare war on them?
Let us not be silly.
If we understand that country too, is suffering from unwanted refugees.
Then stand on our heads to get the brain working.
Say the boats went from here to there, and Indonesia towed them back here?
A county both sides of the house see as vital to our country,s future and we want to smack 300 million people in the mouth.
Am I the only one to notice the thread wrongly spoke about Malaysia, not to worry,, far sillier things are being said here.

If we understand that country too, is suffering from unwanted refugees.
Belly,
No, they don't !

Belly, the phrase "Flagged" does not mean that they are actually flying
a flag. It means that is the nationality of the vessel.
You said;
The Indonesians? if we declare war on them?
Let us not be silly.
---
Now that is silly.

In any case they are crewed by Indonesians.
Indonesia would not complain because they know that they would not
have a leg to stand on.

They certainly would not attack Australia or Australian vessels and
Indonesia would not risk Australia activating the ANZUS treaty.

They could force the boats back out to sea but then that would be a
humanitarian crime as well as a crime against maritime law.

No, they have no choice but to allow entry to returning boats.

Bazz,

I'm curious regarding your idea to have volunteer civilian crews "turning the boats around".

I'm supposing the volunteer civilians would have to board the boats and take control, for that to happen.

Open to an accusation of piracy...do ya think?

Oops a typo, I meant to say Indonesia. Sorry about that.

Towing the boats back is NOT the way to go.

1) It would be a waste of (our) resources ,and
2) It would leaves us open to emotional blackmail/manipulation. Think about it, if we were to tow a boat back to even 100 metres to the Indonesian shore (and we can’t get that close!) and little Ali fell off and drown we would not hear the end of it. The ABC & SBS would run doco-sermons about for decades!

A much better approach would be to thrash out the problems with the Indonesians. Everyone (except the one-eyed advocates ) knows that most asylum scammers of Middle Eastern origin flying in through Indonesian airports, hold up in Indonesian resorts, hire Indonesian boat crew. Surely there is some way we can come to an agreement on this –For God Sake! you can stop a nation from dumping unwanted goods on your shores -- why not illegal immigrants (and I’m not suggesting the Gillard “regional solution” which was a no starter from beginning)

Just as importantly we need to take away our welcoming mat. We have a whole infrastructure ( advocates, second rate academics & associated legal flotsam and jetsam ) that encourages and accommodates the inflow of illegals ( PhilipS point out earlier, judges telling offenders that they are going easy on them since they don’t want to jeopardize their “asylum: claims –WTF!)

And then we have this (joke?): <<[Towing the boats back would leave us] Open to an accusation of piracy...do ya think?>>

The asylum scammers hijack the Viking Princess and camp on it for god knows how long while we feed them –No, no , no dats not piracy.
The asylum scammers force ships who want to take them the nearest ( Indonesian or Singaporean port) to divert to Oz –No, no dats not piracy eaver

But should we talk about crewing the ships back to their point of origin –that’s piracy --what a joke!

Actually Poirot may have a point if civilians were used, it could be piracy.
However, if government civilian employees were used as a law
enforcement body that could be different.
They just could not be armed forces personnel.
There are international laws about Warships entering other countries waters.

Surely there is a part of the Arafura Sea which is International waters ? As long as the boats get towed back into international waters you're not violating indonesian territory/waters.
The prevailing winds will invariably take them back to their point of departure once they run out of fuel. Just give them rations to last them until they reach Indonesia again. As they are indonesian registered they will not be refused entry. They would even get a chance to sail right back to their shores of origin. Once the word gets out that Australia is broke they'll soon stop coming.

The crew thing on The good ship "Redneck", should not be a problem. Captain Phil in command, with first mate Rehctub, along with the rest of the motley crew, Hasbeen, JofM, Bazz and who's down below working the bilge pumps, its those two old salts of the sea Indi and SPQR. up there in the 'crows nest' is the never vigilant OTB always on the lookout for "illegals" and icebergs. The flag, again no problem they just run up the "jolly roger". Fellas as you sail off to do your duty remember those inspirational words of Lord Kitchener, "All the Fuzz Wuzzy understands is the thrust of cold steel."
Lads, if the good ship "Redneck" doesn't make it to Indo. you will always find a welcoming port in the safe haven of Cloud Cuckoo land.

No Individual that just would not work.
I presume you have never sailed.
The problem is the Indonesian rescue zone waters extend a long way
from Indonesia.
They have to be got back almost to Indonesia otherwise they would just
turn around and head for Christmas Island.
PS they are not in the Arafura Sea,

The problem is the Indonesian rescue zone waters extend a long way
from Indonesia.
Bazz,
How turn around with no fuel ? I'd think they'd think twice before approaching Xmas isle with the south-easterlies behind them. No reverse gear with no fuel.
The word would soon spread.
Paul1405 you're getting sillier by the post.

No one is in favor of asylum seekers making dangerous and sometimes fatal sea voyages to Australia. What was a human problem, has now developed into a human tragedy with so many lives lost.
There is no quick fix to what is a complex predicament. Australia is not going to resolve the issue alone; we very much need the cooperation of others within our region, particularly Indonesia. The notion that we can act unilaterally without any kind of diplomatic dialog with our neighbors or the rest of the world is totally ridiculous, those that push this line have no understanding of where Australia is positioned, what are our responsibilities and what undertakings we have given. Australian cannot simple sign protocols, and then when things get tough, just walk away.
Slogans from politicians like "I'll turn back the boats" may be good for home consumption but they are not policy and never will be. Similarly off shore detention with its limitations is not a solution but a political band aid,
At the end of the day we are going to have to make changes to out refugee policies, whither we like it or not, world events will simply dictate it to be so. On one hand Australia can lead and accommodate change or we can have change forced upon us, it’s our choice.

Just to make it simple for Paul,
When the boat is intercepted the amount of fuel is checked.
If they are closer to Indonesia than Christmas Island you ensure they
have enough to get back, but not enough to get to Christmas Island.
That is a difficult judgement when not knowing the weather or the
efficiency of the engine etc.

So you tow them to within say 5 to 50 miles of a suitable port and leave them there with that amount of fuel.

There are many variations on the above theme that could be used and I
am sure those with more experience than any of us, except perhaps
Hasbeen, would know the best way.

Good onya indy!
Quick and spot on.
Following my view some truly silly things are being said here.
You proved it!
How do these not of Indonesian birth or back ground get to that country?
They, refugees, use the stupid United Nations garbage to *pretend to be refugees*
While in truth being or wanting to be *Financial Migrants*.
YES! corruption is rampart in that country.
Money is made sending the boats here, BUT that country is not asking them to come.
We can not, at our level of miss understanding, tell that country what to do.
300 million vs 22 million? if some here had their way we would be the refugees!

@Paul

<<there is no quick fix to what is a complex predicament. Australia is not going to resolve the issue alone; we very much need the cooperation of others within our region, particularly Indonesia.>>

Now who’s living in Cloud Cuckoo Land, ay?
Yes negotiate with Indonesia, do a bit of arm twisting even, but don’t kid yourself about (a Gillard/Green style) “regional solution”
Absolutely NO ONE in the region wants these illegals.
The *regions* only contribution to a solution will be, perhaps, corralling them for a time then passing them onto Oz.

<<At the end of the day we are going to have to make changes to out refugee policies yada yada yada ...>>

What airy fairy stuff!
Remember when were told that if we lifted out quota it would stop the flow.
Well we did –and we did it again –but it didn’t even dent the flow.
Even if our quota was 1,000,000 pa it wouldn’t stop it
The only REAL SOLUTION is to take away the incentives--the easy approvals.
And undercut their support base –starting with finding underemployed Greenies something more useful to occupy their time.

There is a golden rule. "He who has the gold makes the rules."

It is clear that Indonesia:
a) would prefer that the refugees are not returned to port,
b) would like the human trafficking trade stopped,
c) resents seeing its citizens locked up for 5 years,
d) cherishes its relationship with Australia.

It is also clear that while Juliar and the ALP are running the show and poisoning the well and telling everyone how bad turning the boat around is, that it is clearly in the interest of indonesians to agree.

However, as private conversations that the coalition has had, it is clear that the issue is not set in concrete. Once Abbott is PM, there every chance that a real solution to the Labor stuff up can be found.

SM,
I hope that what you say is true;
"However, as private conversations that the coalition has had, it is clear that the issue is not set in concrete. Once Abbott is PM, there every chance that a real solution to the Labor stuff up can be found."

If the Coalition can come up with a solution that is acceptable to all, and saves lives, we should be thankful to Abbott an co. I doubt the solution will come from the throw away line "I'll turn the boats around." but from hard diplomatic work. P/s i was talking to a Liberal candidate on Saturday, a bloke who is expected to win a seat from Labor and I was impressed by his understanding of the refugee problem and he is well aware of how difficult the solution is going to be under a Coalition government, but agrees a solution has to be found.

SPQR There is no "quick fix" solution to what is a very difficult problem. the variation on the "gun boat" theme would only invoke condemnation, something Australia doesn't need or want.

Once a pone a time in reality land the country,s used as footpaths by refugees got together.
Not one of them in truth wanted those travelers, so they looked for an answer.
Those from silly land said no! you keep the lot! but most stated the trip to get there.
It was said in silly land the streets had Social security checks fluttering around every place.
And so they kept coming.
At a meeting the regional country,s, said hey! no matter what country has them we get them here first.
Silly land, how silly, said hang on, if we send some back to the end of the que.
But take more of yours, if the rich see the cash they pay is wasted, will it stop?
Some in silly land think no! so want to kick the giant land to their north in its shins till it puts silly land before its self.

OK, now what ! The Indonesians won't allow the 'Illegals' boats to be returned to their shores;

It appears now, the Malaysian's won't accept them either ?

I realise we Aussies are a tough lot, and when the Libs & Nat's take power in September, they've promised unequivocally, they'll 'Stop the Boats'! Including such strategies, as towing them back from whence they came, all the way to where exactly -> -> ?

OK, so we re-introduce the 'temporary protection visas'. That'll help a bit I suppose. Process everyone 'off shore' at the various facilities Oz has here 'n there ? Then we've always got the asylum seeker's friend, the venerable High Court of Australia, to help guide us in our moral responsibility - notwithstanding these useless jurists pontificate from 'on high', without ever bringing down a judgement that will manifestly help this (their) entire country in it's time of real crises - the EFFECTIVE protection of our sovereign borders ? Oh well, what'll it matter in fifty years eh ?

Oh, sorry ! Was it someone herein suggest we stop all aid to both Indonesia and Malaysia ? Oh, we can't do that, otherwise they won't talk to us...oh dear, what to do, what to do ! ?

Gee we're so bloody weak, weak weak and weak !

Yes o sung, it certainly shows the stupidity of helping your neighbor. The only people you should ever help is your own.

You probably know O sung, how many men we lost putting down the communist instruction in Malaysia, or Malaya back then. We have seen damn little gratitude from those who inherited the country courtesy of those men's lives.

It is time to throw a bit of weight about, & Belly don't worry about how many of them there are. Granted we could use those F111s we have stupidly got rid of, but remember who you are talking about.

We see many Muslims who are very good at fighting women & children, blowing up civilians, & shooting a lot of ammunition into the air, but real fighting is not their bag. Just look at Timor & how quickly their rampant militia went to water should convince you.

o sung wu Quote Quote "Gee we're so bloody weak, weak weak and weak !"

I put it to you "we are not weak" but instead "we are led by the weak"

Good afternoon to you HASBEEN & PHILIP S...

Perhaps you're right there PHILIP S, we are led by some very very weak people ? I tend to get a bit fired up, sorry. You're quite right ! In fact, some of my friends, most all over seventy now, but believe me are as tough as tough as can be. Actually, it's me who's the only weak link ? Please, don't tell HASBEEN, he'll give me a hard time ??

Oh, afternoon to you HASBEEN ! I've yet to respond to your other thread on the Defence 'weakening' processes precipitated by some extraordinarily dull witted 'boofhead' of the far left in Labor ! I'll do it after tea, I'm sorry ol' friend.

Yes, I think I recall, we gifted some of those beaut 'swing wing' F111's to the Indonesian Air Force didn't we ? Oh, they won't be a problem I shouldn't think ! When the A/C becomes AOG'd they'll not be able to source the parts nor the technology to bring them back on line...I think ? Unless we have some of our guys over there ready to assist in their servicing and repair ? It wouldn't bloody well surprise me ? After all, weren't we training Indonesian Officers at Duntroon and ADFA ? Also didn't the 'Saturday's and Sunday's (SAS) have some sort of training pact with them, in the West ?

Please, don't tell me we're still training their potential Officers at Duntroon and/or ADFA ? Surely not ? I need some coffee to revive me, if that arrangement still exists ? Thank you Mr Bob CARR ?

Belly,
just like you feel you have a duty to support your Labor Party so has Indonesia an unwritten obligation to fellow muslims, no matter how they may prefer not to but such is culture & religion.
I'm just about 100% certain that Indonesia would much prefer not to be the roadstead for the invaders getting into Australia.

A good example of stupid is a country that gives foreign aid to Indonesia this year approx $540 million and the aid will go up $650 million next year, we look after there people so they can buy helicopter gunships and missiles.

Welcome to the world of Juliar and Labor.

Now if we don't give them the money they will have to cut back on military spending or suffer the consequences from thee own citizens.

Belly - Quote "I'm just about 100% certain that Indonesia would much prefer not to be the roadstead for the invaders getting into Australia." I would like to think you are right BUT it does not appear so you never hear of them turning or stopping anyone going there, so I believe they are complicit in the problem.

Next time there is a boat arrival look at the people on it they would stick out like a sore thumb in Indonesia, the police could not, not know about them.

Sorry Quote attributed to the wrong person.

individual - Quote "I'm just about 100% certain that Indonesia would much prefer not to be the roadstead for the invaders getting into Australia." I would like to think you are right BUT it does not appear so you never hear of them turning or stopping anyone going there, so I believe they are complicit in the problem.

......Indonesia an unwritten obligation to fellow muslims....
Philip S,
That's why I wrote the above. Indonesia is complying with what every nation is expected to do & that is not to persecute citizens of like-minded nations if they do no wrong. Having fellow believers pass through your country is not a crime nor is not deterring them. Many Australians argue that humanitarian assistance is to be offered unquestioningly to an asylum seeker. If people aren't asking for asylum in Indonesia then you can hardly blame the Indonesians for letting them pass through.
Unlike Australia which has Visa conditions that Indonesia doesn't have for Australians. For an Indonesian to visit here requires so much bureaucratic nonsense yet tens of thousands of Australians see it as their right to just waltz up in Bali & behave like heathens. Not even they get deported so why should well behaved boat people be treated worse ?

Come back Rechtub!
So you got the wrong country.
It still looks OK compared to some comments.
Let us look at aid.
Do some of us know Howard funded a great deal of it?
In Indonesia for a start, aimed at education stopping in the end terrorism?
And are we, in talking of stopping aid, trying to black mail other countrys?
I see no budding Diplomats here.
And an extremism Abbott would not support.
Would you, if you became one of these boat people, pay ten thousand dollars to come here.
If on arrival you found your self on a plane on the way to Malaysia within days?
And sent to sit down and wait for many years?
Just think Malaysian solution would work.
Now how do we deport these people once they destroy their papers, what country does not want proof of what country they came from.
Whatever we do, do not let facts get in the way of a good rant.

I THINK WE NEED TO REFLECT ON WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE MUSLIM WORLD? WHY DO SO MANY WANT TO GET OUT? WHY ARE SO MANY PSCHYCOTIC? DO WE WANT THEM IN AUSTRALIA WITH THEIR MEDIEVIL PERCEPTIONS?

SILLER,

You might like to peruse the third point on this list.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp

We can thank Kevin Rudd for the current situation. John Howard’s Pacific solution was successful until stupid goody goody two shoes Kevin dismantled it. He should be made to wear a 10Kg necklace of cast iron inscribed with the words “I opened the doors to uncontrolled entry of boat people”

POIROT
Point taken, thank you

Officer Poirot of the etiquette police , I see you are back again.

To the 'usual suspects' you know who you are, if you don't just look in the mirror, you are the ones still waring straw hats and spats, and pushing the 'gun boat / fortress Australia' line on this forum when it comes to asylum seekers.
It's good to see our PM going to Indonesia in a couple of weeks time (assuming she is still PM then) and there she will discuss with President Yudhoyono ways of stemming the flow of asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat. Unlike the Mad Monk who only last October when meeting with the Indonesian President, did not have the 'guts' to raise the asylum seeker issue with him, its seems Abbotts rhetoric is purely for domestic consumption and nothing more than that, rhetoric.
Recently Paris Aristotle, a member of the government expert panel on asylum seekers, called for government to government engagement at the highest level on the issue as the only possible way of coming to a resolution. Good to see Gilgard taking the advice.
Just to put the refugee issue in perspective as far as Australia is concerned her is a link;
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/small-numbers-of-refugees-in-australia-un-20130619-2oisu.html

Julia Gillard has travelled overseas frequently. In fact she is usually abroad. Why did she leave it to this late stage to hitch her butt to Indonesia to discuss this very important subject?
She has known about it for a while,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0MHRSFz6FM

Oh wouldn't it be wonderful if some fool Indonesian were to kidnap her, & hold her for ransom.

With any luck they would ask for $10 or more.

No whip around in Oz for the ransom to be paid, & have her return could ever raise that much, & we would be rid of the fool.

Nah, It wouldn't take long for them to be prepared to pay us to take her back, & some lefties would be silly enough to take the money.

Beach person, I like it, its a bit funny, I didn't think you neanderthal down at national action could put a YouTube together.

The Mad Monk explains Liberal Party policy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5rMJopalps

Paul1405,

You ducked the question.

Why did Julia Gillard, Australia's most prolific tourist, a woman who has scattered many millions of taxpayers dollars in foreign aid whether asked for or not, left it to the final weeks before an election to hitch her butt to Indonesia to discuss this very important subject?

Beach person this is my answer not Gillards. Because she is very slow on the uptake and has finally realised what THE GREENS have been advocating for yonks. The only way to solve the asylum seeker issue is at the highest diplomatic levels. The problem will never be solved by locking these people in a closet (that's in some other third world countries closet, like PNG). Nor will it be solved with the 'gun boat' approach that some advocate, make no mistake Abbotts "turn the boats around" slogan is only a variation on the 19th century 'gun boat' policy of Britain.
Imagine the hew and cry, and gnashing of teeth that would be going on if a boat load of Americans were to drown off our shores, after we towed there into the middle of the Pacific and told them to "GET" You couldn't get it off the front pages for weeks.
At the end of the day these people are no different from you and I, they want nothing more than a better life for themselves and their families. Unfortunately no matter how much they would deny it, our political leaders, like many of us, still see these people as inferior, their lives are of lesser value than ours.

"Bring back capital punishment" while ever we have those that advocate a simplistic draconian approach to crime our prisons will be bulging. Crime will continue at an alarming rate. the viscous cycle will continue. Of a population of about 22m about 0.1%, or around 22.000 people are in jail, 70% of prison inmates in Australia have been in jail before, Aboriginals are 14 times more likely to find themselves in prison than non indigenous people and 33% are serving a sentence of less than 2 years. All over the western world the socio-economically disadvantaged will be more likely to find themselves in prison than the general community.
For some, like welfare dependency, jail is part of life, part of the vicious circle. In many cases the answer is prevention not incarceration. Prevention of lesser crime, the 33% and more of inmates and those young people who are on a road to jail, will only be achieved through social equality leading to opportunity, not through some "lock em' up, and throw away the key." approach.

Sorry about that put it in the wrong thread. crap happens

I am always amused by the rantings of those extolling the horrors of turning the boats around. The reality is the Indonesian boat, the passengers, and the Indonesian crew simply find themselves exactly where they were a few days earlier.

Since Labor opened the borders, Indonesia has been swamped with tens of thousands of economic refugees waiting for a place on a boat. Severe disincentives are required to stop further thousands dying on the high seas. The prospect of handing thousands over to the human traffickers only to find themselves where they started is a powerful disincentive.

When Juliar has been banished to obscurity, Tony Abbott can begin genuine discussions with the Indonesians. Probably to facilitate the turning of the boats and the live cattle exports.

I like the linking of asylum seekers with live cattle.
SM can you explain why your man Abbott when given the opportunity last October to raise his "turn back the boats" policy with the Indonesian President failed to do so? Possibly didn't have Archy Pell's clearance, I can't think of any other reason, can you.
I am concerned that an Abbott led government, like all post WWII Conservatives governments in Australia, will embrace a foreign policy which is nothing more than being a sycophant of the United States.
If Obama needs an adulating ferret do you think Tony will oblige? I'm sure he will. p/s Your party is not alone in sucking up to the US, with the exception of the Whitlam Government, Labor have been just as sycophantic.

Paul,

Why would TA discuss this with the president, especially as Labor had been using megaphone diplomacy and saying that the boats would not be turned around, and the Indonesian president is unlikely to cause a diplomatic incident by disagreeing with the Australian PM. Especially considering the live cattle debacle. However, this was discussed at a lower level with some positive feedback, and will be actively pursued when a mature government is in place.

The US is not the Great Satan, and I don't see cooperation being a problem, especially since alliance with them has enabled Australia to maintain a pitifully small army.

"The US is not the Great Satan," SM that could be debatable considering that countries extreme aggressive militaristic stance post WWII. I fail to see the "benefits" Australia has received from an "alliance" with the US. I rather think the "alliance" has worked in the Americans favour, conning us into a number of political wars which were not of our doing or our business. We have been useful to the Americans as a propaganda tool, like Vietnam in the past and Afghanistan today where Australia's main roll is as a servile lackey to propagate the US myth that it is a "team effort".
A new war in our region is developing; its first stage is an economic conflict with the major players being China and the United States with India along with Australia and others playing a lesser roll. The US has already indicated it is preparing for a more active participation in our region to serve its economic, strategic and political interests. If Australia again adopts a "blind faith" in the US attitude, and indications are that is what we are doing, then we may well find ourselves on the losing side as deals are struck to carve up this part of the world for the benefit of others, particularly the US and China, of course we could adopt a more independent stance in the hope we can achieve better outcomes for
ourselves. it would also give us a stronger voice when dealing with our regional neighbors such as Indonesia and Malaysia on local issues.

Paul,

I am well aware of the greens's Stalinist roots with old communists like Lee Rhiannon who view the US through the old cold war lens. The reality is that the excesses of the US is echoed by just about every major power including Russia and China. The worst excesses of the "socialist" countries i.e. Korea and Afghanistan were thwarted by US intervention, and others such as in Grenada and Bosnia.

As for any future confrontation between the US and China, the assumption by some that China will gain supremacy and be able to dictate terms is false, because no matter how powerful China gets, it cannot get past the point where the US can inflict unimaginable damage in retaliation. As for picking sides, the US is an ally that can be trusted, and who largely shares our interests, whilst China has shown no propensity for furthering Australian interests.

The US alliance has enabled Aus to save many billions (or about 2% of GDP) on military expenditure.

"Grenada"?

Yup, that was pretty well up the US's alley. Defenseless and supremely unimportant in the scheme of things - except as a diversion.

Well, ho, ho, ho.......

Poirot,

I see you neglected Korea and only chose Grenada. Grenada was becoming a failed state, had already a leftist dictatorship (sponsored by the cubans). The US interest was that this was yet another democratic government toppled by violent means. It was easy to restore order, and gratefully accepted by the majority of the citizens of Grenada.

SM,
Australia's support for US imperialism has resulted in the deaths of young Australians in far of places like Korea, Vietnam and today in Afghanistan, plus our unjustifiable killing of thousands of non combatant civilian. These deaths are seen by the warmongering conservatives as a worthwhile investment by Australia, according to some, saving billions, not lives, but dollars. Not forgetting how well big business has done out of these conflicts.
What did Australia achieve in Korea or Vietnam, absolutely nothing. What are we achieving in Afghanistan, absolutely nothing. Afghanistan "socialist", please don't make me laugh, the country is still a collection of tribes controlled by warlords, how does that equate to socialism? As for North Korea, its some kind of police state run by ratbags, not much socialism going on there.
"the US is an ally that can be trusted" SM are you still supporting Holts slogan of "All the way with LBJ". "Trusted", trusted to serve US interests first and foremost, Australian interests will run a bad second.
Lee Rhiannon may have her roots in communism, but the Mad Monk has his roots in the ecclesiastical world of the Catholic Church, oh what can we expect come September, the Australian Inquisition led by Archy Pell?

Paul,

I can see that you have hopped onto your favorite soap box.

From what I recall of Korea, China armed and spurred North Korea to invade the South, So I guess America was defending South Korea from Chinese Imperialism. The society in North Korea is extreme socialism, which by definition takes the forms of production from "capitalists" and runs it by the government. As was Socialist Russia under Stalin, etc.

Imperialism by definition requires the desire to conquer and colonize. The US does not have any colonies, when it invades as in Korea or Afghanistan, etc, it was to restore democracy, generally from forces from the outside trying to impose dictatorships.

"The US does not have any colonies".

Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Um buddy, have you heard of "Australia"? Probably not.

PJack,

Grow up.