Roy Morgan’s latest face-to-face survey of 1799 voters has Labor’s lead up to 57-43 from 55-45 a fortnight ago. Labor is up 1.5 per cent on the primary vote to 47 per cent, and the Coalition down 2 per cent to 37.5 per cent.
Other stuff:
• I appeared yesterday before the Perth hearing of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters’ inquiry into the federal election, where I argued the increasingly problematic STV Senate system should be replaced by good old-fashioned list system PR with seats allocated using the New Zealand-style Sainte-Laguë formula. Not a chance in hell of this happening of course, but as Homer Simpson would say, at least I’m out there doin’ stuff. Perhaps I would have done better to have fallen in behind the Greens’ Commonwealth Electoral (Above-the-Line Voting) Amendment Bill 2008, which I hadn’t given due consideration as I wrongly believed it required full numbering of above-the-line preferences. When told it was optional preferential, I instead argued it would amount to a New South Wales-style de facto “largest remainder” system, with the potential to produce disproportional results: for example, parties which get 1.5 and 0.6 quotas on the primary vote could win one seat each despite the former party having won well over twice as many votes (as Antony Green puts it, methods like Sainte-Laguë ensure that “each MP represents roughly the same number of voters”). However, I now see it requires that a minimum of four boxes be numbered, which might solve or at least alleviate this difficulty – although there remains the likely problem of a higher informal vote. I remain open to persuasion on any of these points, and might yet make a supplementary submission.
• The Electoral Commission of Queensland has finalised its boundaries for the state redistribution. The new electorates which were named Macrossan, Samsonvale and Dalby in the original proposal will instead be named Dalrymple, Pine Rivers and Condamine.
• Christian Kerr of The Australian reckons blogs, and “polling blogs” in particular, contain “paranoia about certain journalists, certain newspapers (and) certain pollsters”. What a thing to say …
This just shows that all the talk about being mentally active protecting you from dementia isn’t a guarantee. 🙁
Margaret Thatcher’s struggle with dementia
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24232802-601,00.html
152
Adam in Canberra Says:
McCain is Churchill
That is a hell of a stretch.
And war with Russia? Not smart. Though I certainly agree that Russia (especially Putin) needs to be contained somehow.
186
Thomas Paine
I agree. There does seem to be a solid streak of deeply irrational hostility to Obama among many on this site.
I know the discussion has moved on, but let me admit William that I was meaning Sainte-Lague, not D’Hondt. I’ve forgotten how to calculate elections on D’Hondt, and haven’t looked it up to see how many we would have got using it. I got distracted by the discussion of D’Hond’t in ACT. My point stands on Sainte-Lague.
I’m pleased to see however, that reform is being discussed so seriously, and there are lots of options on the table, and particularly encouraged by Antony’s view that Labor and Liberal want change.
Boerwar
#188
“On the positive side (Obama) is not stuck in the grooves that have led the US to the SUBPRIME credit crisis”
Austan Goolsbee , his senior economic adviser, is a former Harvard mate & friend from Chicago , he published an article in The New York Times n 2007 in pointing out the VIRTUES of subprime mortgages
Goolsbee said “These innovations mainly served to give people power to make their own decisions about housing, and they ended up being quite sensible with their newfound access to capital.”
Another phony perseption of Obama that contradicts reality , Obama & his economic team were up to there neck in 100% gung go for subprime financing
Worse still , that guy & rest of his econamic team believe in a brand of economic theory that no bludger here would support & is th reverse of Edwards Gore or a Rudd economic model philosophy
Boerwar , your preceding comments in that post were very inciteful , so you’ve corectly understood some of Obama’s questionable background & polcy weakness’s , far more than others here & none of it is good Unfortunateley enormous further research is needed about each & every policy & background area to separate th phoney myth perseption from reality (which people naturaly do not hav time to spend) , and each time I hav its been horrifyingly shallow , murky or contradictory
It would be informal vote for both for me on principal seeing McCain for different reasons causes me great disquiet
For those you rely simply on MSN & TV grabs of Obama , without doing extensive research (most) , I can reely understand they see both a stark choice contrast & for some a hope thrust , and misrepresent hostility for facts I possess they don’t , which lead me to contempt for a phoney & super con man Voters and USA deserve than that Pity is most people at least on this site actualy share th general same hopes of what a Pres needs to be & should domesticaly stand for , Gore Clinton & Edwards were fine (even Biden less his curent Iraq policy)
“McCain is Churchill”
Rubbish.
Russia is now a little country smaller than Spain, and there recent little carry on isn’t really that important. trying to turn things back to a cold war is a serious stretch of reality. Fortunately this is Europe’s problem and not the problem of the nutters in the USA, and anyway the USA has a couple of wars to pay off before they start another.
Exciting announcement plus amusing YouTube clip from Possum.
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2008/08/24/major-announcement/
‘Appeasement’ is an interesting problem to consider. It sort of depends on who is doing the perceiving.
There was no way that the Russians, from their perspective, were going to ‘appease’ Saakashvili and his sometime, (or is it erstwhile?), protector the US.
The Iranians probably hold the view that the US appeased Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran.
Some folk would have the view that most of the rest of the world appeased the US when it fought in Vietnam. Others have the view that in allowing Russia and China to support North Vietnam, it was the Americans who were appeasing them.
Some people would have the view that the world appeased the US and its allies when they invaded Iraq on the basis of a lie.
Some of the ‘lefty/hippy/pacifist; persons to whom Adam was referring in his post probably think the rest of the world engaged (and engages) in appeasement when China captured Tibet.
Many would have the view that west is appeasing China in its efforts to support the regimes in Zimbabwe, Burma and the Sudan.
Most arab states would have a view that the US is a routine appeaser of Israeli aggression. The Isaelis have a view that the rest of the world is a routine appeaser of arab states when they engage in, or support, some act of bastardry or other.
‘Appeasement’ also depends on hindsight and ‘alternative’ history. A post hoc condemnation of appeasement in a particular circumstance depends on the history that actually followed the ‘appeasement’. It cannot consider as a counter argument if, instead of ‘appeasement’ the path to all-out war was followed immediately. There is always only one set of ‘facts’.
‘Appeasement’ also tends to imply that there are really only two policy settings in a particular circumstance: war or peace.
Because circumstances of international conflict vary so much, argument by analogy regarding appeasement may not be all that useful.
Using the word ‘appeasement’ so as to imply that there is only one sort of appeasement, that appeasement or war is the only choice in town, that it is only pro-Hitlerian, Chamberlainitic softies who support appeasement, regardless of context, is arguing by definition, and not very useful – apart from, perhaps, when you want to go to war.
Ron @ 204
Interesting. Is there a source for your stuff on Obama’s approach to subprime?
Ron @ 204
Disappointing. Is there a source for your stuff on Obama’s approach to subprime?
Boerwar
I also have a problem with the term “appeasement”. Firstly, its become a perjorative term used in a sneering fashion when it may well be the best policy.
And the definition is “The policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.” The US etc have not granted concessions to Russia or China. They haven’t intervened militarily. There is a difference. Appeasement would be if they said “That’s fine Russia, you can invade Georgia. We’re happy for you to take it coz it’ll keep the peace” .
Hmmm, Churchill and McCain, some spooky parallels there already…
Churchill’s positives:
(1) spotted Hitler as a threat early, but because of his constant disloyalty to political parties, and his failures in WW1, had no credibility and no influence to do anything about it.
(2) was a good war leader, was an inept personal combatant and a hopeless fiddler-arounder with strategy and even tactics.
(3) towards the end of the war, correctly warned the US about the Russians (cf eastern europe and northern persia) but was disbelieved because they regarded as someone who was only interested in using US lives to support the British Empire.
Negatives:
(1) had a tendency to think of war as spiffing stuff; he loved to play boys’ own soldiers (the Sudan and the Boer War)
(2) stuffed up Gallipoli
(3) stuffed up in supporting the invasion of the made-for-defence Italian peninsula. Turned that bit of the war into a meat-grinder for the allies.
(4) appreciated Canadians, South Africans, Indians, Australians and New Zealanders fighting and dying in WW2, as long as they were fighting and dying for No 1. (Not a stuff-up from an English point of view, I suppose).
(5) completely failed to realize that the gig was up with the British Empire.
Now, would we want McCain, if he gets in, to be another Churchill?
Gary
You make a very fair point and my answer to your queston would probably be few would occur , especialy Despots
However I was suggesting a variation that Adam was corect in practise , almost all Leaders these days who deside to go to war , also do not end up on th battlefield , instead they’re ‘directing’ it from afar , example Abraham Lincoln
ADDRESSING other posters views on War , I do not hav disagreement with people advocting war , even if there life is not on th line , my queston instead would be hav ALL other reasonable alternitives been exhausted AND if so is war still justified & why
IF my view is NOT flawed , then th ultimate invasion of Iraq in first Iraq war was justified as all other avenues had been exhausted & Saddam would not leave Kuwait that he invade , which is why Bob Hawke agreed to send our military against Saddam
Goolsbee’s article was published in New York Times in 2007 , he is Obama’s chief economic campaign advisor His proposed equivalent Treasuer here , publicly said Wal Mart workers wanting inrease on there $7
Most Aussies vocally supported Hawke’s Iraq war , yet NONE of those Aussies had there lives on th line
A Country & its peoples hav to be “prepared” to fight and go to war A Country also should ensure its potential enemys know you will not hesitate to do so , if “certain boundaries ar crossed” , and after certain other alternitive meassures (diplomatic cultural econamic etc then potential military ‘signals’) hav already been taken and failed
USA’s gross ‘mistake’ with democratic Georgia was it failed to do any of these things , and thats when one ends up wiith appeasement & a ‘lost’ democracy
.
ps/ Definition of appeasement is quite simple for Democratic countrys , when by inaction & weakness & poor prior econamic & diplomatic polcy , you allow a democratic country to be invaded by Russian thugs Unfortunately USA double standards in some places has tarnished th word , but principal is still intarnished and lets not allow examples of thoise double standards to disippate a fair principal…otherwise we may be a casuality
War , thats why ‘oz’ do hav an Army , Airforce & Navy , when circumstances justify its use
Ron
To start off with, just because a country is a democracy it doesn’t mean other countries have to go to war to keep it that way.
The US has never had much time for democracies unless it can control the outcome of the elections. The US has overthrown more democracies and installed dictators than vice versa.
And there are various degrees of democracy. I suggest that Georgia’s is on the lower end.
Hollow Victory
Georgia’s riots may be over, but for President Saakashvili it’s also the end of his stint as the darling of the West.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/69464
Diogenes
#213
“Ron
To start off with, just because a country is a democracy it doesn’t mean other countries have to go to war to keep it that way.”
So if Indonesian invades us , USA can quote your words , and leave us in tatters
Once people ar selective , they can hardly whinge if that selectivity comes back to bite them
I am not yet convinced it wasn’t Georgia that started this conflict by attacking South Ossentia and bombing it’s Capital City. Was Russia supposed to appease Georgia because maybe USA supported Georgia?
In protecting Ossentia they had to invade Georgia and stay for a short period of time to insure that Georgia got the message to leave South Ossentia alone.
I understand the major hostilities has ceased and Georgia got the message to leave South Ossentia alone.
Tense Standoff in South Ossetia After Bombardment
Ron
That’s a straw man argument. I did not say that the US (for eg) should never go to war to save a democracy. I said that the US should not go to war purely to save a democracy.
There are nuances in the argument. It’s not a Manichean world.
Muskiemp
I thought everyone knew that Georgia started the conflict by “invading” South Ossetia which it had agreed NOT to send troops and tanks into. The Russians called their bluff and used it as an excuse for a huge overreaction and invaded as well.
Diogenes
“I did not say that the US (for eg) should never go to war to save a democracy. I said that the US should not go to war purely to save a democracy.
There are NUANCES in the argument”
and i’ve said
“So if Indonesian invades us , USA can quote your words , and leave us in tatters Once people ar selective , they can hardly whinge if that selectivity comes back to bite them”
Lets hope Indonesians as they attack , and th USA , understand those ‘nuances’ , whtever they ar
William
Are the bludgers going to be part of Possum’s new supersite? We should support his endeavour as much as possible.
I enjoy annabel Crabb’s jottings in the SMH. This got a real chuckle.
“In the state of NSW we were ensnared in the ethical question of when is the right time to euthanase a wallowing, stricken, directionless behemoth whose pitiful death throes are too upsetting to watch.
And, if NSW politics alone weren’t enough of a distraction, there was also Colin the whale”.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/annabel-crabb/harvest-the-fruit-of-labors-conversion/2008/08/22/1219262526765.html
We already hav a super site here , and most would not like it to be ‘weakened’
Diogenes , now Gilligans were recently looking at setting up a ‘oz’ site rather than posting here , you’re a clever man Diogenes be careful for what you wish (or assume)
Yes, I predicted the very end of the print media in a decade or two. Possum came out and said it will happen within the next 3 or 4 years (from memory). Go getum Possum.
Taking on the MSM should be little more difficult than having a nice workout at the gym. Take the comment from a journo who works for The Oz on Insiders this morning (fish face looking bloke with glasses who sat where Akerman usually sits) “the ETS will cost people more than the GST”. Obviously, wishful thinking on his part.
You can’t let comments like that go unchallenged!
Centre @ 222
Not sure, but I think it was Tim Blair. His journalistic ‘balance’ consisted of one sneer after another directed at the Rudd Government. But I think he Might be the the Telegraph and not the Oz? I could be wrong.
You are right on both counts, Boerwar (i.e. Tim Blair and Daily Telegraph, though he actually made his name as an independent blogger, ironically in light of Centre’s comment).
Boerwar, you could be right. I stopped buying those rags years ago. Especially now that you can get the formguides on the net. 🙂
[I enjoy annabel Crabb’s jottings in the SMH. This got a real chuckle.
“In the state of NSW we were ensnared in the ethical question of when is the right time to euthanase a wallowing, stricken, directionless behemoth whose pitiful death throes are too upsetting to watch.]
Matt Price’s spirit works in mysterious ways…
There’s been very little of a political nature from the Olympians in China. Here is a good story about Usain Bolt, who has been the best athlete IMO. He was criticised by the IOC chairman Rogge but shows he is a class act by visiting the Sichuan earthquake victims. I think Phelps celebrated with Ms Rice from memory.
Usain Bolt visits Sichuan earthquake victims, urges them to look forward
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/beijing_olympics/story/0,27313,24232838-5014124,00.html
There is a good articule in the Sunday Age about how Peter Kavanagh DLP is performing in the Victorian Upper House, and the effect for the good he is having on the Parliment.
I recommend it to all who are interested in the future of the DLP.
Support for the DLP is growing and membershi is increasing.
Interesting to see how if that support is reflected in the Mayo or Lyne by-elections
Link
http://www.theage.com.au/national/new-order-in-the-house-20080823-40y3.html#
“the ETS will cost people more than the GST”.
But, but Howard and the libs told us no-one would be worse off under the GST, or was that Work Choices, or the new medicare levy, or their housing policy or just generally under the libs.
I know this blog is full of lefty/hippy/pacificist nongs
You’re right. There seem to be a lot of us cretins about. And not just here. You can find us in the oddest places.
When the Ruskies started taking over most of eastern Europe after WW2 you’d think Truman would have gone to war to protect those countries, wouldn’t you? But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to put him straight, eh, Adam?
And when the Ruskies invaded Hungary in 1956 you would have thought Eisenhower would have kicked their sorry arses into the next week, wouldn’t you? But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to lay it on the line for him, eh, Adam?
And when they began building that wall to imprison the East Germans you’d think Kennedy would have gone for their jugular, wouldn’t you? But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Just stood in its shadow and proclaimed himself a sausage. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to put some steel in his spine, eh, Adam?
And when the Ruskies gave Dubcek what for in 1968 you would have thought Johnson would have had a go, wouldn’t you? But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to explain the error of his ways, eh, Adam?
And when the Ruskies gace aid and comfort to those damn Vietnamese terrorists killing good ol’ American boys you would have thought Nixon would have blown the mother-f***ers all the way to Hell and back. But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to lay out the big picture for him, eh, Adam?
And when the Ruskies invaded Afghanistan and began murdering its peace loving peoples, you would have thought Reagan would have given them what for, wouldn’t you? But, nope. Never ordered even a single shot to be fired in anger. Bloody lefty, hippy, pacificist nong! Pity you weren’t around to give Ronnie the benefit of your vast military/diplomatic experience, eh, Adam?
Oh, and I almost forgot. Even your hero, Winnie seems to have gone to water in the face of the unbearable Ruskie hoards when he regained the Prime Ministership in 1951. Perhaps age turns even mighty farsighted men like Churchill into lefty, hippy, pacificist nongs, eh?
Maybe that’s what happened to me, for if you’re to be believed, after more than 3 decades of being a warmongering, baby murdering 30,000ft coward, I’ve apparently become a lefty, hippy, pacificist nong, too. If only the blokes at the RSL who called me those other names when I first set foot in one could see me now, eh, Adam?
But hey, at least McCain won’t waiver if he becomes Prez, because there’ll be no more excuses now that you’re finally around to put him and the world to rights, eh, Adam? Bet you’ve already booked a ticket to Washington and they’re setting up a room next to the Oval Office for you.
Or have you decided to cut out the middleman and doing the job yourself by offering your services as
cannon foddera general in the Georgian army? If so, give ’em Hell, Adam! With a right-wing warmonger like you leading the charge I’m sure the Ruskies will be running a white flag up the Kremlin flagpole in no time. Why I bet they nearly cracked when that pullover chappie tried it in the Crimea, but he was probably a lefty, hippy, pacificist nong, too! 😉Following on from a reasonably critical article of journalistic standards by Mark Day I sent him an e-mail. His reply though was somewhat surprising in that he seemed to be offering a soft defence of it. My e-mail & his reply follow. Well worth a read.
{Where have you been for the last 2 years. A copy of this article should be placed on the desk of every Juornalist & Editor of every publication in your stable as well as the others.
I have expressed similar thoughts to yours on numerous occasions to Editors & Journalists for the past 12 months or so & don’t even receive any acknowledgement or response.
{editing with a bit of maturity would be a step in the right direction. Introducing more long-form copy and resisting populism and cheap shots would add greatly to their credibility}
{As newspapers are buffeted by the winds of change, it makes sense to protect existing audiences}
You should also have added that media commentators who base the content of their articles on personal opinion (which in many cases is totally conflicting with mainstream experience) or political ideology is not only a major reason for readers rejecting the abismal offerings dished up adnausium, but Australian society is all the poorer for it.
Media commentators attempting to prop up a failed political Opposition just doesn’t cut it out in the real world. A thoughtful and incisive examination of Government & Opposition competence & policies is what is expected & is vitally important in the standard of govenence of the country & the wellbeing of its society.
Basing the content of articles on ones personal political leanings or spin provided adnausium by party hacks is one of the major reasons why so many people are turning to the internet for their information.
For 38 years, I was a daily reader of The Australian & the Courier Mail. I no longer purchase those products & there would have to be a remarkable change around in the culture & standard of reporting for that to change.
I know from comments around the “blogosphere” that I am far from alone in this regard. Sites like LP have run specific threads on media groupthink etc and the subject of media bias & personal opinion slanting as well as consistent reporting of “spin” is a constant refrain on many other sites such as Poll Bludger & Tim Dunlop’s.
You would be doing your industry a big favour by following on from this article and doing some research on the many blogs which identify the many shortcomings of the current print, electronic & on-line media.
Hoping to see more quality evaluation on this from you in the near future & hopefully media operatives with just a modicum of intelligence will take notice and give the traditional forms of media a chance to survive & contribute to a just, fair & intelligent contribution to our society & way of life.
By the way. Great article & long overdue.}
and the reply
{Thanks for your note.
I must say, in defence of columnists, their primary role is to put an
opinion in order to get readers to think through a subject and decide
whether they agree or disagree. Therefore, you’ll often see opinion that
runs counter to the mainstream – it’s a device to get a reaction. The
columnists would be happy that they managed to provoke a response.
Having said that – yes, I agree some of them are ready to be put out to
pasture.}
As the Games are closing down.
[China 2008 olympic medal tally by population – This page contains Olympic medal results standardised by population. The thinking is that the bigger your population is, the better chance your country might have a freak of nature that can win a medal. Reasonably simple to do and although this statistic is by no means an accurate reflection of a country’s performance, medals/population is, in my opinion, a far better indicator of success than simple sum-medals, and is easy for the lay person to comprehend.
Three tables contain the following:
Gold medals per million population
Total medals per million
Weighted medal score per million ]
http://simon.forsyth.net/olympics.html
Ron @ 214 –
So if Indonesian invades us , USA can quote your words , and leave us in tatters
Ron, the TNI has as much chance of successfully invading us as you have of being the next President of the USA.
Why? Well a number of reasons, but the most pertinent was witnessed by those sitting on one of the small hills to the east of Dili watching the last Indonesia troopship leave. They sat…and watched….and watched…and sat…and sat….and watched for most of the morning as the bucket of rust struggled to clear the harbour and sail out of sight. I only have one (reasonably) functional lung but I would wheeze and cough less after running a marathon than it did trying to pull away from the wharf.
The only country with the means to successfully invade us is America. No one else currently has the military capability mix to pull it off. China may eventually, but not anytime soon. Not only is the hardware expensive, the expertise takes many decades and many wars to acquire.
The real danger Indonesia presents is economic because most of our imports and exports traverse its waters or airspace.
MayoFeral @ 230
A series of direct hits, and all the more powerful for coming from direct experience and the heart.
and @ 233
Agree on Indonesia’s competence. It is what happens remarkably often when the main function of your armed forces is to suppress your own population. I also agree with your view that the problem is that they sit across our trade routes. I suspect their best hope to cause us a military nuisance would be to start a small, running ‘proxy war’ across the PNG border.
Apart from that, I would question the assumption that seemed to be implied in some of the posts above that the US would support us automatically against Indonesia. The Dutch were US allies when Indonesia under Suharto invaded what is now West Irian. The Dutch, with the support of the locals, quickly despatched the Indonesian paras and the few Indonesian naval units that came their way.
Kennedy of Camelot fame, (frightened that Suharto was getting into bed with Kruschev (sp?), and by the way, yet another another US appeasement) then told the Dutch to get out, or no Marshall Plan for you. The plebiscite was handed over to the UN to handle, the Indonesians with the passive connivance of the UN, fixed the vote and Bob’s your Uncle.
Two main messages here: Don’t trust the UN and don’t trust the Americans to be your friends when you really need them.
Yeah, well … the 57:43 result is quite gratifying given that the intervals between parliament sittings are generally quiet and politics is the furthest thing from most people’s minds.
Maybe with the resumption of parliament the perception will set in of the Opposition as spoilers and hole-blowers of the budget.
If they don’t soon resolve their leadership “issues” they will be seen as non only mischevious, but directionless. Costello’s party-pooping game is paying off handsomely.
Boerwar, the Dutch dont speak English and it was a colony not a homeland. I cant believe I’m biting on an Indonesia invasion scenario, what is this 1977? ‘sit across our trade routes’ thats funny.
{If they don’t soon resolve their leadership “issues” they will be seen as non only mischevious, but directionless.}
RX, do you mean to say that they aren’t mischievous and direction less now!
Boy, I would hate to think what they would be like under your scenario.
MayoFeral
For momnt I agree completelty , however we do not know what technologial advances in wicked weaponary will occur in future , thereafter available to Indonesia or any country to look our way
In any event , it was an example to demonstate a point whether applicable cyurently or applicable in longer future , ie. being ‘selective’ about which democracy to defend is not wise let alone unprincipalled , as we may be a furture casuality of such ‘selectiveness’ Perhaps you may hav a european example that is more realistic currently , but I wished to indicate ours or our kids living rooms cann’t be guaranteed to be attack proof for ever , and we ought to be consistent & not selective , even if bigger Powers ar not always
You got that right, Scorpio!
Ron
There are many considerations other than whether the country is democratic. Regional balance, historical treaties, wishes of the population, prospect of success, viable alternatives and the one that the US uses above all, to protect economic interests.
Mayoferal, @ 230. Thank you so very much for that. Do you suppose Adam in Canberra will deign to reply? I’ve certainly been dismissed via not bothering to think about what I was saying.
Possum unmasked.
Diogenes
#240
I realise there ar alot of other considerations , all used by diplomats and politicans , and none of them worth anything if we were being attacked
There ar intrinsic values and freedoms in ‘democracys’ , united you stand and divided powerful despots sooner or later will devour you History shoes that
There is sometimes a lazy view in ‘oz’ of how fragile a Countrys freedoms and independance is compared to Europe , where Nato (made up of essentially democratic Countries) guarantees those freedoms by being united Also people’s feelings about USA morality should not colour this aspect
And incidently if one Nato country is externally attacked , NONE of your considerations apply whatsoever Had Georgia been part of Nato (it was in ‘process’ of joining which Russia did not want & were provocking Georgia for months) , Russia would never hav had courage to attack a Nato country , and instead th grievances of Ossettians some of which probably ar valid , would hav been addrssed peacefully by negotiation
Relevance deprived Libs accuse Labor of impotence. Pots and Kettles prepare to blacken themselves.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/24/2344882.htm
Ron
I’m not sure if the NATO treaty ensures a military response if a member nation is attacked. Lots of the treaties are secret with quite a few caveats and some are non-binding. The book “Guns of August” by Barbara Tuchman about the outbreak of WWI follows how the treaties unfolded in determining who fought and on what side. I was amazed how nervous each country was about whether an ally would honour the treaty.
Having a debate about whether war is about supporting democracies – remind me about the election that should have decided the issue in Vietnam in 1954, whether govts we supported in southern Vietnam were democratic. Remind me about interventions or support for insurrections in Iran, Chile, Guatemala, Congo, Angola…….. All sorts of governments have had slim claims to be democracies and yet we have supported them or not supported them with little connection to how democratic they were. It doesn’t sound like the right question to be asking.
“All sorts of governments have had slim claims to be democracies”
So what relevance has that got to Georgia , no such claim has ever been made about Georgia and th rose revolution , and in fact there hav been unrresticted UN observers at there electons
You point is valid for claimed democratic countries that were not , and for those Countries that did not even pretend to be , all those examples do is to allow people to disengenuously use past USA errors , to then argue to do nothing for pacifism or other reasons , when a valid case arises
247 – and do we doubt that the people of South Ossetia and Abkarsia would/have democratically vote to support some form of independence and Russian alliance. And given democratic principles and UN Charter on self determination where does that leave us.
Enemy Marsupial is on Chris Kerr of ‘oz’ , abit late posters here slayed him a few days ago I for one wrote
Ron 94 Says:
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 pm
CHRIS KERR says in ‘oz’ :
“The sheer fact it’s mainstream, though, means it must offer two crucial elements missing from the world of the blogs. They are balance and fact.”
Chris Kerr ? Kerr’s Kerr’s junior Thats like saying th dominant food Supermarkets Coles and Woolworths ar mainstream , and therefore offer most value for money !
Market dominance in any Industry including Media is an economic result of economic power , and ‘balance’ and ‘fact’ ar not only an irrelevant factor , but normally result in ‘imbalance’ and ’spin’ …th antithisus of ‘balance’ and ‘fact’
Pity Kerr’s Kerr’s junior is not up to th challenge of defending posters demolition of his sanctimonious assertion
AT LEAST 30 bloggers here could debate that Chris Kerr closet Liberal echo into being simply a ‘rodents’ pen pal His article proves he is a sensitive little fellow to any criticism , and reads some blogers posts proving he actauly thinks they ar important , offer a non ‘oz’ view to people and may alter peoples views He is th one who has now made such an acknowledgement , but as usual ‘oz’ is 2 years too late understanding
Wakefield,
I have a penchant for law and order. Players of both sides are hypocrites. Probably why no one takes any notice of your despairing entreaties.