ReachTEL: 54-46 to Labor

More evidence that the Barnaby Joyce saga has shut out the Coalition’s glimmer of polling sunlight at the start of the year.

The latest ReachTEL poll for Sky News is the Coalition’s worst result from that pollster this term, showing Labor with a two-party lead of 54-46, out from 52-48 at the previous poll on January 25. On the primary vote, the Coalition is down a point to 33%, Labor is up one to 37%, the Greens are up one to 11% and One Nation are down one to 7%. Malcolm Turnbull’s lead on the forced response preferred prime minister question is 53-47, down from 54-46. The poll was conducted on Thursday, the evening before Barnaby Joyce’s resignation: it found 57% thought he should indeed resign, against 32% who thought he should remain. A question on who should be Nationals leader had Joyce on 23%, Bridget McKenzie on 15%, Michael McCormack on 11%, Darren Chester on 6% and “don’t know” a formidable 40%.

UPDATE: As noted in comments, the Coalition have done well to make it to 54-46 on ReachTEL’s respondent-allocated two-party preferred result. If 2016 election preference flows are applied, the result is around 55.5-44.5.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,838 comments on “ReachTEL: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 33 of 37
1 … 32 33 34 … 37

  1. bemused @ #1589 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 2:42 pm

    daretotread. @ #1573 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 3:23 pm

    bemused @ #1534 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 1:17 pm

    daretotread. @ #1472 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 1:04 pm

    Question @ #1458 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 11:39 am

    Sorry DTT, no intention to be nasty.

    As we have often discussed in the past, some things you say baffle me (particularly about Trump).

    Question

    I fully understand how controversial my view on Trump is.
    —

    The main difference between myself and conventional “lefties” is that I fear nuclear war and do not believe that anyone in power in the USA has the capacity or common sense to avoid it. Hillary would have had next to zero chance of stopping it and advocated policies (no fly zones) that made it much more likely.

    Trump’s rhetoric was less confrontational. In the upshot however Trump has proved weak and powerless, so in reality the outcome has been pretty much the same anyway. I still cling to a vague hope that Trump will at least avoid a nuclear conflict with Russia. I am even less hopeful about China.

    So you alone among ‘lefties’ fear nuclear war and see next to zero chance of stopping it. I call BS!

    There is ‘still a vague hope that Trump will at least avoid nuclear conflict with Russia’ and you are less ‘hopeful about China’. I call BS on that too.

    You have a really weird view about the inevitability of nuclear war with out our saviour Trump.

    Bemused

    I would have more respect for your comments and you personally if you based your comments on knowledge.

    I am most definitely NOT alone amongst lefties and most of what I read comes from such lefty sites. Those of you who do not fear nuclear war are in my opinion simply stupid. No if no buts. Just thick headed.

    Sure the chance may still be low but the consequences are so server that only a mindless idiot would NOT fear it. Once again Bemused I refer to common or garden risk analysis. A Tie line would be fab but hard to put into English on a blog.

    So simple risk analysis usually has a 5 by five matrix. You could go more sensibly to a 10 by 10 when you think of nuclear war. So if you do a simple multiple (this is easiest to explain here but there are other methods. Now Bemused I know you do not understand Risk Analysis but I do it for a living in part so pull your ignorant head in.

    So let us take three global risks. Nuclear war between Russia and USA, Global warming and say a serious flu outbreak as well as a more limited regional “hot war of some kind, plus some other obvious kind of risk such as whooping cough epidemic or one that is a hot topic these days say sexual harassment in the workplace.

    Score for each on their likelihood Nuclear war 1, Major Flu outbreak 3 and global warming 8. Regional conflict in say the ME is already certain so also 10. Whooping cough is also around, but not everywhere so give it a 4. Sexual harassment is also around but does not affect everyone, so lets give it a 3. (men and old women are largely safe). You can argue these relationships but I doubt too many here would disagree much (other than ESJ).

    Then consider the consequences in deaths, or property destruction, both immediate and long term. Let us take global warming as the reference – flooding, famine, severe weather, major population dislocation. This would be long term. We will give it a 6. The flu outbreak while devastating in the short term will not lead to long term deaths as immunity/vaccination will allow us to address the issue. Minimal property damage. Lets score it at 3. Whooping cough is ghastly (I am passionately pro vaccination) but the numbers of actual dead are still very small. Much less than flue. Must be scored as a 2. a regional hot war as in the ME will kill lots of people – more than Whooping cough and probably more than the flu. Plus lots of property damage. Lets score it at 4. Sexual harassment will distress many and be damaging long term to mental health. Some may die, but less than whooping cough. so lets give it a 3. Then finally out nuclear war scenario. The consequences are horrendous. Have to be a 9 or 10 – 10 if it involves China, 9 if just Europe/US.

    So there you have it Let us do the scoring – You could of course replace the numbers with words. So a 10 by 10 risk is simply listed as extremely ghastly and impossible to contemplate and a 1 by 1 as Meh. In standard simple 5×5 risk matrices it is simply low, medium high and extreme. Let us just use numbers for now – simple multiple. (You could also simply order them 1-100 which is probably the “approved” method i a 5×5 matrix. So you minimize your risk by getting a 20 scored risk down to 16 etc or a 3 to a 1.

    So we have

    Global warming 8 by 6 =48 – High
    Flu epidemic 3×5 = 15 medium
    Whooping cough epidemic 4×2=8 low but still nasty
    Local war in the ME 10×4 =40 – High
    Nuclear war 1×9 =9 – low but not non existent
    Sexual harassment =3×3 low but still important.

    Now the point Bemused and others is that risk assessment is ALWAYS subjective but you are expected to have a clear rationale for your assessment of the likelihood of an event happening and the consequences if it should happen. In a workplace it determines whether you should place your emphasis on avoiding RSI or falls from ladders. if you are in an office environment obviously the RSI is much more likely and the ladders risk small, but on a building site it is the reverse.

    So Bemused and other doubters, by all means query the actual relative likelihood of an even and event the horror of the consequences, but do this FIRST before dumping on me. Then I might take your comments as reasoned and relevant.

    It wasn’t really necessary, but you have proven yet again, that you do not understand risk analysis.
    Try AS-4360.

    Funny thing Bemused but when I submit my clients for certification under ISO 14001, 9001 or 4801 they have not a whinge about my methodology. Better take it up with the ISO. Generally i get comments such as extraordinarily thorough and comprehensive. I suppose you do understand that Risk analysis is required in all such certifications these days. probably not.

    Better get your skates on and complain to JAZANZ.

    Out of interest bemused did you copy the standard from an employer or Library. Very naughty. It is of course an outrage that essential standards are sold fro profit by a private company. I notice this has got a bit of media coverage lately

  2. CTar1
    “The last time I watched ‘I, Claudius’ I found it the same – ‘stiff’.”

    ‘Rome’ had a few things that were stiff – especially when Atia’s breasts were on display.

  4. Ven @ #1595 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 2:59 pm

    I did not follow other posters
    But W Bowe did not publish Essential poll of The Guardian
    It is 53-47 in favour of ALP. Frankly that is not good enough.
    According to EP, ALP primary is 35%. What is happening here. We have huge scandal on LNP side and still it is 53-47.
    According to another poll today, LP should get majority In Tasmania even though ALP has good premier candidate.
    Can anyone of you give any reasons for that?

    Ven

    My own feeling is that voters do not care much about scandals. They care about incompetence or unfairness but scandals are a bit meh!

    Also a one point shift could well just be MoE so I do not get all bothered by it – only ifit continues for several polls.

    Finaly Tassie – did I not hear just this morning on the Government (LNP) Gazette that Tassie is booming. If true there is your answer

  5. Kevjohnno

    Can any of the PB round ball football fans explain the fascination fans of that sport seem to have for flares?

    Yearning for the 70s.

  6. CTar1
    “Now the ‘locals’”

    Italy has changed hands quite a few times since the Romans departed (Ostrogoths, Normans, etc).

    My father-in-law is of Italian descent, and ‘barbarian’ is too kind a word for him. 🙂

  9. If nuclear war is your concern, you don’t want an unhinged, unstable cretin at the helm.

    Pure and simple, being afraid of nuclear war and not being supportive of anti-Trump elements are fundamentally counter-intuitive concepts. It’s like trying to retrofit circumstances to suit your agenda and priorities.

    Trump has emboldened Putin, he’s personally destabilised the Korean peninsula because #reasons. He wants to RAMP UP the nuclear arms race. I put climate change, economic collapse, epidemics WAY ahead of nuclear war as something that keeps me awake at night and I don’t think I’m foolish to do so. But when the North Korean leader is considered the more strategic and rational actor next to the US President, something has gone terribly wrong.

    Trump and Trumpism is a disaster for the order of the world, it was held back in France and Germany and Austria … thank God. But the end result of your line of thinking is the slow capitulation of western liberal values in the name of appeasement.

  10. I hope Turnbull got a little payback in QT for his ‘special’ NBN service.

    MarkJacka‏ @themarkjacka · 2h2 hours ago

    I asked the NBN techn what he thoughtof the NBN & he loves it as he’s paid $100 a call out. He also said that if the Govt had sent a tech to check lines & line diagrams for the town I live in it would cost $1000 total, whereas he will have over 500 visits costing $50,000.

  11. guytaur @ #1554 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 10:52 am

    Barney

    A pity they are not so amenable to the human rights parts of Australian influence. Like freedom of and from religion.

    Also repealing criminal charges related to homosexual sex.

    A bit hard to charge your opposition with Sodomy though if you make it legal like most democracies.

    Malaysia is a mixed bag.

    The States are individual kingdoms with the Sultans maintaining much political influence and control.

    As such the impact of Islamic law can vary wildly depending on the relevant Sultan, also there are federally controlled territories like KL, Putrajaya and Labuan which culturally more relaxed.

    Politically, federally it’s a very hypocritical place with the one Party having held power since the Country’s inception and a born to rule mentality is prevalent amongst them.

    The 21st century has finally seen the emergence of credible Opposition Parties and the Government has used all it’s power to stymie them, as seen by the pursuit of Anwar, amongst others, through the courts.

    They barely scraped in last time and this years elections could see the end of their dynasty as there is not much more they can do to corrupt the election process and still maintain an air of credibility with the outside world. They’re too developed to pull a Cambodia and dissolve the Opposition Party.

    They love to push the idea of “One Malaysia” yet being an Islamic Country there are many laws that benefit Muslims over other Malays.

    It’s not uncommon to hear of ethnic Chinese or Indian businessmen converting to Islam because of the resultant business benefits provided by the law.

    They’re not the worst Government in the World and Malaysia has prospered under them but a good dose of democracy would be a welcome wake up call and signal the beginning of a more mature Malaysia.

    Or so I hope! 🙂

  12. Itsa

    “That’s the intro to philosophy isn’t it? “I think therefore I am”. “

    That’s a foundation of Descartes philosophy.

  19. I find the discussion on risk assessment interesting. I also think Bemused and DTT make valuable contributions. Both stay stuff I agree with and some stuff I don’t. No matter. The personal sniping is tedious, however.

  20. we still pay a price for BS – he is not a magnet for dissenting voters to leave liberals – it seems business as normal with govt maybe some voters think pragmatically this is as good as it gets … they are switched off – of course maybe with election ALP vote will increase

  21. Steve777 @ #1619 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 4:26 pm

    I find the discussion on risk assessment interesting. I also think Bemused and DTT make valuable contributions. Both stay stuff I agree with and some stuff I don’t. No matter. The personal sniping is tedious, however.

    At least when they are arguing with each other the rest of us are spared having to read any of it!

  23. kevjohnno @ #1597 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 11:59 am

    “Western Sydney Wanderers Red and Black Bloc fans banned from stand for flares lit in derby”

    Can any of the PB round ball football fans explain the fascination fans of that sport seem to have for flares?

    When you are lacking entertainment on the field you need to do something!!!!

    I know, I’m going to Hell!!!!! 🙂

  26. daretotread. @ #1578 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 3:29 pm

    —
    Bemused

    I would have more respect for your comments and you personally if you based your comments on knowledge.

    I am most definitely NOT alone amongst lefties and most of what I read comes from such lefty sites. Those of you who do not fear nuclear war are in my opinion simply stupid. No if no buts. Just thick headed.

    Sure the chance may still be low but the consequences are so server that only a mindless idiot would NOT fear it. Once again Bemused I refer to common or garden risk analysis. A Tie line would be fab but hard to put into English on a blog.

    So simple risk analysis usually has a 5 by five matrix. You could go more sensibly to a 10 by 10 when you think of nuclear war. So if you do a simple multiple (this is easiest to explain here but there are other methods. Now Bemused I know you do not understand Risk Analysis but I do it for a living in part so pull your ignorant head in.

    So let us take three global risks. Nuclear war between Russia and USA, Global warming and say a serious flu outbreak as well as a more limited regional “hot war of some kind, plus some other obvious kind of risk such as whooping cough epidemic or one that is a hot topic these days say sexual harassment in the workplace.

    Score for each on their likelihood Nuclear war 1, Major Flu outbreak 3 and global warming 8. Regional conflict in say the ME is already certain so also 10. Whooping cough is also around, but not everywhere so give it a 4. Sexual harassment is also around but does not affect everyone, so lets give it a 3. (men and old women are largely safe). You can argue these relationships but I doubt too many here would disagree much (other than ESJ).

    Then consider the consequences in deaths, or property destruction, both immediate and long term. Let us take global warming as the reference – flooding, famine, severe weather, major population dislocation. This would be long term. We will give it a 6. The flu outbreak while devastating in the short term will not lead to long term deaths as immunity/vaccination will allow us to address the issue. Minimal property damage. Lets score it at 3. Whooping cough is ghastly (I am passionately pro vaccination) but the numbers of actual dead are still very small. Much less than flue. Must be scored as a 2. a regional hot war as in the ME will kill lots of people – more than Whooping cough and probably more than the flu. Plus lots of property damage. Lets score it at 4. Sexual harassment will distress many and be damaging long term to mental health. Some may die, but less than whooping cough. so lets give it a 3. Then finally out nuclear war scenario. The consequences are horrendous. Have to be a 9 or 10 – 10 if it involves China, 9 if just Europe/US.

    So there you have it Let us do the scoring – You could of course replace the numbers with words. So a 10 by 10 risk is simply listed as extremely ghastly and impossible to contemplate and a 1 by 1 as Meh. In standard simple 5×5 risk matrices it is simply low, medium high and extreme. Let us just use numbers for now – simple multiple. (You could also simply order them 1-100 which is probably the “approved” method i a 5×5 matrix. So you minimize your risk by getting a 20 scored risk down to 16 etc or a 3 to a 1.

    So we have

    Global warming 8 by 6 =48 – High
    Flu epidemic 3×5 = 15 medium
    Whooping cough epidemic 4×2=8 low but still nasty
    Local war in the ME 10×4 =40 – High
    Nuclear war 1×9 =9 – low but not non existent
    Sexual harassment =3×3 low but still important.

    Now the point Bemused and others is that risk assessment is ALWAYS subjective but you are expected to have a clear rationale for your assessment of the likelihood of an event happening and the consequences if it should happen. In a workplace it determines whether you should place your emphasis on avoiding RSI or falls from ladders. if you are in an office environment obviously the RSI is much more likely and the ladders risk small, but on a building site it is the reverse.

    So Bemused and other doubters, by all means query the actual relative likelihood of an even and event the horror of the consequences, but do this FIRST before dumping on me. Then I might take your comments as reasoned and relevant.

    It wasn’t really necessary, but you have proven yet again, that you do not understand risk analysis.
    Try AS-4360.

    Funny thing Bemused but when I submit my clients for certification under ISO 14001, 9001 or 4801 they have not a whinge about my methodology. Better take it up with the ISO. Generally i get comments such as extraordinarily thorough and comprehensive. I suppose you do understand that Risk analysis is required in all such certifications these days. probably not.

    Better get your skates on and complain to JAZANZ.

    Out of interest bemused did you copy the standard from an employer or Library. Very naughty. It is of course an outrage that essential standards are sold fro profit by a private company. I notice this has got a bit of media coverage lately
    So many words to convey so little sense.
    Or, more correctly, nonsense.

    I have done a number of courses on Risk Management which have given me access to AS4360 and other standards. There are also publications which draw on such sources.

    It seems to me you have defrauded your clients if what you wrote above is anything to go by.

  27. According to another poll today, LP should get majority In Tasmania even though ALP has good premier candidate.
    Can anyone of you give any reasons for that?

    The gaming industry has been saturation-bombing Tasmanian media with pro-Liberal ads. See https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/02/27/liberals-spend-big-in-tasmanias-state-election/?utm_source=TractionNext&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Insider-Subscribe-270218 (paywalled).

    “For weeks, the public has been hit with a barrage of political advertising, the likes of which have never been seen before. The banners hang from the old Victorian pile pubs, in a city never really modernised — “Labor and the Greens think you’re idiots” — the newspapers are filled with double-page spreads urging apple islanders to “love your local”, the TV ad breaks are wall-to-wall with nine-dollar graphics, radio fizzes with 30-second warnings”

    Think pokie pre-commitment back in 2012, but apparently on a much bigger scale. They were effectively saying sport did not exist before poker machines appeared in club and pub and would cease to exist were pokies to be restricted.

  29. kakaru

    The date of Christmas Day (Dec 25) was stolen from the pagans; it was originally the Winter solstice.

    The religious message changed but for most people as long as it was a public holiday who really cared!

  30. “Excuse my ignorance, but what, pray tell, is a Tim Tam Slam?”

    Oh Gecko, you haven’t lived. Bite off both ends of a Tim Tam, and use it as a straw to slurp up hot chocolate from a mug. Rather messy, but a real treat in winter. For extra deliciousness, can try with an Irish coffee.

    I prefer double coat Tim Tams.

  31. Jesus was a Jew and did not think he was a god – no Jew would

    he thought he was the high priest as well as royalty and with authority and closer to god – bit like pope (used to be held)

    but his regime was anything but orthodox, and of course changed completely when he died
    there was a diaspora of liberal jews and romans who followed him will he was alive – paul did not create communities out of blue (stands to reason – esp for a failed ruler)

  32. for some time just before he lived liberal jewish belief was voguish in empire tied of romans gods – monotheism was voguish – but that suddenly changed with rulers – jesus was born out of time, a few decades to late

  34. Steve777 @ #1619 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 4:26 pm

    I find the discussion on risk assessment interesting. I also think Bemused and DTT make valuable contributions. Both stay stuff I agree with and some stuff I don’t. No matter. The personal sniping is tedious, however.

    DTTs greatest, but by no means only, problem with her version of risk analysis is that it assumes the worst case and does not take into account mitigation actions. Hence her extreme conclusions.

    In reality, there are all sorts of international conversations going on to mitigate a lot of the risk of war through misunderstandings or accident. i.e. Diplomacy.

  35. Rome’ had a few things that were stiff – especially when Atia’s breasts were on display

    Shall we get Herr Flick to fetch you a painting of some boobies?

  36. Someone say Scottish?

    Flower of Scotland is a good footy anthem.. a wee bit of a dirge….

    “Freedom Come All Ye” is better as an anthem for Scotland.

    As sung in Scots, not English, at the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow by the wonderful South African soprano Pumeza Matshikiza.

    Some say her Scots is pretty good too.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yChTjZqGCt0

  39. A Tim Tam Slam is where you nibble off opposing tips of the Tim Tam and, using it like a straw, dip one end (only just) into a hot cup of tea and suck the tea up through the Tim Tam.

    When the tea reaches your mouth you have to very quickly suck the whole Tim Tam into your mouth. It spontaneously combusts into a supernova of deliciousness.

  41. If you get the timing wrong, it is a bit messy. But when the two person game involves the other person cleaning up the mess with only their mouth and tongue and that person happens to be a catholic girl you have had your eye on for a while then…. well….

  44. J341983 @ #1609 Tuesday, February 27th, 2018 – 3:13 pm

    If nuclear war is your concern, you don’t want an unhinged, unstable cretin at the helm.

    That is a reasonable enough point provided you believe that the President is ever really at the helm. The reality is that it will be some General Bloggs who really has the say so and much depends on the will power and streghth of the POTUS to say NO. Yes the Kennedy Bros did ad i think Obama. Whoever really controlled Reagan also was sane. Luckily the issue did not arise between 1990 and 2015.

    In my opinion (and I have as much right to this as all those who nod to the group think), is that Clinton was just as likely to bow to the will of some nutter General than Trump, possibly more so, especially after she fainted a few time and there was a possibility of a weak as P**s Kaine as POTUS. Ivanka and Kushner may be many things but neither seems insane.

    Pure and simple, being afraid of nuclear war and not being supportive of anti-Trump elements are fundamentally counter-intuitive concepts. It’s like trying to retrofit circumstances to suit your agenda and priorities.

    Sorry I just disagree. You have no substantial evidence for the comment other than everyone thinks so. When someone publicly says they want better relations then it is reasonable and rational to assume that they are LESS likely to go to war than someone who speaks of no fly zones targeting the opponent. Honesty only an irrational person could think otherwise. Yes even if one person is sane and the other a nutter.

    Trump has emboldened Putin, he’s personally destabilised the Korean peninsula because #reasons. He wants to RAMP UP the nuclear arms race.

    This is a tad batshit crazy. i do not think Russia has had much to do with the Korean situation and certainly they are not stirring it up. Putin was much bolder under Obama than he has been under trump, so I am not sure there that comes from.

    I put climate change, economic collapse, epidemics WAY ahead of nuclear war as something that keeps me awake at night and I don’t think I’m foolish to do so.

    Well bully for you. What is your rationale? Please make some sort of rational attempt too explain why. Now obviously if you understood my post I would agree with you re climate change and a flu epidemic, and probably (have not done the calculation) also economic collapse.

    But when the North Korean leader is considered the more strategic and rational actor next to the US President, something has gone terribly wrong.

    Fair point, but the fact that trump was even nominated in the first place and that the only opponent was so lack lustre should be the concern

    Trump and Trumpism is a disaster for the order of the world, it was held back in France and Germany and Austria … thank God. But the end result of your line of thinking is the slow capitulation of western liberal values in the name of appeasement.

    I think you are conflating too many very different ideas and as such come across as confused. Trump is NOT a Hitler nor even a Mussolini. He is too much of a weak vacillator to be such. Indeed his stated objective (not what has happened) was in fact to pull back from overseas adventures and imperialist conquests. So this comment is a tad silly.

    Yes he is clearly a racist but that is not the same as being a fascist.- overlap for sure but it is thick heated to conflate the two. His immigration policy is after all exactly the same as that of both the LNP and ALP ie build a wall to keep em out and if you think that his wall is any different to our boats and orange life rafts and OS detention centres, you lack comprehension skills.

    Now I am not sure exactly what these liberal values we are seeking to defend actually are. Bombing/invading/destabilizing governments in Afghanisan, Iraq, Libya, Syria is hardly benign given the many, many deaths. We support Saudi who stone people to death, Israel who ghettoises Gazans, overthrow of democratic regimes in Ukraine, uber surveillance and spying on all our citizens.

    Our allies the US pays people wages of $4/hr and has them living in the streets and ensures that the poor die through lack of health care. We should not be so bloody holier than thou. it is up to the citizens of other countries to determine they form of government – NOT us.

    Counties must follow their own paths to stable government in the best interests of its people. Imposing from outside almost never works.

    We should be much more concerned about loss of our personal freedoms from WITHIN than the possibility of some weird domino effect. I find Dutton (and many other Qld LNPers) one helluva greater risk to our western freedoms than Putin or Xi or some crazed Muslim seeking Sharia law.

    Now finally the issue of appeasement. This is a long and complex argument that I have no time for just now. I am still thinking on this one. ie what price appeasement. How many deaths are justified in the name of freedom? When I was 20 i would have said many, now I am less sure. What say you?

  46. J341983 says:
    Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 4:13 pm
    If nuclear war is your concern, you don’t want an unhinged, unstable cretin at the helm.

    Trump has emboldened Putin, he’s personally destabilised the Korean peninsula because #reasons. He wants to RAMP UP the nuclear arms race. I put climate change, economic collapse, epidemics WAY ahead of nuclear war as something that keeps me awake at night and I don’t think I’m foolish to do so.

    My observations may be counter-intuitive, but what we actually experience is a form of “nuclear peace”. I’m not saying the world is peaceful. It is obviously is not. However, the clear history since 1945 has been that wars have not been waged by nuclear means. There are very good reasons for this.

    Nonetheless, it is not true to suppose that nuclear weapons are not “used”. I would argue that nuclear weapons are in everyday use. They are “used” but they are not discharged. The mere fact they exist prevents states from making war on each other. So their arsenals serve very real defensive purposes. Needless to say, these purposes are best served by nuclear states publishing the facts about their respective capabilities, numbers, distribution and readiness. It seems that the more we know about each other’s nuclear capabilities, the less likely it is we will have to use them.

    I would go even further, and say that the capacity of one state to threaten another state, who in turn can retaliate against the first state actually stabilises the dynamics for all states. It follows they all have an interest in preserving the status quo.

    This makes me wonder too about limiting proliferation. The nuclear states obviously benefit from non-proliferation. The states that lose from non-proliferation are the non-nuclear states. They lose not only because they are deprived of offensive capability but, are importantly, they are deprived of defensive capability.

    This forces non-nuclear states into subservient relationships with nuclear allies. In our case, this reinforces our dependence on the US, for example. Moreover, were we to attempt to reduce this dependence, we would risk upsetting the strategic balance generally. To this extent, our dependence contributes to geo-strategic stability. This is true for every minor non-nuclear power that is allied to a major power. So the situation is layered. The nuclear powers – antagonists – are co-dependent. The non-nuclear powers are dependent but also contribute to strategic balance.

    The corollary of this is that peaceful interaction is possible – in fact, may only be possible – under the umbrella of nuclear competition. It is in locations where nuclear competition has been been ineffective or has been largely absent that the worst wars have been fought. Viet Nam and Iraq are the best examples of this.

    In this context, hawkish policy would actually better serve peace than would dovish policy. It all seems counter-intuitive….but we do experience nuclear peace and have done so every day since the bombing of Nagasaki.

  48. From the Graun :

    There is a lot of Penny Wong headshaking going on in this committee hearing.

    So far she has learnt that:

    No one knows why the Attorney-General has the ultimate responsibility to decide what happens to Roman Quaedvlieg’s case.

    No one knows what is going on with the report that was looking into his investigation

    No one knows when the Attorney-General became the decision maker.

    No one knows who decided the AG should become the decision maker.

    No one knows if Quaedvlieg’s legal costs are being paid, or by who.

    The department doesn’t know if the Attorney-General making the decision makes it a “decision making role”.

    I think that sound you hear is the Working Dog Productions crew rushing down the hall

Comments Page 33 of 37
1 … 32 33 34 … 37

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *