Hiya guys,i was having this discussion with some members of my base medical team during lunch and we sort of stumbled into this topic: Does Australia hold hidden agenda and territorial ambitions by sticking in Timor Leste even though most countries have left?There is abundance of natural resources.Does Australia stand to gain in this mess?These were questions that me and me mates discussed about and were genuinely puzzled.
In Australia, the overwhelming sentiment is that we are generously helping East Timor after a bout of bloodshed... There is no doubt whatsoever, I havent even heard the word 'imperialism' pop up on TV or the news. Of course this might not be the case elsewhere, I'm sure the Indonesians think about the subject along different lines
which brings us to the point,why would the Australian government want to get their hands dirty with Timor Leste? There has to be some kind of motive.No government would really help another just because they want to help them.You get what i mean?of course i am not implying that the Australian Government is being imperialistic.
Well, if you are going to take such a cynical view ( ), potentially they could simply be doing a favour now which could be repaid later - maybe with a favourable trade agreement or somthing similar.
Well, we consider ourselves a regional power (rather arrogantly) and it seems to be presented that it is the Australian governments responsibility to maintain order and peace when necessary... That and it would be unfortunate if a coupe resulted in the installation of a militaristic dicatorship in a country so close to Australia
i heard the aussies were going to stage border incidents in paa pua and paga pago because of allegeded mistreatments of of ethnic austrailians liveing in these unterabomentch nations...followed by a rapid billabongblitzkreig and a g'daylight bombing campaign....
the australians may not harbour intentions..but the australian government may have, gentlemen(and ladies). Don't get me wrong,this is not a thrash Aussie topic.But in light of this,i thinkl it is still rational to say that there's surely some hidden agenda for the helping hand.And i hope a mature conversation and discussion would come out of it....
kaiser...the aussies are acting in timore because the aussie public demands it..it is their sphere ,and they are the only ones who give a shyt in that corner of the world....the american public demanded and end to the rapes and murders of muslims in bosnia and the clinton administration forced the un to act....a few english merchants and clergymen met in a coffee house in london and 20 years later the rn was seizing slave ships anywhere on the high seas ...no hidden agenda ,just people forcing their governments to do the right thing,rare enough ,but it does happen...now that i think of it..these acts are always promoted by western christian based nations...am i wrong....?
I think you think wrong... Turkey, Israel and Pakistan are three non-Christian western nations whose actions have often been considered peacable... Just as there have been modern western Christian-based countries whose regiemes have been quite bigotted, Greece (during Kosovo), South Africa (Apartheid)... One of the primary reasons why I doubt John Howard is hoping to 'expand his empire' into the SE Asian Islands is that, to be perfectly frank, there's nothing valuable there... Oil? Nope. Resources? Nope. WMD's, Terrorists, Evil Dictators? While there has been some terrorist action against Aussies in Bali etc., its not dangerous enough to warrant action or invasion... Who in their right mind would want the responsibility of keeping order in Timor? Not Australia, we simply felt obliged to do so... IMO
iirc correctly,turkey was the perpetrator of a huge genocide (ameanian christians) in ww1...pakistan has been selling wmds to any bidder with cash in very recent times...what were the peacable actions you were reffering to smeg?....israel dosent count as it is the font of jud-christian thought , ie the old testament ...( not christian perhaps...but the foundation of christianity...ten comandments ect.. )
I'm not saying John Howard is imperialistic or anything.I'm merely stating a ,imho,a quite valid point in my suspicions.And i'm not one that doesn't listen to anybody either(think Grieg)*nah i'm just kidding,i love the old man old enough to be my grand daddy.* So anyway,i think smeghead and majorwoody raised a vaild point. Anyway,recent(ok,not so recent but i was not ard during the time) news regarding the execution of an australian drug convict in Singapore sparked violent protests ,and public virgils as if he was the late Steve IRwin.I would like to know what Smeghead think of it.
Really? I think there was relatively little kerfuffle about the Australian executed in Singapore... His death was overshadowed by the 10 Australians convicted in Bali for the same crime - Drug Trafficing... IMO Australians have a lot more respect for Singaporean Law than Indonesian Law, and as he was definately guilty there wasn't much that could be appealed (as there was in the perhaps less-than-just trial of the Drug traffickers caught in Indonesia) In the news, the only gripe made was that John Howard should have 'pulled a few strings', no jabs were made at the Singaporean government at all, though plenty were made at the Indonesians... I'm sorry to say it, but over here we pretty much accepted the Singaporean victim's execution as necessary and put faith in the Singaporean courts... Not so much with the Indonesians, and I'm not sure why. Any ideas? Muslim discrimination perhaps?
Then perhaps my country's medias overplayed the issue.Cause over in one state of Australia,there was even a minute's silence for this guy which i thought was pretty ridiculous.And to be hoinest,at that point,i seriously doubt australian rationality.But seriously,i think the 10 Bali drug traffickers would have faced the same sentence in Singapore.John howard did write a personal letter to our government requesting clemency,it was turned down just like how we turned down the american's request for michael faye
