Julia, I reckon we should train them here and send them back to fight their their own battles in their own country.
This is an irony which has occurred to me too. Why should young Australians be fighting for a decent existence for the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, when their own apparently healthy young men can't do likewise?
One answer I've come up with is that Australia as part of the so called Coalition of the Willing, engaged in destroying much of these countries on a poorly thought out and illogical pretext, so perhaps we owe them something.
I don't know. There are many ways of considering the many aspects of this whole miserable situation.
You misunderstand.Hey Doc, why attack the messenger?
Julia, I reckon we should train them here and send them back to fight their their own battles in their own country.
You misunderstand.
The point is, it's very easy to call people that flee their country for a better life cowards, but the reality a long way from the romantic notion of overcoming all odds and fighting for your freedom.
It's also very good work invoking WW2. But as long as we're talking about battles our relatives fought, it's fair to point out that the Afghans essentially defeated the Russians. But I'm not sure how any of it's relevant.
I'll check back tomorrow morning to see if your point has become any clearer with the benefit of additional time.With respect, it's you who missed the point.
Have a nice day.
Well, the Tamil's did and they lost. Hence their exodous.How will these countries ever become stable, and strong if their people never fight for it?
Senator David Johnston, Opposition Defense Spokesman, made a valid point in parliament yesterday (reported on Lateline last night) when he said,
These "asylum seekers" say they come here looking for freedom, so it's about time we sent them back to their countries to fight for their freedom instead of allowing them to run away like cowards.
I dont understand why everyone gets hung up on boat people. If we are talking illegal immigrants, then most of the estimated 60,000 illegal immigrants in Australia are not asylum seekers hoping to be judged as refugees. Most illegal immigrants arrive by air and overstay their visas. They are generally tourists, students or people granted temporary-residence permits. They do not get much media attention and the Government does not appear to consider them a serious threat.
Maybe we should be worrying more about the tourists than the boat people.
Asylum-seekers arrive by plane, not boat
October 25, 2009 08:15am
EVERY day, at least 13 asylum-seekers enter Australia through airports, representing 30 times the number of boat people that are supposedly "flooding" across our maritime borders.
A total of 4768 "plane people" - more than 96 per cent of applicants for refugee status - arrived by aircraft in 2008 on legitimate tourist, business and other visas compared with 161 who arrived by boat during the same period, the Sunday Telegraph reports.
And plane people are much less likely than boat people to be genuine refugees, with only about 40-60 per cent granted protection visas, compared with 85-90 per cent of boat people who are found to be genuine refugees.
In 2007-08, 3987 claims were received and 1930 of these were approved.
But whereas boat people are detained on Christmas Island while their claims are processed, plane people live in the community and they are allowed to work under policy changes introduced by the Rudd government.
Experts say few Australians understand that the boat people represent just a small fraction of our refugee intake - and these asylum-seekers are unfairly vilified by "expedient" politicians.
Exact plane-people figures for 2009 are not yet available, but an Immigration Department spokesman said the figure was likely to have increased at a similar rate to that of boat arrivals, which grew from 161 to 1799 since last year, in response to increased pressures within the region, including the end of civil war in Sri Lanka, which has seen many ethnic Tamils fleeing persecution.
An analysis by The Sunday Telegraph of immigration records shows that Sri Lankans represented more than 28 per cent of "plane people" who successfully applied for protection visas in 2007-08, followed by Chinese (26 per cent), Iraqis (14 per cent) and Pakistanis (7.6 per cent). Of the plane people found to be non-genuine refugees, many are Indonesian, Malaysian, Indian and Chinese.
Chinese represent 30 per cent of plane people who apply for refuge, followed by Sri Lankans (8 per cent), Malaysians, Indonesians, Iraqis and then Indians.
Australia will take 13,750 refugees through its humanitarian program in 2009-10, an increase of 250 on last year.
It is expected that Sri Lankans will represent an increased proportion of that intake, which in previous years has been dominated by Burmese, Iraqis, Afghans, Sudanese, Liberians, Congolese and Burundians.
Politicians' "expedient obsession" with boat people is clouding the truth about Australia's refugee flows, according to migration law expert Professor Mary Crock, of Sydney University Law School.
"It's a great mystery why people get upset about boats -- and it's disappointing that our Prime Minister is playing to the old politics," Professor Crock said.
"We have a small number of arrivals and the ones who arrive by boat are nearly always genuine refugees."
Many of the boat people that pay for the trip borrow the money from questionable people.
It is interesting to watch well researched documentaries on the issue like those often shown on SBS and ABC when compared to primetime rubbish of 7 and 9. 7 and 9 are good at throwing numbers are people without suitable context and often the figures themselves cannot be reconciled.
All the rubbish figures thrown around by media organisations without valid and clear reputable sources should result in fines. They make money from the sales so they should suffer consequences of peddling incorrect information that can be very emotive.
The question is ... if it wasn't in the media would it affect anyone? I propose not as it is under control and no, repeat no, threat to any Australian residents existence. Now if there were thousands lining up daily off the coast there would be a problem.
Look at the matter from it's severity and impact on Australia rather than an alarmist, emotive, attention seeking or boring life context.
...
Mr Rudd is used to buying popularity by dispensing money and spin. Apparently this recipe is not working with the Indonesians.
I would have thought that it would be obvious that I meant that they should be sent back to join their Afghan National Army to fight!Surely there's a material difference between a trained, equipped and organised force and a group of individuals with no particular skills, training, equipment or leadership?
You have obviously never faced the prospect of having to fight for yours!When's the last time you fought for your freedom?
Yes Julia, I think you have a valid point there. During the ‘70s, after we lost the Vietnam war, I think we felt obliged to accept the Vietnamese refugees fleeing from their now Communist-controlled country and that set a bit of a precedent.This is an irony which has occurred to me too. Why should young Australians be fighting for a decent existence for the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, when their own apparently healthy young men can't do likewise?
One answer I've come up with is that Australia as part of the so called Coalition of the Willing, engaged in destroying much of these countries on a poorly thought out and illogical pretext, so perhaps we owe them something.
I don't know. There are many ways of considering the many aspects of this whole miserable situation.
Perhaps our recalcitrant GenYs would appreciate this country more if they had to do a period of some sort of national service.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?