Prev
Next

Most think our leaders have it about right on Afghanistan

Ross Neilson

by Ross Neilson

24 Oct 09:00am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Afghanistan, Debate, Military, Parliament, Politics, Polling

28 comments

When should Australia wage war? Has anyone asked you? Have you given it much thought or is that a job best left to the government?

Cartoon: The Daily Telegraph's Warren Brown

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that twenty one Australian men lie dead, lost on the battlefields of Afganistan. Each of them is easy to admire - young, supremely fit, highly trained, brave soldiers.

It’s pretty clear they all possessed courage and commitment to their task, their training and their mates most of us would struggle to emulate. They all have families and friends - even more tragically, a number of them have young children who will never see or know their dads.

Many more of their comrades in arms have been terribly wounded. It’s a heavy, hideous price we are paying to support our allies in this conflict.

These are extremely sombre facts about our country’s support for the war against the Afghani Taliban. This week Federal Parliament has been largely devoted to debating that commitment. At Auspoll we thought it timely to ask Australians what they think.

Do we think the price is too high and we must pull out or does the heavy toll in lives lost and damaged make it all the more important to stay the course?

In a national survey of 1,500 people this week, only 22 per cent supported an immediate withdrawal of Australian troops. Nearly twice as many - 40 per cent - backed the proposition of staying in Afghanistan until the mission our soldiers are engaged in is complete. Around the same proportion – 37 per cent – favoured a compromise: to set a date for withdrawal and bring our soldiers home soon.

Julia Gillard’s government and Tony Abbott’s opposition are – for once – in broad agreement on this question and both may take some comfort from these results. There is no widespread clamour to end our involvement in this war immediately.

If you listen to a lot of talkback radio however, you might be forgiven for thinking there is a huge groundswell of opinion on a different question. Some strident voices have been raised against the decision of the independent director of military prosecutions to charge three soldiers over an incident in which civilians including children were killed.

The officer who took this decision has been attacked, there have been calls for the government to step in and overturn the military judicial process and its unwillingness to do so has even characterised as “stabbing in the back” our troops in the battle zone.

So what do Australians think should happen if our soldiers are alleged to have acted against the laws governing military engagement? Asked to choose between an investigation by senior officers and trial in a military court and an option suggesting our soldiers should never face charges over actions that occur in battle, a big majority (65 per cent) favoured the court martial process compared to 35 per cent who feel combat and rules don’t mix.

It’s noteworthy that that 35 per cent against any charges relating to active service rises to 47 per cent in 65-74 year old respondents.

Asked if the government should intervene to have the charges dropped, intervene to investigate the incident itself (as some of those strident voices have demanded) or stay out of it and allow the military’s legal process to proceed without interference, a majority (54 per cent) back our defence force to run its own affairs and legal procedures.

There was just 20 per cent support for government intervention to drop the charges and another 25 per cent for it to conduct its own investigation, though it’s far from clear how this could be accomplished without resort to the army, since they are the ones doing the fighting and administering the rules of engagement.

The Gillard government has been very clear it is not about to interfere in a judicial process. On this highly charged and complex policy question, with its tragic overlay of death and sacrifice, it has broad community support for this judicious approach, whatever the strident ones say.

Most commented

28 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • No War Gamer says:

      08:17am | 24/10/10

      After war, comes peace - eventually - of some sort.  So send back all fit Afghan men who apply or refugee status so they can defend their own country and bring back our troops fighting someone else’s war.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      08:51am | 24/10/10

      Someone in authority recently intimated that there is a lot of public opinion on the matter of these charges, and that as we don’t have privy to the charge sheet, we’d best refrain forming an early opinion…as if they’re guilty, and we should mind our manners.
      Well, OK then, we’ll shut up, but after mr. Karzai (dogs hind leg) finishes making deals with the Taliban, which may save them from those pesky drones, I expect charges shall be laid against every fighter who did the wrong thing.
      Charges will include murder, shooting un-armed civilians who did not want to fight, pouring acid over women and girls who went to school and importing an illegal substance for profit and mayhem.
      (Soldiers who throw grenades in time of war who inadvertantly get the wrong people may feel a chip on their shoulder here, but when they get out of the lock-up, I expect they’ll get their pension…or will they ?)

      Reply

    • Ted N says:

      08:57am | 24/10/10

      The David Hicks kangaroo trial was a military tribunal wasn’t it? If it’s not open and transparent then I for one will assume it’s not justice just a scared Governments hiding stuff.

      So we are going to be there for another 10 years without a strategy? Without air support? Duh? Watching more diggers come home in body bags… This episode has to go down as the most Fawlty Towers epsiode of an otherwise proud Australian military history.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      09:50am | 24/10/10

      But you avoid other more interesting questions.“Should there be a parliamentary debate before Australia commits troops overseas?” and “Should there be a parliamentary vote before Australia commits troops overseas?” Australia as a democracy, yeah right.

      Reply

    • geoffm says:

      11:03am | 24/10/10

      Our soldiers are fighting and dying because they have been directed to observe all the Rules of War and all the restrictions of the Geneva Comvention.  This means they virtually have to refrain from shooting until AFTGER they have mede 100% certain that there are NO civilians in their line of fire -  and they just about have to call our “Do you mind if we shoot at you ?” before firing at someone who is shooting at them.
      Our troops need to be goven the OK to kill on sight all who shoot at them, without taking into consideration the probability that the terrorist(s) are hiding in a school or hospital or from behind a group of civilians.

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      07:53pm | 24/10/10

      So if they didn’t have to observe the Rules of War and Geneva Convention they would suddenly win? Are you serious?

      BTW, our troops MUST follow the Rules of War and the Geneva Convention. They are different to the Taliban. I don’t know about you, but I like that they are different; that they don’t target civilians, and if they do break the rules, they should be held accountable. So, no, they must not be given the okay to kill on sight without taking civilians into consideration. Civilians did not ask for war, and if soldiers have to make 100% certain that there are no civilians in the line of fire, that is fine by me.

      I wonder if you would have a different view if Australia was invaded, and the invading forces decided not to take civilians into account. Something tells me that you would.

    • ImaWestie says:

      10:50am | 25/10/10

      The whole point here is “the Taliband don’t follow anyone elses’ rules”. My understanding is this is what marks them as “the bad guys”, hence for us to be “the good guys” we’d better have some clear set of rules we follow.

      And consequences for not following them.

      It is my understanding however that these people are being investigated for the possibility that they took disproportionate action without due concern for the consequences in order to save their own life. If the court finds they had callous disregard for the consequence of their actions, they were in the wrong. But at least they aren’t dead.

      It may well be found that, given they were being fired upon, what they did was reasonable. Let’s wait until the court makes a statement on that!

    • Against the Man says:

      03:09pm | 24/10/10

      Let us get it straight, it is the Gillard co-government with the Greens/Independents. Gillard isn’t a strong leader, one who talks with no real results. Australians will suffer for a long time under this pseudo PM. War is hell guys, we need real leaders, not Gillard.

      Reply

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:25am | 25/10/10

      You mean like the ‘real leaders’ that sent us into Afghanistan and Iraq without a plan or clue? Those ‘real leaders’??

      I mean really, it was less than 1o years ago and you’ve forgotten already??

      People with memories that bad shouldn’t be allowed to vote wink

    • Bruce says:

      06:08pm | 25/10/10

      Against the Man: Agree. I think many people forget that any decision to enter into a war situation requires much commitment and decision making that any government can ever make. Howard made his decision to go to war, Hawke made his decision to go to war in Iraq. These two men were leaders.  Unless we have strong leadership when it comes to a commitment of war, cowardess and soft options usually lead to defeat. Check out your WW 2 history.

    • Dan says:

      10:38pm | 25/10/10

      Deciding to go to war doesn’t make one a leader. Making the right decision to go to war, or not to go to war, makes one a leader.

    • Soames says:

      05:02pm | 24/10/10

      Ross,
      Your first four paragraphs will apply to any soldier deployed in the UN committment, and not in particular, one might observe,  to Australian troops. The Australian Prime minister, whoever that might be , under the present constitution, is designated as the “Commander-in-chief”, but only under under chapter II of section 68 titled ‘Command of the naval and military forces,’ the Constitution of Australia’, and as such, states that: “The command in chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor General as the Queen’s representative.”
      The current Queen of Australia is HM Elizabeth II and the current Governor General is Quentin Bryce. So, one would like to know by what means, and when, Austraila intends to educate the Australian public, if this indeed will be done by the Commander-in-chief, the Queen’s representive, or the Prime Minister. On the other part of your piece, your words and paragraphs seem to convey that our soldiers are sacrificying their lives for their country. This is a half-truth.  Ask any family in the ADF community. Some will say, it’s an opportunity to get a substantial war service dollar benefit, understandably, to get a chance to own a home. Others will say, it’s their belief, to defeat the enemy.  One cannot forget however,  those of our repatriated soldiers, who are unable by circumstance to accomplish those common ambitions, because of psychological and physical damage. One would ask, firstly, if any military recruit, particularly at 18 yrs or so after signing up, has the realisation that their life could be snuffed out in a second, or, after 5 or six hours of indescribable pain, without any indication of survival,  not published in batallion or company standing orders, nor on company noticeboards, feels that his contract is fair! One can only think of Monty Python.

      Reply

    • Pete says:

      06:04pm | 24/10/10

      Tell Gillard that many of the Taliban are hiding and storing resources over the border in Pakistan. Gunna invade them to Ross? Or just keep losing??

      Reply

    • Anthony says:

      07:07pm | 24/10/10

      First they invade Afghanistan, then Iraq, so what next? Iran? Oh wait, now their looking for excuses to invade them too.  Wars are incredibly profitable to those who control the world, which is why we are always left in the state of an impending threat. The War on Terror has now become the longest war in modern history, and the US and Australia are already in many more frontiers secretly than we are allowed to know about.  Is it really worth it? For the West to go in and kill everyone in an entire village, just because one “Terrorist” might be there?  Wake up Australia.

      Reply

    • Craig Lambie says:

      08:03am | 25/10/10

      I think accidentally killing a few civilians that are harbouring a terrorist is much better than that terrorist purposefully killing and wounding unknowing civilians either locally with a car bomb our nail bomb, yes definitely - pay attention to your surroundings people, nothing wrong with dobbing in a terrorist, especially if it means protecting your family.

    • Dan says:

      09:01am | 25/10/10

      Craig, you do realise that it’s not as simply as ‘nothing wrong with dobbing’ in a terrorist. These people are terrified. Have you read what the Taliban and co does to people who collaborate with the coalition forces? It’s not nice in the slightest.  They are also not ‘harbouring’ any terrorists. The fact that you would use that word and that you think it’s easy to ‘dob in’ terrorists shows a lot of ignorance.

      As for whether or not it’s preferable ‘accidentally killing a few civilians that are harbouring a terrorist’ to a ‘terrorist purposefully killing and wounding unknowing civilians either locally with a car bomb our nail bomb’, perhaps, but how you can use the word ‘much better’ is beyond me. I also would hope you would adopt this same attitude if you or your loved ones were among the civilians. Regardless, the civilians have NOTHING to do with terrorism, and if there is a choice between killing a terrorist and saving a civilian, they must do the latter.

    • Joan says:

      07:19pm | 24/10/10

      So you think 1500 is a good sample? I don’t…. not when there about another
      22 million or thereabouts to consider.

      Reply

    • Sean Williams says:

      01:59am | 26/10/10

      The sample of 1,500 is actually more than the paltry Australian contribution to the mission. Britain has 10,000 troops in Afghanistan and has had more than 300 killed. As it was in Iraq, the Australian aim is to look as though it is involved while avoiding as exposure to actual conflict as possible. I don’t blame the fine Australian military for this, but the political cowards in Canberra who should be told by the US, Britain and NATO in no uncertain terms “go hard, or go home”

    • Whisperer says:

      05:17am | 25/10/10

      So if these solders are found guilty ,how many personnel will reinlist after their tour of duty.I would suggest not very many .

      Reply

    • Drew(Darlinghurst) says:

      06:08am | 25/10/10

      Oh dear here we go again. If the might of the Soviet Army could not defeat the USA backed Islamic Fundamentalists the Mujahideen and got bogged down in Afghanistan for a decade 1979-89….

      Do you really think the USA /Australia etc….can win. This is a classic example of Blowback!! As the US funded the Mujahideen for a decade with $$ and military know how and its bite them on the Bum.

      It’s time to leave Afghanistan…..Period.

      Reply

    • Tom Daly says:

      07:48am | 25/10/10

      Being a resource rich nation , Australia is the envy of many world powers , who covet our natural riches. We are kidding ourselves , if we believe we can repel any attempts from major forces to take over Australia , the Digger
      spirit ,though noble and recognised is not enough. We have to align with a world power , we have chosen the U.S. and in doing so have committed to
      assist them in their endeavours when required or asked. To sit alone on the fence in World matters , is inviting others , to knock us of a precarious perch. It is not a free lunch so have had to pick the most compatible power
      to ally ourselves with.  It means we must make a contribution,  in order to
      count on assistance, if we are ever in a time of need. That we have troops
      in Afghanistan , is an example of what we have to do . War has proven to be
      an unpopular measure, yet it has also been proven it is an inevitability in a
      World we all share . We must all play our part , if we wish to maintain the
      semblance of a status quo.  In the U.S. we have a friend ,which many others would like to deny , to reject them would be the action of a fool ,
      having little
      forethought of the possible consequences.

      Reply

    • PaulB says:

      09:25am | 25/10/10

      Thye USA that we entered treaty obligations with long ago was not the corrupt, useless joke that is today’s USA.

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:33am | 25/10/10

      Umm…how do you propose an ‘enemy’ comes down here to take our resources?

      China? Doesn’t have the air or sealift capacity to move a fraction of its troops our way. Indonesia? Don’t make me laugh. They’d need to swim here as well.

      Everytime I hear this ‘invasion’ chestnut it makes me laugh. Do you know what kind of logistical tail is needed to move a large number of troops that far to get to us and continually support them? The only country on the planet that can support a large number of deployed troops is the US. No other country comes close to what they can throw around the planet.

      Save your ‘bunkers’ for the Zombie Apocalypse - its far more likely to happen than a ‘Chinese invasion fer our resources!!’

      Keep your eye out for the new TV series - The Walking Dead wink

    • Daniel says:

      12:37pm | 25/10/10

      Australia should never have got involved in the War on terror. We have made ourselves more of a target than ever. Howard is the guy that is the blame for that.

      Reply

    • TheRealDave says:

      02:39pm | 25/10/10

      “We have made ourselves more of a target than ever”

      Dan, mate, we’ve always been a target, regardless of whether or not you’d like to thing so or not.

      We, that is Oztralia as a whole…not as a hole - but I digress, are a mostly white, affluent, democratic, secular, which means in their eyes Christian infidels who want to piss daily on the Koran and make their women dress up in bikinis and have sex with drunken men on busy sidewalks during the day, nation.

      Regardless over whether or not we send a token force that they wouldn’t even know about because it hardly rates a mention once outside our sunny shores.

    • Dan says:

      10:36pm | 25/10/10

      “We, that is Oztralia as a whole…not as a hole - but I digress, are a mostly white, affluent, democratic, secular, which means in their eyes Christian infidels who want to piss daily on the Koran and make their women dress up in bikinis and have sex with drunken men on busy sidewalks during the day, nation.”

      Except that is not why they hate us. This whole ‘they hate us for we are’ is just nonsence. They don’t care if we have democracy, are mostly white or secular, or anything like that. None of those things are why we may be targeted. So, no, we haven’t always been a target.

    • Nicole says:

      04:18pm | 25/10/10

      Just out of curiosity, has anyone stumbled across Pers? She seems to have gone MIA again…...

      Reply

    • Nicole says:

      05:35pm | 25/10/10

      I don’t know how this ended up on this thread. I thought I posted it on Open thread. I’m losing the plot!

 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 20 May 13 04:12PM

@ajbau @mcilveenl The latest Nielsen Answers survey. 2,872,000 readers for April. Number one by 53k on the next - Ninemsn, Yahoo7, @SMH.

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 20 May 13 04:05PM

RT @mcilveenl: http://t.co/1Jh1nNcelR Australia's number one news website, according to latest survey. http://t.co/ZRCmNMDN35

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 20 May 13 03:49PM

@ajbau @newscomauHQ More than everywhere else.

tory_maguire

_Tors 20 May 13 03:48PM

Go @newscomauHQ!! http://t.co/cqclJ0oqrl

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter