Australia may act against terror in Asia

last SG · 2002-12-04T20:28:30+00:00

Then he will have to bare the consequences of the action, whether it's justifiable or not.

Viper52 SG

With the big bouhaha stirred up by Johnny Howard's remarks that Australia may act against terrorists in Asia with or without the Asian countrys permission to defend Australia from terrorists, heres what I feel about the major players:

John Howard: Typical Johnny Howard. Arrogant, disrepectful of Asia and Asian sensitivities. Nothing new from him IMO, considering most Aussies I know regard him as an arrogant prick to begin with. However hes right when he says he will act to defend Australia and Australians. After all, Australians elected him and he should serve their interests first. Still, his arrogance and insenstivity knows no bounds.

Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia: Guilty conscience. These countries know they have not done enough, not by a long shot, to combat terrorism and know that they fall directly in Howard's sights if he acts on what he says and are reacting accordingly. Rather than react like headless chickens to Howards playing to the home gallery, maybe they should get off their fat corrupt asses and start doing something concrete.

Malaysia: Typical attitude problem and big mouths. If you are doing enough to combat terrorism (which they claim they are and I believe them to a certain extent), why the f*** do they need to concern themselves with this issue? As usual, inferiority complex, which manifests itself all too often in its dealings with the West, Australia and Singapore. Sad case.

foxtrout8 SG

anyway...i dun wish that **** to be involve in our business of anti-terrorism.

If they were to intrude any country , i personally see it as a act of agression , dun care got reason no reason , i dun think the international community will accept it , ever he is doing it for the interest of his pple. ( many agression in record occured due to own country's interest , however was condemmed till now.)

Malaysia might be a big mouth but being stated in the media by australian authorities as a listed spot for terrorism, he have the right to condemm wat the aussie prime minister said. Personally i dun wish to see Aussie's UAV being flown into Singapore , jus because their qu qu intelligence officers listed us in. I believe thats wat the malaysian are thinking.

Australian should not practise their pre-emptive strikes but , wat they should do is to co-operate with the SEA nation to settle the problem, pre-emptive strike will onli bring more hatred to themselve.

Viper52 SG

Agree....carrying out pre-empive strikes without the host nations go ahead is tantamount to an act of war, whatever way you look at it.

Theres no party right or wrong in this. Australia and John Howard is an arrogant bully for even suggesting this. But some SEA nations do need to examine their own record in fighting terror.

duotiga83 SG

Global Pre-Crime Unit Forming

Says 9/11 changed everythinghttp://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/03/1038712914684.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/02/1038712887463.html

Like America's Homeland Security Agency?
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/02/1038712887460.html

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1038803802952

i have to say..younger 'bro' learn from bigger 'bro'...damn it..is so shocking......tt things happen so near.....well ...'kingdoms against kingdoms' seems near now....[/url]

tripwire SG

austrialia and howard may be the biggest bully this part of the world... but that does not deny them the right nor their will to ensure their national safety by bring the war to the enemy...

secondly... the terrorist have officially declare a global war... thus... wont any country harboring such terrorist (either knowingly or innocently blindly) be considered as being 'in-league' with such organizations?? ( i still remember how the indonesian VP openly call that snake face bashir HIS BROTHER!!) Mr. Green had bashir's attack on singapore succeed... wat shall we do??

1... stay behind singapore border and scream our ass off... while bashir laugh his head off in batam?

2... send the falcons into indonesian airspace.... and risk being labelled as bullies and watever stupid titles?

3... wait for the next bomb to go off and complain to the UN... and continue to complain day in... day out... with no resolution in sight...

4... get out of singapore...?

5... all become muslims?

which one.. would you all choose...??

foxtrout8 SG

tripwire SG

doesnt matter... they have already been hit... they now only want to hit back... everything else does not matter... if a country cannot protect its people ... IT loses its main function as a country and as such.. the nation could disintegrate... if the people looses confidence in the govt instituition to defend their interest...and lives..

Viper52 SG

So its alright Tripwire by your logic to ignore international borders, conventions and law and trample on another country's sovereignity? Do not do unto others what you do not want to be done unto you. Remember? How would you like it if the roles were reversed and Singapore is the one who gets foreign troops running all over the place without our say-so?

The op in Yemen does not apply as a precedent because the Yemeni government tacitly gave the US the ok to strike. It told the US that the local government couldn't handle the Al-Qaeda in-country and asked for assistance.

Read what was said properly. What Howard is in effect suggesting simply states that they'll go in when they feel like it and do the job. Screw the other countries laws, screw asking the other country to tackle the problem first, screw their sovereign rights, screw their permission, we do what we want.

I don't like how some SEA countries are handling the problem and I've made that clear. But I think what he said is just as perturbing, if not even more so.

Viper52 SG

As long as the host country doesn’t say yes, sending covert troops into another country or lauching an overt invasion is an act of war either way.

tripwire SG

the current situation is somewat reminescent of the konfrontasi in the 60s...

then... indonesian forces were lauching guerilla war across malaya and has conducted several terrorist act which resulted in signifcant civilian casualty...

during that time... MAF... HAS and is KNOWN to have conducted attack into kalimantan in reprisal and also to pre-empt TNI forces from launching attack into east malaysia...

Singapore also have hung 2 indonesian marines for bombing civilians...

1 SIR was also involved in the attack into kalimantan back then under the command of MAF...

MAF has also been known to occassional trespass into thai territory when chasing the MCP guerillas hiding behind the thai border ...

thus as can be seen... the truth is... the SEA asians... are no better.. if not the same as the aussies...

foxtrout8 SG

I will stay in Singapore, look out for my ass, scream my ass out , and let bashir laugh in Indonesia.
No way is he going to with his capability to bomb mi when i am closely watching my ass, corner him or wait to see as he will be dealed by someone, when he is making a wrong move.

i am pretty sure of one thing... if your 'someone' dont come out soon.... the singapore you see today would pretty soon be just a piece of memory....

secondly... waiting for someone to deal with bashir on my behalf is as good as waiting for divine assistance.. who knows... maybe bashir would be struck dead by lightning if he live long enough...

against terrorist... watching your ass... isnt good enough... that much.. we all know...

..... this is one strategy Singapore is using. Borrow Knife , Kill Enemy... in 36 strategy in classic chinese . this strategy is dependent on many factors beyond our control and it is only used if the situation and circumstances permits... else... you have to sit and wait... and pray you still got a butt to sit on after sometime....

I cant get my falcons into my neighbour's ass , as it will get mi critise by the 'white' and the 'black' side of the world , screaming to UN is one way , killing him without dirtying my hand is a lagi better way....
screaming to the UN would bring no reprieve if the big fat corrupt ass of indonesia simply cant get out of its chair....

the white and black side of the world is not your citizen... your first priority is your people's safety and not the general opinion of the global masses....though it will be good to have them on your side.. but to hell with them if they choose to turn a blind eye to the sufferings of your people...

Singapore is not going to stop terror by offending its neighbours and allies but the Aussie dun prove to like this alternative.

it wont... but doing nothing... wont either...

Even if Aussie like a pre-emptive strike role in anti-terror , he should ask his neighbour first or jus do it secretly lah, by doing top secret recon into the SEA countries, once got enough evidence , inform the authorities or then if no choice attack urself .
covert ops is an alternative... i dont think howard say anythig about send his army to invade another nation right?

He so fast declare, i 100% for sure SEA 's terrorist now all want to aim aussie land.
doesnt matter... they have already been hit... they now only want to hit back... everything else does not matter... if a country cannot protect its people ... IT loses its main function as a country and as such.. the nation could disintegrate... if the people looses confidence in the govt instituition to defend their interest...and lives..

---------------------------------------------------------------

Too bad tripwire, thats wat Singapore choose to do, and we survive.

tripwire SG

I think that as the PM of australia... IT would be considered gross negligience of office IF he failed to ensure the future safety of aussies... especially after the bali incident lefted him on the defensive....with a mountain of corpses...

i personally felt that the indonesians should be responsible for this outcome... both singapore and malaysia have warned them repeatedly against bashir... its not that indonesia isnt capable of arresting bashir... they simply didnt want to arrest him... back then before the bali blast...

tripwire SG

no.... singapore is not currently in the position to choose wat to do... as no bombs has gone off in singapore thus far...

but if we might use the konfrontasi as a guidance... i think singapore would send the vipers in...

foxtrout8 SG

we can not going sent in Vipers.

Diplomacy and Deterrence , we must uphold.

foxtrout8 SG

we can not going sent in Vipers.

Diplomacy and Deterrence , we must uphold

------------------------------------------------------

We are not going to sent in Vipers.

Diplomacy and Deterrece , we must uphold.

foxtrout8 SG

Diplomacy as our goal to most countries to lessen enemies , deterrence as our method to prevent any attack onto Singapore.

We cant , even with the capacity to do it , to intrude our neighbours. The consequence for that will be too great for us to bear , even if we are doing it as a retaliation agaisnt the attack. Instead of removing the terrorist off this face of this region , we are inviting rivalry and maybe inviting war.

Remember wat is the objective of the JI members on the lastest bomb plan, they want singapore to have war with malaysia , again using the borrow knife kill enemy strategy.

Ur idea of senting Falcon in , will put Singapore in a agression situation , war may invited. Prolong hatred will be eyeing on us and we will not benefit , remember wat disadvantage are we in , in the confrontation.

tripwire SG

the alternative is to send in assasination squad, which though less intrusive... IS STILL trampling on our neighbour's sovereign rights... Mr. Green

foxtrout8 SG

deterence FAILED immediately when we DARE NOT send in the vipers as and when it is needed...to defend our rights and our lives... might as well ask SAF close shop... if we dont dare to use it.. waste money...

Diplomacy can only go so far... AND sending in vipers is also another form of diplomacy...

by signalling to the regional states that THEY RISK having singapore vipers flying over into their country to do wat they refuse or fail to do...

hopefully.. the regional states will get the message that NO nation on earth will continue to tolerate to be on the recieving ends from terrorist groups operating in the neighbouring state...

As neighbours, unless in hostility... ALL effort should be made to prevent their soil from becoming the breeding ground for terrorist with aims to attack another nation... since understandably... such events are not good for friendship...

ALL responsible states... HAS an undeniable responsibility to ensure that their land is not being used as a base of operation against another state... without their explicit permission, thus it can be considered that nations that continue to harbor such groups HAVE recieved permission from the hosting nation...(a very serious allegation i would say)... either verbally or by other means...

failure to weed out terrorist... can then ONLY results in forcing the victim nation into carrying out actions it may deem as reasonable under the terms of SELF DEFENCE...

PERSONALLY.... i dont think australia want to go to war with anybody!!... I think that the REAL reason behind howards statement is TO inform all states that they have an UNDENIABLE responsibility towards the safety of other nations...and the dangers of IGNORING such responsibilities...

IF terrorism operating behind the 'soveriegn' laws of another state continue to flourish... IT will simply be a matter of time before USA, EU, RUSSIA and perhaps even JAPAN and CHINA will start insisting the right to defend themselves.. by sending troops all over the world...

IF war is to be prevented... then all nations must recognize the danger of INACTIONS against terrorist towards their nation.. and the need to take active, strong and rapid steps to weed out terrorist... otherwise... you will simply end up forcing another nation to do it for you,.... take your pick...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

No matter how much u say, i can bet Singapore will not do such pre-emptive strike actions. Singapore is no israel in this region, the onli mean of survival is to make friend and deter , if deterrence fail then a all out strike would be possible, however it is out of the topic.

Dun u understand, we are agaisnt terrorism not agiasnt any government , by senting falcons in u are going agianst the two group of them

U will make Singapore a even hatred island for those terrorist out there. U dun even understand the lesson of 911 , y is US being bomb not us?

Because the way they handle things are in the interest of their pple , however a pain in the *** for others. Singapore can t afford to do that.

U can say all u want , i can tell u , singappore will not do such things to protect its citizen.

deterence FAILED immediately when we DARE NOT send in the vipers as and when it is needed...to defend our rights and our lives... might as well ask SAF close shop... if we dont dare to use it.. waste money...

Diplomacy can only go so far... AND sending in vipers is also another form of diplomacy...

Hell, u dun even know the basic meaning of Singapore's Diplomacy and Deterrence.....

no state in this region is intensionly harbouring terrorist , we should co-operate not intrude each other. (indo had learn her lesson).

Im glad u are not a leader of any branches of the armed force, i am not willing to lay my life because of such bludder the government made.

Pls think of the consequence , Singapore will nv do such action , assasination may not solve the problem entirely.Senting Falcons in may be a solution , UNLESS THEY INVITE US.

Im sorry tripwire , this time im totally agaisnt ur idea.

thomasct SG

License to Kill

Do you REALLY understand the implications of the policy of pre-emptive strikes?

PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE is a declaration of the War in the every sense of the word. - Pearl Harbor is the Most Famous example.

So is Australia or SG WILLING to declared WAR on another country or countries over an terrorists action ????

Another thing implications of such a policy is that its REALLY a license to KILL anyone who the gov. deem to be a threat without due legal process

Whether they are guilty / a threat / terrorist etc or NOT IS AN ISSUE to be decide as gov. (US & now Aust. ) is the judge, jury & executioner .

What is means is the US or Aust. gov. deem YOU - as a "" TERORIST THREAT "" and they bomb etc your home - killed you, your family, friends etc

Whether you, friends etc are REALLY terrorists or NOT is not an ISSUE as long as the US or Aust. government say they ARE.

As for your families, friends or other innocent parties that got killed with you, they also are "" terrorists "" by association with you or acceptable causalities.

The HYPOCRISY of Aust. & American governments after having the championing of human right & passing judgments on other countries for so -called human right offenses - freedom of press , unfair judicial system etc

Now they practicing an OFFICIAL policy of extra judicial killing of people whom they " THINK " are a threat to THEM.

My sympathies for the INNOCENTs who are deem as " Terrorists "

I don't even what dwell on the implications if other countries like China. Russia etc decided to follow the same policy.

For some news on US gov.' s Policy on Killing its OWN Citizens
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=514&ncid=514&e=5&u=/ap/20021203/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/american_al_qaida_1