http://donkephant.blogspot.com/

I was hoping for the senior advisor role! Spose I should concentrate on getting to heaven first.

I see Australia as one global player among many, and the club is filled with dirty players. If we took my position and concentrated on other countries, the law of human nature would mean the Australian government would slip further down the slippery slope. As as democratic population, it is, after all, our duty to hold our government accountable.

Rollsy, I like your comment (despite it’s length ). I could argue about the opposite point of view, say, the left-wing cheerleading for the UN, but that’s really just continuing arguments that belong elsewhere, and will probably never be solved.

My prayer is that Jesus comes again soon, so that there will be no more sickness, or pain or sorrow, and that justice will be dispensed to those on my shit-list (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Che Guevera, Mugabe …).
Note: I fully expect the Lord to be both more merciful and more vengeful than I could imagine. I’d like a job as senior adviser in areas of justice, but He’ll probably keep His own counsel.

Now, can’t we slip into some Hillsong bashing instead?

Countries behave strategically in the interests of the wealthy and powerful (these usually go together). Laws are made to facilitate the smooth and safe operation of society to benefit this situation. A natural consequence is occassional immoral activity by state agencies.

It requires a huge amount of effort to reverse this natural order, and the results are almost always temporary in nature.

Although I didn’t refer to the UN in my initial post, I’m glad you brought it up.

Sometimes the media, particularly right wing conservative media such as Murdoch’s, highlight the UN’s lack of success in various ways. The humorous side of this is that the govts that criticise the UN are inevitably the ones that are being scrutinised and criticised by the UN.

Saddam criticised the UN during Clinton’s era when it was criticized
Deng Xiao-ping criticised the UN during Tienanmin when it was criticized
Mugabe criticised the UN (and UK) during his most recent era when he was criticized
Bush criticised the UN during his terms …

… because during his term the UN had the audacity to live up to its first charter: to prevent the scourge of war. When Bush wanted to invade Iraq, he did so against the expressed will of the world (as offered by the UN, which is made up of the 5 permanent security members plus a forum of other nations).

Since that precedent, what difference does it make to Bush if he ignores the UN and the rest of world? His agenda is to best advantage the USA according his judgment and backed by about 30% of Americans who still agree with him. So if he wants a prison camp that defies international law, bugger the rest of the world, he’ll do it.

Perhaps this sounds innocuous enough … until China decides it’s in its best interest to reclaim Taiwan via military means. Or Nth Korea decides to “liberate” the south. Or Germany decides to show those pesky French once and for all. Or for NZ to get stroppy over losing a rugby game and invade Australia (once they find a few boats).

The reason the UN exists is because an individual at the helm of a govt can’t be trusted to operate unilaterally, as their agenda is intrinsically self-absorbed. Hitler gave them the idea, and so the UN was set up to prevent momentary farts on a nation’s political history (eg Hitler, Mugabe, Bush) from doing international damage.

If the UN has since been slow to act, does that mean its purpose is no longer valid? Or is there some wisdom to showing caution in crossing a sovereign nation’s borders and bombing a city? Even considering some tragic cases of slow response (eg Yugoslavia, Rwanda), I’d still rather have an international group that shows restraint when it comes to violence.
A lot of the criticisms that Fox News / the Republican’s make against the UN is that it is wasteful and costs a lot of money … they don’t highlight the fact the US is the largest unpaid debtor to the UN.

It’s an old smoke and mirrors trick: if someone makes a valid criticism against you, don’t worry about defending your position, just criticise the criticizer and muddy the waters. When Kerry, a war hero, criticised Bush for dodging the draft, instead of making a legitimate response, all of a sudden “Swift Boat Veterans For Truth” lobby group emerged, not to answer for Bush, but simply to try to discredit Kerry.

When people read a criticism of the UN, they should look at the agenda of the media or spokesperson and see if they’re really just trying to misdirect attention away from a legitimate criticism the UN is making.

All things considered, the UN does an excellent job and without it, the world would simply answer to the mightiest power of the time. Right now: USA. Next generation: China? Russia? A one-Euro govt? Someone else?

In a rare moment of cross-cultural understanding in 1945, war wearied nations put their differences aside to say “never again should one person act in defiance of world opinion”. While some of these countries aren’t my cup of tea, I like the check and balance that happens when they are accountable to each other in the UN theatre, rather than the theatre of war.

Whoa … long post … sorry.

i’m not sure why we have to pick only australia or other countries to focus on. can’t we do both? I absolutely agree with you about the high standards. just because other countries standards are lower doesn’t mean that we can let Australia’s drop.

of course, to see things that way means believing that what’s happening in G Bay, or with asylum seekers, is unjust. if you don’t, then this conversation is about the wrong question.

the point on which we differ, though (and i doubt we’ll convince each other), is that i believe i have a responsibility to speak out against the injustices of a government who does them in my name.

“Concern for prisoners (the oppressed) was central to Jesus’ understanding of the mission of the Kingdom of God (Luke 4:18-19). And we are admonished to “remember those who are in prison as though you were in prison with them; those who are being tortured as though you yourswelf were being tortured (Hebrews 13:3). It is for these reasons that we cannot be indifferent to those who are in prison and are suffering inhumane and degrading treatment. This is even more the case when those who are suffering in tehse ways are suffering at the hands of those who are Australia’s partners in the Coalition of the Willing. Therefore we have both a Christian responsability and additional moral imperative as citizens of Australia to be concerned with what is happening at Guantanamo Bay and with the immoral practice of “extraordinary rendition”.

And yes the motion called for the release of “all political prisoners, including those held at Guantanamo Bay.”