Australian Politics Forum - Indonesian Q&A

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #105 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:44pm

Dnarever wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:38pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:48pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:39pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:29pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:29pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 3:59pm:

Today, I heard some RAN big brass say that in 2007 the Navy did turn the boats back....four......and in doing so, they removed all the fuel on board except sufficient for the boat to get back to Indonesia. This was done in International Waters.

Isn't that an act of piracy?

Not if it's done in a special protection zone. The RAN would have jurisdiction there.

If it's done in Indonesian waters, definitely.

Yeas....agreed, but if it is done in international waters, the 'high seas,' it's got to be illegal. And if it happens in a 'special protection zone,' I guess that must be an Australian zone, and if the people on board scuttled, they are in our dung hill for 'special' assistance?

according to whom? its been done before and Indonesia didnt even complain.

Tampa ring a bell?

not even close to the same thing. The Tampa was trying to dump them HERE not return them to indonesia.

try and keep up.

The Tampa was not going to Indonesia. Their responsibility was to take them to the next port of call - Australia.

the australian people apparently disagreed - and still do.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 105564 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Indonesian Q&A Reply #106 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:46pm Bobby. wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:59pm: For economic illegal migrants - why don't we hire large passenger ships & take them back to their country of origin 10,000 at a time? That seems like a simple solution. bump
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #107 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:46pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:33pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:31pm:

Alexander Downer had a perfect solution to the problem and it would be rather anal of the Indonesians to refuse since it solves the problem permanently and costs them nothing - not even face.

The plan is a simple one. EVERY SINGLE boat person is simply flown back to Indonesia and we take one person from the queue (and there is one) and fly them here. For a couple months we will end up spending a sizable amount of money and alucky few Indonesian refugees will get first class travel to Oz. But the boat people trade will very quickly grind to a complete halt once they realise that EVERY SINGLE ONE of them will be simply loaded back on a 747 and set back home.

It is a very simple, relatively inexpensive and totally effective solution.

Now tell me how this could fail!!

Well, what do you know?

You've just described the Malaysian "Solution" in a nutshell.

I can't see Mr Abbott doing that. He voted against it, remember?

Malaysia, like Indonesia, is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention.

the Malaysian plan was to give back 800 in return for 4000. how was that even similar??? and this plan is unlimited. the malaysian plan was never going to stop the boats.

Of course it wasn’t. But how are you going to get Indonesia to take all those refugees unless Australia pays to accommodate them?

And how can Mr Abbott impliment Mr Downer’s marvellous policy when he refuses to send refugees to non-signatory countries?

Please explain.

do you even read the post???? we SWAP boat people for refugees they already have in Indonesia! its a win-win for everyone except boat people and it costs nothing fro Indonesia to comply.

Actually, you’re right. That could work.

But what about Mr Abbott’s guilty conscience about sending boat people to non signatory countries?

He already said this WOULD NOT BE DONE UNDER A GOVERNMENT MR ABBOTT LEADS.

Thoughts?

returning them to indonesia from whence they came which IS a signatory. problem solved.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

ian Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 9451	Re: Indonesian Q&A Reply #108 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:48pm Jesus Christ. Are there some thick people around or what.
Back to top	IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #109 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:57pm

Peter Freedman wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:16am:

Fascinating program last night providing a rare insight into the thinking of some of our nearest neighbours.

Most important was a blunt statement by an adviser to the Indonesian Deputy President that they will never accept asylum seeker boats turned back from Australia.

Looks like one of Abbott's principal election policies has developed a serious leak and is sinking fast.

What now, Tony?

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

We've co-operated with the Indonesians on illegal fishing so we can do it on illegals

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96025
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #110 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:58pm

http://www.theage.com.au/world/rohingya-refugees-a-growing-problem-for-indonesia-20130408-2hh6w.htmlhttp://www.theage.com.au/world/rohingya-refugees-a-growing-problem-for-indonesia-20130408-2hh6w.htmllongweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:33pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:31pm:

Alexander Downer had a perfect solution to the problem and it would be rather anal of the Indonesians to refuse since it solves the problem permanently and costs them nothing - not even face.

The plan is a simple one. EVERY SINGLE boat person is simply flown back to Indonesia and we take one person from the queue (and there is one) and fly them here. For a couple months we will end up spending a sizable amount of money and alucky few Indonesian refugees will get first class travel to Oz. But the boat people trade will very quickly grind to a complete halt once they realise that EVERY SINGLE ONE of them will be simply loaded back on a 747 and set back home.

It is a very simple, relatively inexpensive and totally effective solution.

Now tell me how this could fail!!

Well, what do you know?

You've just described the Malaysian "Solution" in a nutshell.

I can't see Mr Abbott doing that. He voted against it, remember?

Malaysia, like Indonesia, is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention.

the Malaysian plan was to give back 800 in return for 4000. how was that even similar??? and this plan is unlimited. the malaysian plan was never going to stop the boats.

Of course it wasn’t. But how are you going to get Indonesia to take all those refugees unless Australia pays to accommodate them?

And how can Mr Abbott impliment Mr Downer’s marvellous policy when he refuses to send refugees to non-signatory countries?

Please explain.

do you even read the post???? we SWAP boat people for refugees they already have in Indonesia! its a win-win for everyone except boat people and it costs nothing fro Indonesia to comply.

Actually, you’re right. That could work.

But what about Mr Abbott’s guilty conscience about sending boat people to non signatory countries?

He already said this WOULD NOT BE DONE UNDER A GOVERNMENT MR ABBOTT LEADS.

Thoughts?

returning them to indonesia from whence they came which IS a signatory. problem solved.

You sure of that, Longy? You want to put a nice little taster down? Make this worth our while?

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 96025 Gender:	Re: Indonesian Q&A Reply #111 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:59pm ian wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:48pm: Jesus Christ. Are there some thick people around or what. I prefer to call them challenged, Ian.
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96025
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #112 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:03pm

Maqqa wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:16am:

Fascinating program last night providing a rare insight into the thinking of some of our nearest neighbours.

Most important was a blunt statement by an adviser to the Indonesian Deputy President that they will never accept asylum seeker boats turned back from Australia.

Looks like one of Abbott's principal election policies has developed a serious leak and is sinking fast.

What now, Tony?

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

We've co-operated with the Indonesians on illegal fishing so we can do it on illegals

That’s right. Maybe the Indonesians will change their minds when Mr Abbott goes to Jakarta and talks tough.

All this problem needs is Mr Abbott’s superior skills at persuasion. He’ll make them see the error of their ways.

Back to top

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #113 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:07pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:16am:

Fascinating program last night providing a rare insight into the thinking of some of our nearest neighbours.

Most important was a blunt statement by an adviser to the Indonesian Deputy President that they will never accept asylum seeker boats turned back from Australia.

Looks like one of Abbott's principal election policies has developed a serious leak and is sinking fast.

What now, Tony?

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

We've co-operated with the Indonesians on illegal fishing so we can do it on illegals

That’s right. Maybe the Indonesians will change their minds when Mr Abbott goes to Jakarta and talks tough.

All this problem needs is Mr Abbott’s superior skills at persuasion. He’ll make them see the error of their ways.

Which is alot more believable than when Rudd said he'll never challenge again or when Gillard said "There will be no carbon tax..."

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 105564
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #114 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:10pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:16am:

Fascinating program last night providing a rare insight into the thinking of some of our nearest neighbours.

Most important was a blunt statement by an adviser to the Indonesian Deputy President that they will never accept asylum seeker boats turned back from Australia.

Looks like one of Abbott's principal election policies has developed a serious leak and is sinking fast.

What now, Tony?

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

We've co-operated with the Indonesians on illegal fishing so we can do it on illegals

That’s right. Maybe the Indonesians will change their minds when Mr Abbott goes to Jakarta and talks tough.

All this problem needs is Mr Abbott’s superior skills at persuasion. He’ll make them see the error of their ways.

Yes - Abbott has the right words in tough situations:

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 74740
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #115 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:20pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:33pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 4:31pm:

Alexander Downer had a perfect solution to the problem and it would be rather anal of the Indonesians to refuse since it solves the problem permanently and costs them nothing - not even face.

The plan is a simple one. EVERY SINGLE boat person is simply flown back to Indonesia and we take one person from the queue (and there is one) and fly them here. For a couple months we will end up spending a sizable amount of money and alucky few Indonesian refugees will get first class travel to Oz. But the boat people trade will very quickly grind to a complete halt once they realise that EVERY SINGLE ONE of them will be simply loaded back on a 747 and set back home.

It is a very simple, relatively inexpensive and totally effective solution.

Now tell me how this could fail!!

Well, what do you know?

You've just described the Malaysian "Solution" in a nutshell.

I can't see Mr Abbott doing that. He voted against it, remember?

Malaysia, like Indonesia, is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention.

the Malaysian plan was to give back 800 in return for 4000. how was that even similar??? and this plan is unlimited. the malaysian plan was never going to stop the boats.

Of course it wasn’t. But how are you going to get Indonesia to take all those refugees unless Australia pays to accommodate them?

And how can Mr Abbott impliment Mr Downer’s marvellous policy when he refuses to send refugees to non-signatory countries?

Please explain.

do you even read the post???? we SWAP boat people for refugees they already have in Indonesia! its a win-win for everyone except boat people and it costs nothing fro Indonesia to comply.

Actually, you’re right. That could work.

But what about Mr Abbott’s guilty conscience about sending boat people to non signatory countries?

He already said this WOULD NOT BE DONE UNDER A GOVERNMENT MR ABBOTT LEADS.

Thoughts?

returning them to indonesia from whence they came which IS a signatory. problem solved.

Indonesia is as much a signatory as Malaysia .... idiot.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58674
Here
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #116 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 7:23pm

Maqqa wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 6:57pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 5:16am:

Fascinating program last night providing a rare insight into the thinking of some of our nearest neighbours.

Most important was a blunt statement by an adviser to the Indonesian Deputy President that they will never accept asylum seeker boats turned back from Australia.

Looks like one of Abbott's principal election policies has developed a serious leak and is sinking fast.

What now, Tony?

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

We've co-operated with the Indonesians on illegal fishing so we can do it on illegals

They've turn boats around before and they'll do it again

They got it wrong before acknowledged it and stopped turning them back about 2002.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #117 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 8:00pm

Quote:

The Tampa was not going to Indonesia. Their responsibility was to take them to the next port of call - Australia.

The Tampa had left Fremantle and was going to Singapore via the Sunda Strait.
The Palapa was in international waters off Java.
According to international law, survivors of a shipwreck are to be taken to the closest suitable port for medical treatment. The closest suitable port was 12 hours away in Merak, Indonesia.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38791
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #118 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 8:04pm

Grendel wrote on Jul 5^th, 2013 at 8:00pm:

Quote:

The Tampa was not going to Indonesia. Their responsibility was to take them to the next port of call - Australia.

The Tampa had left Fremantle and was going to Singapore via the Sunda Strait.
The Palapa was in international waters off Java.
According to international law, survivors of a shipwreck are to be taken to the closest suitable port for medical treatment. The closest suitable port was 12 hours away in Merak, Indonesia.

.....yeas, and please now add the rest of the Wiki, or is that too much to expect?

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Indonesian Q&A
Reply #119 - Jul 5^th, 2013 at 8:08pm

I corrected the errors of the previous post which you left unchallenged.

Feel free to correct any errors I have made.

there are none. Grin

I also think you will find I did not cut and paste that info from Wiki. Even though there is a link to the Tampa as you have shown.

Some of us are interested in politics and have good memories.

If you like I can refer you to acts of "piracy" by the people saved by the Tampa too. Is that mentioned in your wiki link?

Back to top

IP Logged