Got kids? Nieces* & nephews? This is good.
Nah, it's just you Bob - you're sounding a bit hysterical love.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Because all those in power in politics or business are cowards. They have kneeled to the woke BS that pervades society today.
Why is it so hard for those that have a bit of power or influence to say no?
Why is it okay to make a joke about God but it is not okay to make a joke about Mohammed?
Why is it okay to criticise a white man but not a black man? but not a woman? but not a transwoman?

Basically the world is getting nuttier every day.


Because Anzacs are reviled and LGBTQXYZ ae worshipped on today's altar of the Woke.
My answer would be to send the LGBTQXYZ off to Ukraine to fight against Putin!
And I'm witing for SloJoe and the US to ask Australia to send troops to the Ukraine.
Of course AnAl will oblge as he needs to brown nose the lefty US scum govt..

Australia has always been willing to send our soldiers to fight THEIR wars

This was in today's Australian

The decision to commit Australian forces to war is not one a prime minister takes lightly. The burden of responsibility weighs heavily even though the cost is ultimately borne by the men and women of the Australian Defence Force and their families.

It is sobering to remember that Australia has waged war abroad, as part of the British empire or an ally of the US, in a dozen conflicts – from the Boer War and Boxer Rebellion to World Wars I and II, in Vietnam and Korea, in the Persian Gulf, and more recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. In less than 90 years, 1914-2003, Australia went to war no less than nine times.

The story of Australia’s wartime leadership is told in an absorbing new book, The War Game, by distinguished historian David Horner. It examines why and how decisions were made to send troops to these nine wars, the relationships between prime ministers and military commanders, the structures in which they operated, and the lessons that have, or should have, been learnt.

The book focuses on Joseph Cook, Andrew Fisher and Billy Hughes in World War I; Robert Menzies, Arthur Fadden and John Curtin in World War II; Menzies and the Korean War, Malayan Emergency and Indonesian Confrontation; Menzies, Harold Holt, John Gorton and Billy McMahon and the Vietnam War; Bob Hawke and the Gulf War, and; John Howard and the Afghanistan and Iraq commitments.

Some prime ministers see themselves as forces in history, imbued with vision and judgment, destined to play a role on the world stage. They believe the moment called for their leadership and they are determined to make the most of it. Their ego fuels the notion that they can make a difference. Think Hughes and Hawke.


Gorton, in this study, stands alone as having served as a fighter pilot in World War II. (Many ministers and backbenchers have served in war, especially following both world wars.) No prime minister has previously served in a position of wartime command unlike, for example, US president Dwight D. Eisenhower.

So, the relationship between politicians and commanders is critical. Politicians must maintain confidence in military leaders, whom they have a right to appoint and dismiss. Prime ministers have to decide when to go to war, the nature of the commitment, and the time to exit and how. Military leaders have to train, deploy and command forces to achieve the government’s goals.

“War leadership therefore involves tension between the two parties – the civil and the military – who often come from different backgrounds,” Horner writes.

“One is based on compromise, consensus and public acceptance; the other is based on discipline, obedience and clear orders. In a democracy there is no question about who is in charge; it is the civilian political leaders. But the military leaders have the professional military expertise.”

The Pacific theatre of World War II, beginning in December 1941 when Japan bombed the US naval base at Pearl Harbor, is the only conflict where it can be justifiably claimed that Australia was directly imperilled. The decision to send forces to World War I and World War II, Cook and Menzies stated, was because Britain was at war.

The wars in Vietnam and Iraq, Horner notes, have parallels. Both did not have bipartisan support, were undertaken without carefully considering the strategic implications, or evaluating the costs and consequences. Australia’s contribution to both wars, initiated by Menzies and Howard, did not affect the outcome. But they were commitments valued by the US and were seen as a down payment on the alliance.

The belief that Australia must follow the US into every conflict, as it did Britain before World War II, is seen as a homage to “great and powerful friends”. This notion that we need a mighty protector, who will come to our aid at a time of danger because we have responded to their trumpet sound of war, permeates this book. We are, it is said, always a reliable and dependable ally.

Horner chronicles the decision by the Hawke government to commit naval forces to liberate Kuwait from Iraq in 1990.

Hawke was eager to contribute to George HW Bush’s multinational force and saw an advantage in committing early. (In 1950, the Menzies government acted quickly to send an infantry battalion to South Korea also believing it would be advantageous.)

US records of phone conversations between Hawke and Bush show just how eager Hawke was. Although not referenced in Horner’s book, they make for cringe-worthy reading.



Hawke surprised Bush with his enthusiasm and asked for permission to say it was the US who invited Australia to contribute to the multinational force when it was in fact the other way round. Bush agreed.

This book draws on a wide range of archival sources, interviews, reports, journals and books to examine wartime leadership. One of the striking aspects is how little influence Australia has had over the conduct of wars once our forces have been deployed, even though our military leadership, personnel and equipment are often highly valued.

To guide future leaders, Horner concludes with a series of 10 rules for navigating “the war game”. Perhaps the most important is drawn from the failure of the US in Iraq – although Vietnam and Afghanistan have echoes – and that is to be suspicious about any future US war plan given how “deeply flawed” was the process for deciding to go to that war.

With “the drums of war” beating yet again in our own region, as we have recently been told, this book serves as a useful primer for a new Prime Minister who could soon be faced with a grave decision of his own.



Cause one lot are a bunch of cry babies and the others are adults.


Na Mate the whole Worlds Mad except you and me, and I'm worried about you.


First of all I would like to sack the government and the public service especially the advisors. Then I would like to seek out those that work in their community that do the get down and dirty work, and encourage those with common sense ( it needs a new name btw, not so common) to stand in parliament. While we elect those that want to be their we will remain in trouble.


After the outbreak of World War Two, Gorton was running the family property in the Riverina when he decided to enlist in the Royal Australian Air Force. Dressed in rather battered work clobber, he attended a R.A.A.F recruiting office, approached an immaculately turned out recruiting officer, and announced his intention of enlisting as aircrew.

The officer looked the unkempt figure up and down.

"We prefer our candidates for aircrew to have some form of academic qualifications."

Gorton returned the stare.

"Master of Arts from Oxford good enough for you?"

Francis de Groot's Love Child

I wonder what the answer was.


That same little boy probably know he is a boy, even without having degree in biology.
It was a little boy who exposed the sycopants for what they were in "The Emporeror's New Clothes", too.

A lot of this 'woke'ery is just sycopants -people who join in because they want be noticed by the cool Overlords, like that little kid at school who run around doing things for the coolest kid (manipulative thug) in school, hanging out for the little pat on head.


Because the Liberal Party is gay?

Jack Morris

Val, if you sacked the public service, half of Austraians would return to their home countries as the Centrelink system would also collapse.
The whole Ponzi scheme of the Australian economy would fail before politicians received their superannuation and the benefits of insider trading.

robert griffiths

My honest answer to the kid would be cause the ANZACS live permanently in our hearts.



Sounds good to me.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)