|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
*Ahem* Just to get things a little bit back on topic.
Continuing my story... While being held under house arrest, the Prime Minister Ulufalu was forced to resign under duress. After the TPA was signed, there was some doubt as to the legality of the resignation, but the S.I. Parliament eventually decided to name a new P.M., Sogavaere and organize new elections. This happened in 2002, and the Sogavaere government was kicked out and Allen Kamekeza was named P.M., continuing till today. In practice, both Sogavaere and Kemakeza followed the same policy towards the militants. Where Ulufalu held firm and refused to bow to their demands, the policy of the Sogavaere and Kemakeza governments was one of appeasement. Basically, whatever the guys with guns asked for, the government gave it to them. For example, following the TPA, the government decided to compensate the displaced Malaitans with money which the Ozzie and NZ governments rather stupidly lent to the S.I. government. Naturally, the families of the cabinet members and senior members of the supposedly defunct MEF got first priority. Many former MEF members were also recruited into a sort of semi-legal paramilitary group called the "Special Constables" (SC). They were also offered sums of money in return for giving up their guns. They took advantage of the offer by giving up only the oldest and broken down guns, but held on to the big, bad, automatic weapons. Their excuse: Harold Keke is still somewhere out there in the jungle. Disarm him first, and then we'll disarm. All the while, the "Special Constables" (SC) make all sorts of spurious claims ("danger allowance", 'family allowance" etc.) and the government keeps paying them off. After all, it's all someone else's money. Naturally, the government's finances are a big mess, and the wages of ordinary government employees keep being delayed for longer and longer periods of time. A couple of weeks ago, one of the judges of S.I., a pretty good guy I might add, courageously announced in the newspapers, that with the constant delays in his wage payments and the very low level of his wages, he was in real and serious danger of being bribed, and he warned of the consequences to the country should this continue. Of course, the P.M. makes sure that the wages of the SC are *never* late. In the meantime, Harold Keke is making a nuisance of himself to the Gualais, his very own people. He doesn't dare show his face in Honiara, where the Malaitans will gun him down on sight, but out in the bush, he's king, happily raping, robbing and murdering and no one to stop him. His people supported him at first, because they thought he'd stand up for them against the Malaitans, but it turns out he's not so good against Malaitans and they hate him with a vengeance. Pretty much the same thing in the Western Province (WP). The BRA came and then refused to leave, terrorizing the towns and villages all over the western side of S.I. The BRA thing is now under control though, which is a credit to the WP people, but that certainly isn't the doing of anyone in the federal government. Right now, it's every man for himself in the government departments. Each Government department wants fees paid to them directly and not the Ministry of Finance. You get the idea. The idea that the government should compensate the people for any losses whatsoever that they have suffered, no matter how spurious, has filtered down to the general Malaitan populace as well, so that the Ministry of Finance building is in a constant state of siege. The more obviously corrupt the Government becomes, the less relevant it becomes to the people of S.I. Currently, the Government has very little influence outside of the capital. And that's about all I can say about the state of the country right now. I could go on, but then I'll have to name specific people and practices, and I could get into trouble for that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Deccan:
I have a question, who funds all of this? |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
From one of Deccan's comments, it looks like I could be, as an Australia tax payer... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
The mine companies move in and then begin to suffer from local unrest. A few people die and next thing you know, some guys in red jackets are protecting your brand new governor. All this and more out of the kindness of the crown. Now if there were snake eating advisors and strange companies providing un-needed services. Then I would be looking closer to home http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Finally, a Last section for me to express some of my personal opinions on the situation in the S.I.
On balance, I support Australia's planned intervention in S.I. But I have many reservations. 1) Obviously Australia should have intervened much, much earlier. A show of force in support of Ulufalu's refusal to negotiate with the militants would have been relatively inexpensive and very effective. But, in the real world, it took 911 and the Bali bombing to stir the Australian government into taking action. 2) The fact that the Australians delayed acting for so long means that they will now have to rebuild many institutions that were effectively destroyed during the so-called ethnic tension. This isn't a question of building physical structures, but a question of re-training and properly motivating a cadre of competent, honest civil service employees. This is an extremely difficult and time-consuming task. I am not certain that the Australians yet realize the scope of the responsibility they have chosen to shoulder and may back out at a crucial moment. 3) The very scope of the intervention that is now necessary worries me. History has proven that large numbers of highly-paid aid workers in small, poor economies do bad things to those economies. Furthermore, the scope of the intervention and the amount of money involved creates moral hazards amongst some parties. In effect, some parties will inevitably greatly benefit more than others from all of the money being spent by the Australians here and may go to great lengths to artificially prolong the intervention as much as possible. These include local politicians sucking up to the Australians, some sectors of Australian-owned businesses and even possibly some of the aid workers sent here. 4) The Australian government answers to the Australian electorate, not the S.I. electorate. Therefore, any decisions taken here (example: economic and social policy, scope and depth of the intervention etc.) will necessarily be subject to the whims of Australian voters, which may change from time to time and can be a dangerous thing for Solomon Islanders. A couple of suggestions that I would recommend, but see no signs of the Ozzie government being keen on include: 1) Initiate and enforce a comprehensive land reform. An extremely small proportion of the land in S.I. are properly registered parcels. By far the vast majority of land, and this includes land that people build houses on, farm on, and yes, even log on, are what is known as "customary lands", i.e. land owned in custom. Disputes over customary land are resolved in an extremely complicated way that involves calling in witnesses (tribal elders and chiefs) who are familiar with the oral traditions and customs of the various tribes / clans involved and who frequently don't speak English and instead must make their pronouncements in some obscure, nearly extinct regional dialect. This is a very contentious / subjective / difficult to properly administer and document task. This makes land tenure insecure and reduces the incentive of landowners to make long terms plans / investment decisions concerning their land. 2) Government (and taxation) should be conducted at the most local level possible. This is thorny issue. Making government and taxation local would avoid the problem of revenues from resource-rich areas being leeched away to pay to solve the problems in resource-poor areas and the tensions this causes. However, it would increase the overall administrative cost of government because of the need to duplicate many institutions and infrastructure. On balance, I still think that it's a good idea. Some areas of the S.I. don't really need to be subsidized because they produce plenty of revenue already. But some areas are so poor and isolated that they might see a boat from the outside world at most once a year. Properly separating them would make the subsidies that really needed in the really poor areas more explicit. Last question: Baron Grazic indicated earlier that the funding for the intervention was sold to the Australian public at least partially on the premise that it would help to prevent the S.I. from becoming a breeding ground for organized crime, drug production and smuggling, terrorism etc. To be honest, I believe that this is incredibly far-fetched. If the Australian government really is selling it on that basis, they are surely lying because all of those are extremely implausible scenarios. On the other hand, if the Australian public were sold on the basis that the it is a good thing to help a faltering neighbor, then that's another thing entirely, but it would be up to the Ozzie voters and taxpayers to decide whether or not it's worth it. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
it sounds to me like if the sitution continues, it will become a breeding ground for etc.
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
1) Terrorism What cause and what grievances? There are no fundamentalist Muslims here. There are lots of rather fundamentalist Christians, but they aren't violent, just ... wonky. 2) Organized Crime The economy is really too small for crime organizations to bother with. 3) Drug Production Possible, but the logistical problems are huge. S.I. doesn't export anything in any significant quantity except round logs anywhere, so ships leaving the islands are always highly visible. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
What is this "wonky"? You should tell us about "wonky". |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
[ July 11, 2003, 14:07: Message edited by: Loser ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Deccan thank you for your information about a political situation I almost completely missed.
May I ask you two questions: 1.) Is this plannend Australian intervention somehow backed by the UN? If not do you know why this situation is ignored by the UN? 2.) Do the Solomons have any natural resources of relevance? I wish you and the people of the Solomons good luck and a more peaceful future. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
BTW, "Wonky" means the same as "skewiff". |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
My statement was not directed at your person, only at the foundation of your argument. History has shown us that appeasement is only putting off the price that will have to be paid later. A loan if you will. The diplomats borrow a little peace now to be paid for later, with interest. Edit: This turned into a rant from here on, but it felt good to write it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif It should be noted that each potential hot spot has an underlying cause that drives it. And often this relates to the culture of the people involved. And while peace is a worthy goal, it has never been achieved long term without that spilling of blood. Let’s look at the cold war, one of the longest periods of peace that Europe has known in modern times. It was achieved because the result of a war was too terrible to contemplate. And for once, Western Europe had a common foe. This stand off was maintained at the expense of America, the old USSR, and China for the most part. And the blood was mostly theirs along with both Koreas, both Vietnam’s and quite a few Central Americans and lets not forget to mention the Jews and Arabs. During this time Germany was worried about the Bear to the east, France was trying to regain her colonial holdings and England was just trying to adjust to life after empire. When the cost of the cold war became too great to endure, both in monetary terms and political will of the people, it was decided to spend the other side into bankruptcy. And we all watched as the USSR died. Now we have a billion people who were under the soviet boot set free and another billion that were sucking at the soviet tit suddenly going hungry. The politicians are hollering about how great the peace is. While the ex-client states are looking to pick up some unfinished business left from times long past. And we all patted ourselves on the back, "Peace in our time" had returned. Bull ****! But we are a stupid species, so we went on appeasing evil men and their governments. Some of us even arranged it so that there was an influx of cash because of it. The rest of us sat back and assumed that it was so far away that we didn’t need to worry about it. All the while a lot of educators taught our kids that war and force of arms was a bad thing, this based on their limited understanding of the US involvement in Vietnam. So one day some rag heads passing as Islamic defenders of the faith knock down some buildings, and the world changes. So we are left with some hard choices to make. We can spank back just a little, as we had been doing. Or we could go and remove this plague from the face of the earth. And as a Last choice we could begin a measured response that would place us in a position that allows for selective actions aimed at redesigning a culture. A little show of force here, a demonstration of our might of arms there, with some nation building for desert. Well folks, I for one am going to say that we are on the third choice and it is a stupid plan based on the lessons learned during the cold war! We should have tossed that stuff out the door and started with a clean sheet of paper. When a nation is attacked, the government should act swiftly and with all reasonable force available to remove the threat. You can not change people’s attitudes, and you can not make war on governments alone. Just as you can not fight terror with terror. If your nation is under attack by Islamic terrorists, then like it or not, you need to make the Islamic Nations that are supporting said terrorism pay a price so terrible that they will spend the next few generations wondering what went wrong. If the leadership is actually the leaders of their religion, then the religion must be treated as a hostile government. If your allies support you, then fine. If they can not find a way or desire to support you, then they should be allowed to beg off with honor. But if your allies oppose you, then perhaps the relationship needs to be re-examined in depth. And once you go to war, it should be total war as far as that goes. The object should be the removal of the enemies’ ability to harm you. Unfortunately with terrorism (unconventional warfare) this will require making war so terrible that the average man will not be willing to risk it. That includes the bombing of civilian targets and the removal of the nation’s ability to feed and house its people. Do I look forward to this with joy, hell no. I don’t enjoy seeing people suffer. But if I have the choice of having me and mine die or pounding the hell out of them, then I choose to let them die and suffer. And because of the hard work of the people of my nation, we are in the position to give better than we get with regards to every nation on earth. This is a fact that will not soon change. And to put this nation in the position of needing to use that power is a very dangerous thing. In times of war, the will of the people rests with far too few people, many of them not elected. The power that is instantly concentrated in a few days during time of war will take decades to be properly redistributed. And unfortunately, America is divided along ideological boundaries to an extent that has not existed since the American Civil War. This makes for a very unstable political situation at home. The difference this time is that most of the people don’t have a clue about what they are supporting or opposed to. They only know what they hear from their professors, and to disagree openly with them will put you right on the path. And they know the “Truth” that the news services provide. People should become truly informed and then take a stand. To say that this is bad or that is bad and then support it with the standard line that was presented on the six o’clock news is a waste of time. To take an ideological stand and then support it with a broad “way the world should be” argument was a waste of your parent’s college money. People need to look at both the cost and the benefit of their positions and then develop an original idea in support of their conclusions. Then make a statement that offers both a reason (need) and a solution that is based on something more tangible than collegiate political science or religious dogma. OK This turned into a rant, and I done. But first let me share an experience that I had. The World Bank was meeting in DC and I was stuck in traffic. So I leave my car and go into a little café to get a soda. There I find myself waiting in line with some young demonstrators. As we chatted I asked them what they were marching about. All but one replied that it was a “statement” and that it was “meant to show the world that the people had power to influence their government’s just like during the Vietnam War”. Ok that’s a bunch of who-ya bull****! But one of them made the case for the harm that loans and easy credit were doing to the third world. I didn’t agree with it all, but it was a good argument. When it came time for him to pay for his food, the first card he offered was refused as was the second. He then began trying to borrow some cash from his comrades. I asked him if easy credit and high interest were also hurting him. His reply was that he was just a little short until his dad forwarded some funds to his account. He failed to see that he was taking advantage of the very thing he was protesting. He had heard the dogma and could use it as a very good argument. But he did not understand the basic principles that were at the root of the problem. He was borrowing money that he expected someone else to pay back. Just as many people now call for peace, without having any intention of paying the bill that will come due later. The have the dogma down pat, but they don’t choose to see the end result as history and experience say it will be. They chose to see and hope what it could be. They sit back and assume that the bill will never come due. Or that their will not be a price to pay, no bill waiting in the mail. But history has shown us time and again that the bill will come a knocking. And as the world’s population snowballs, the bill will come due. Do you want to pay it now? Or leave it for your children? Do you want to be sheep and baah out the dogma and ideas of others or do you want to take a hard look and make some hard decisions of your own. In tough times, like minded individuals will come together and bring about change. But these same people will fight and bicker among themselves during times of plenty. I ask you this, how much longer will the times of plenty Last? I think a great portion of the world would answer that the time has already come and gone. And if we borrow peace now, how will our children pay the bill when it comes time to balance the books? [ July 11, 2003, 17:41: Message edited by: Thermodyne ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Australians shouldn't cringe from the duty of helping others who can't or won't help themselves. It is the duty of civilized nations to intervene. I know that sounds like I think Australians should be acting like the regions policeman but so what. The region needs a policeman. Think of it this way, Would you rather let that country go to hell? Would you trust the Islamic thugs of the Indonesian Army to intervene and set things straight. Would you trust some pretty Blue Helmets of the U.N. to restore order. I would trust the Australians. Back in the good ol' days this probably would have been called "white mans burden" which isn't exactly very nice, but hey sometimes it is the duty of others to intervene and sometimes that means smacking around a little country. Did Australia get rid of that aircraft carrier yet? I know they got some pretty cool catamaran commando ships!
That dingo's got my baby...back ribs! |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
well, i was thinking of what would happen if things continued to deteriate.
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Thermo, your views sound... familiar. You wouldn't be an ex-US Navy lieutenant turned science fiction writer, would you ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
I'd just like to say that there is no effective way to make war on terrorism, because the terrorists hide. They do not show their faces. The ones who support them do so secretly. Conventional warfare will NOT work against such an enemy (I'll assume your 'kill them all' suggestion was a rant). But there is a weapon out there that may work. It won't kill your enemy but it will make his children leave his camp and join yours; it's called television. Take over their schools, their universities, their TV and radio stations. At the very least, make them lift state bans on what can be broadcast or taught in their countries, then flood them with your culture. Build hospitals, movie theaters, community centers. Send your pacifists over to be their children's teachers. The US has the power to do this, it will restore your credibility with the rest of the world and it will have support from peace and war proponents at home. Quote:
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
The split is along party lines and while each side has its areas of power, it is not a clean divide. I feel that if a party would form that was right in the middle, they would become the majority very quickly. The two parties we have now just keep going further and further apart. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
It would take more than the Solomons going topsy turvy to classify Oceania/South East Asia a region needing policing. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
Personally, I take the same view as Erax. Anyone who thinks that conventional warfare will defeat unconventional tactics is just fooling themselves. The British tried during the Revolutionary War/War of Insurrection, and the start-up USA won in part because they (usually) refused to "play by the rules", march out in a long line, and let the other side shoot you while you shoot it. Vietnam, US troops were there trying to figure out just exactly who they were fighting; is this village supporting us or "the Commies"? Not that there was much that was conventional about Vietnam... It just seems analagous to the current "war"; are they with us, or with them, and what will it take for them to switch sides? But I think the way to go is "cultural warfare". Right now, we aren't making much of an attempt to spread our ideas to the Islamic world. Parts of the younger generations in that culture are coming closer to a "westernized" culture, more because their elders are telling them not to than anything else. If there was an active outreach to truly embrace these people, then the radical fundamentalism that has spawned this particular batch of terrorists will eventually die out. The current policy of going into their house and making a show of force, shooting off some guns... that will only serve to harden their resolve, and we will have more, not less, terrorism on our hands. Anyway, sorry for perpetuating the topic drift. deccan, thank you for posting this information, it hasn't exactly had an easy time getting to me through other channels... Let us know if anything else comes up! |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
[edit] Not that I think that exporting Western culture to them is the best thing to do; there are many elements of Western culture which I also find objectionable (such as the increasing emphasis on personal rights instead of personal freedom--general freedom requires the individual to act responsibly whereas the right to do something removes all responsibility for an action from the individual). [ July 12, 2003, 04:04: Message edited by: Krsqk ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
Also, every culture is unique; American Culture is different than British culture, just like Palestinian culture is probably different than Iraqi culture. It seems to me as if you talk as if you live in Planet PickACulture, where it's alright to stamp out anything you deem intolerable. BTW, Islam does not promote itself by killing other, nor does any other modern religions of the world. Edit: Minor grammatical error Another Edit: I'm pushing this towards an OT discussion. I'll stop replying further. [ July 12, 2003, 04:28: Message edited by: TerranC ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
I'm not saying it's the only way, but it is _a_ way. I would hope that it gets to the point where there's a level of cultural understanding, so those factions where the goal really is "kill all the infidels" eventually lose their influence and voice in the culture, and then disappear entirely. I don't like all aspects of western culture either (most of my issues are with American culture, since I'm living in it), including the "victim" culture that we have. But, a complete incorporation would be very difficult, and take quite a bit of time, so I don't think that will happen. Most likely, it will result in changes to their culture and ours, but both will remain independant.
In an attempt to shove something resembling on-topicness, this would be similar to the changes deccan would like to see in S.I., land reform with definite boundries, government power given to local regions rather than central capital, etc. Small changes to the culture, which bring it in line with the rest of the world (as far as definitions of property), promote stability, etc. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
I see (I think). You were looking at Islamic culture/Middle Eastern culture as a whole, whereas I see fundamentalist/terrorist factions as a separate culture. To the best of my knowledge, most Muslims have a healthy respect for human life, something terrorists definitely do not have. I think an important characteristic like this shared by a widespread, reasonably organized group of people is enough to define it as a culture of its own. IMO, of course.
And you're right--this is well off topic. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Once again... you cannot target the terrorists directly because they (and those who support them) are in hiding. This applies to cultural warfare (nice phrase, Will) as well. What you CAN do is target the population as a whole and bring them closer to your position, so that it becomes harder and harder for the extremist factions to find new recruits and get funding.
Post-war Japan is an example of this process. Their unique culture has not died out, but it has become intermingled with Western culture (and Western culture has received a contribution from them). The example is not perfect because Japan is an industrialized nation and that has an impact. Thermo : I was trying to be funny, and I was referring to Robert Heinlein. I know you are not him because he is no longer alive. But you do sound a lot like him. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
2) Tropical timber, some gold deposits (not terribly rich), fish. That's about it. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
What is this "wonky"? You should tell us about "wonky".</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, they're really weird. For example, there's this clan that goes around calling themselves the lost tribe of Israel, or something, complete with silly justifications on how they ended up in this part of the world and are black. There are also only two t.v. channels here. One is the BBC, the other is some evangelical Christian station using American programming. I don't think that they're prone to terrorism because they seem to have an infinite capacity to absorb / assimilate other beliefs into their own, essentially making one big super-pantheon of gods etc., even though Christianity is supposed to be monotheistic. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
The S.I. Parliament unanimously passed a "policy statement" stating their support in principle to the intervention, but the actual 'enabling" bill has yet to be passed.
The S.I. Prime Minister has also requested that the Australians only investigate and prosecute crimes that occur after the intervention and not before. He was widely booed. Looks like someone's trying to cover their behinds. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
Quote:
[ July 14, 2003, 12:30: Message edited by: Loser ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
Do they also have a great love for orange soda and a terrible sense of direction? |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
I heard today that Australian troops are expected to be in SI within the week, assuming both OZ & SI government gives the go ahead...
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
There are rumors that the OZ troops are on a ship waiting outside S.I. waters. I do know that there are advance scouts already in the country.
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
deccan - The Australian PM, just announced that troops are on the way.
Keep your head down, and let us know what is happening your end... |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Yep, the S.I. Parliament has passed the "enabling" bill.
Some militants are beating up and generally terrorizing people so that they don't tell on them to the Australians that they have weapons. If I have time, I'll type up some excerpts from the local newspapers. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Deccan, I just want to thank you for keeping all of us in the know on this one.
So, eh, thank you. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Doh, top item in the news yesterday and today is the export of dolphins from S.I. It's even in the Yahoo headlines.
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Ozzie troops are in town patrolling the city centre today. They got airlifted in yesterday. No action of any kind though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Troops or Police because we sent 150 Police officers too?
It is reported that SI will be receiving 2225 members of the 'Australian-led intervention force' with soldiers and police from Australia, New Zealand and Fiji. 13 RAAF Hercules tranport aircraft have began flying in, plus the HMAS Manoora landed about 600 troops at historic Red Beach yesterday. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Now this made the way to the news even here in Europe. And it was mentioned that some people see a danger of Australian "colonialism" in the region.
Again my best wishes to you and the people of the Solomon Islands for a more peaceful future. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Yeah, there are both police and troops. Also, I think my house got buzzed by a very low-flying Ozzie chopper yesterday. That's probably because we have a fairly big compound with lots of cargo containers and heavy equipment and high fencing completely surrounding the perimetre. I think they wanted to make sure that we weren't some kind of militant base. Heh. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Heh. I had a personal run-in with the Ozzie intervention this afternoon (Saturday). Five Australian troops (they were definitely soldiers, not police, were in army fatigues, carrying big assault rifles) pulled up at my front gate in a pickup. Only two of them got out of the car though, and since I was in the yard at the time, they talked to me.
It seems that they've noticed that we had fresh gravel strewn over our compound (because we have heavy machinery moving in and out all the time and they tear up the earth) and were interested in buying some gravel. They said it was for fixing up the potholes in the roads here. So I sent them to our sister company from which we get our gravel. Still, with our high fencing, and the fact that our front gate is actually a side gate into a rather narrow lane (we keep the real front gate permanently closed for security reasons), the only way they could have known the ground inside our compound is covered with gravel was yesterday's chopper. So maybe their real reason for visiting was to scope us out on thr ground? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Alexander Downer is in town. I heard that he will be meeting with members of the Ozzie expat community today.
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
The Australian press is now having a field day.
I'm not sure if any of their stories are true but we are getting reports such as :- "A SI resident whose car that was stolen by militants months ago has woken up this morning to find that they returned it. He wishes to thank the Australian troops for scaring the thief into returning his car". Also there is also a lot of talk about the corruption in the SI police force, with a video showing a number of policy officers beating up a suspect in the jail. Keep us updated Deccan. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
who's alaxander d-whosit?
|
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
The Honorable Alexander Downer MP. Title: Minister for Foreign Affairs. Party: Liberal Party of Australia
I didn't think many people would know who Alexander Downer was. I asked the question before who knew the Australian Prime Minister's name, and no-one replied. [ August 01, 2003, 05:50: Message edited by: Baron Grazic ] |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
I do know that certain high-placed people in the civil service are under investigation for corruption. Serves 'em right too. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
i remember hearing about somebody who might be the australlian prime mininster with a first name 'John'.
heh. i have trouble keeping track of the major canadian politician's. |
Re: OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands
Quote:
P.S.: What I just said goes 2 ways... |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.