Stephen, On 2021-07-31 14:22, you wrote: > Good grief .. the exact same suggestion was made over 80 years ago by our > then Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies and also by General Douglas MacArthur > (whom coined the term Brisbane Line) and becoming a foreign policy strategy. However the world in the early 1940's was a vastly different place. WW II was in progress, Japanese Imperial Forces looked as though they might land in northern Australia, and both China & Russia were regarded as allies. Possible greenhouse warming of the planet was generally unknown, nuclear weapons were only a theoretical possibility known to a few, and the concept of cyber-security (even "computing" as we know it) was still to come. China was not regarded as a likely threat to any Western country. And the demon of Infinite Economic Growth on a Finite Planet had yet to weave his fantasies.
In the intervening 80 years or so global population has increased from ~2.3 to ~7.9 billion (currently: China 1,411.8, Indonesia 271.4, Japan 125.4, Australia 25.8, figures in millions rounded up), and all those problems have come to haunt us. So I suggest opinions voiced by Menzies or MacArthur in 1941 are hardly relevant. China has had historical frictions with Japan, so it's safe to assume both the Politician and the General thought it was a pretty safe strategy at the time. > You are aware David, uncounted millions of people are suffering very badly > right now? Lots of Chinese, especially elderly folk, must live in > multi-story apartment buildings with very little or virtually no water > available. And often whatever water there is basically toxic. David, perhaps > second only to Covid, this is now the world’s worst humanitarian problem. Well that depends on one's pespective, there are certainly plenty of humanitarian disasters to choose from. In any case, Australia has almost certainly exceeded its sustainable population limit already, and bringing in millions of the world's poor, unskilled, and oppressed isn't going to improve the situation. And why should we choose China, which appears to have more than enough resources to fix its own problems, rather than some other country or national group? Is there any possibility the Chinese Government might bring their Social Credit system of population surveillance with them? > Yet mate, you say that you have some Aussie political and foreign policy > problems, present outdated, mostly irrelevant research.. and then ask if I’m > joking regarding a clear Australian braveheart-humanitarian idea, which was > on officially accepted foreign policy strategy? To be fair, I think I suggested you might be "stirring", often a very useful thing to do. Was it an "officially accepted foreign policy strategy" or just an idea discussed during WW II? In either case I suggest it's irrelevant now. How would such a policy be legally introduced? It would have to be approved in a constitutional referendum at the very least, and given the furore over a simple issue like marriage equality the international reaction would make the Dismissal of Gough Whitlam or the Mabo Decision seem small beer. Recent publicity concerning reported attempts by China to conduct cyber & economic warfare in retaliation for certain statements & policy decisions it regards as "critical" of China and their current program of building missile silos - see https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/7/28/china-is-building-a-second-missile-silo-field-say-us-researchers for example, what do you think might be the upshot? Would every country between Australia and the Chinese mainland feel reassured by a Chinese nuclear presence to their north ~and~ south? My guess is that limitation of the global nuclear arsenal would soon be jettisoned and several nations would proceed to develop their own. I understand there's evidence South Africa tested a fission device decades ago but then signed the non-proliferation treaty. Japan could probably start work tomorrow. And how would Indonesia react (population 271 million, dominant religion & culture Islamic)? Sudden shocks to the fragile geo-political order are the last thing we need because they often precipitate war, especially in times of natural global crisis. Take Pearl Harbour for example... I think all nations should all take tiny, non-frightening, steps toward global political, economic, climate, and biosphere stability until the planet comes back from the brink Finally, IPCC evidence, supported by intensive NASA observations, indicates Australia will fare worse than most countries when greenhouse warming really accelerates. But that's another thread, I think. > Well anyway .. cheers, Dave 😊 And you, Stephen! I sincerely apologise if I've offended you, and I do enjoy reading your frequent contributions to this list. Cheers, David Lochrin _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
