Also In The News

[ealingfox]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

It's reasonably easy to find a comprehensive list of terrorist attacks sponsored by Iran. The 90's bombing of a Jewish centre in Argentina and the 2012 Burgas bus bombing, off the top of my head, were carried out by Hezbollah. 

 

Not that they are the only country in the World that does that,of course. But calling them a "terrorist state" is not totally unreasonable. 

 

If that's your definition of a 'terrorist state' then the USA is one as well

 

[bovril]

9 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

If that's your definition of a 'terrorist state' then the USA is one as well

 

Hence my third sentence. 

[WigstonWanderer]

11 hours ago, Barrowblue said:

Thanks, I'm sure I won't encounter any fires in June, but that wasn't really my point. 

'the fires in oz' until today has been headlines for a week here. This has led to friends and family asking weather we are still going or not. Fortunately having been to Oz a few times and having plenty of family and friends there I'm more clued up on the situation than the average tourist & backpacker.

I see a dip in tourism coming due to the media in other countries playing this up big time. If your planning a gap year next year, questions will be asked. Also whilst I appreciate regrowth is quick due to the natural aspects of bushfires, a lot of people will be watching the news and thinking what's the point in going to the national parks to see burnt trees. 

We were living on the edge of a bushland valley in Mt Colah at the northern tip of Sydney during the 1993/94 bushfires. Quite scary at the peak as there were fires nearby in Kuringai and we were potentially vulnerable to fire sweeping up the valley. It was sad to see the extensive damage to areas all around including along the scenic route to the Central Coast region that we often visited, and parts of the Blue Mountains region.

 

I was astonished to see how much regeneration had occurred by the time we left just over a year later.

[WigstonWanderer]

9 hours ago, MattP said:

Pretty sure Aus has had these sort of bushfires and temperatures for years.

 

By all means go for Morrison on the preparation etc for this as it appears to have been absolutely woeful but using climate change as a stick to beat him is a bit daft and it's obviously politically motivated. Whether he and his supporters believe it or not wouldn't make a blind bit of difference whatever action they had or hadn't taken.

Unbelievable nonsense

[Guest MattP]

Just now, WigstonWanderer said:

Unbelievable nonsense

Go on then. What would you have done?

[WigstonWanderer]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

Go on then. What would you have done?

I think @ozleicester summed things up much more eloquently and knowledgeably than I could have a couple of pages back.

 

Just to add, Morrison’s little stunt with coal in parliament showed his attitude to the issue of climate change. He sees it as a joke and/or a hoax. He does not consider it a threat to people’s jobs and futures to balance possible short term costs of remediation.

 

Any leader who takes the climate change issue seriously would do 2 things. Firstly they would support international efforts to reduce emissions to at least try to lessen the scope of climatic changes. A relatively rich country like Australia with a high per capita carbon footprint, large exports of coal, and plenty of scope for renewable energy expansion, should actually show leadership (as was the previous Labour government). He seems to do his best to undermine any such efforts.

 

Secondly, a responsible leader would make sure that as far as possible preparations were made to mitigate the effect of prospective changes. Once again he has failed spectacularly as @ozleicester has already noted. He is being heavily criticised here by people directly affected for his lack of preparation.

[peach0000]

I do have sympathy’s with countries like Australia over climate change. Coal makes up a stupid amount of their economy so it would be so damaging to them in the short term to change that. Other countries with less reliance on fossil fuels are always judge countries like Australia where in reality instead of judging they need to help them find a way around their issues. All countries want to stop climate change, doing so will disproportionately affect a select few.

Edited 3 January 2020 by peach0000

[Innovindil]

At the very least twitter is great right now. #WWIII 

 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

Quite aside from the rights and wrongs of assassinating leading foreign military figures, no one seems concerned that the US has launched an attack at a major civilian airport. Surely this itself is a shocking act of terrorism that sets a terrible precedent? Or is it OK because it’s in the Middle East?

Edited 3 January 2020 by WigstonWanderer

[ozleicester]

 

This is Australia's Minister for the environment and energy last week. His own personal column. Published in "The Australian" Murdoch's loss making national newspaper.

The Australian was established in 1960's and has NEVER made a profit, it exists purely to influence politicians and promote the right wing elite's opinions.( i know these facts as i was manager of its WA branch for some time).

 

On a day when people have died in unprecedented bushfires and literally hundreds of homes have been lost and millions of kilometres and animals are burning... The "oz" front page story was about a remote community's alcohol problems (racist anti aboriginal story) and the  rich elite racing carnival.

 

What we are experiencing now is unprecedented... even those of us that acccept the climate emergency didnt realise how hard and fast it would hit... Europe needs to think about this, when you are experiencing weather change unlike anything in the past, its not going to sneak up on you, its going to hit and hit hard as it is here.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/04/the-australian-murdoch-owned-newspaper-accused-of-downplaying-bushfires-in-favour-of-picnic-races

 

 

 

 

[leicsmac]

...someone gonna tell 'em?

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, ozleicester said:

 

This is Australia's Minister for the environment and energy last week. His own personal column. Published in "The Australian" Murdoch's loss making national newspaper.

The Australian was established in 1960's and has NEVER made a profit, it exists purely to influence politicians and promote the right wing elite's opinions.( i know these facts as i was manager of its WA branch for some time).

 

On a day when people have died in unprecedented bushfires and literally hundreds of homes have been lost and millions of kilometres and animals are burning... The "oz" front page story was about a remote community's alcohol problems (racist anti aboriginal story) and the  rich elite racing carnival.

 

What we are experiencing now is unprecedented... even those of us that acccept the climate emergency didnt realise how hard and fast it would hit... Europe needs to think about this, when you are experiencing weather change unlike anything in the past, its not going to sneak up on you, its going to hit and hit hard as it is here.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/04/the-australian-murdoch-owned-newspaper-accused-of-downplaying-bushfires-in-favour-of-picnic-races

 

 

 

 

These purveyors of disinformation need to be nailed and discredited as soon as possible. If not for vested interests undermining efforts to move away from fossil fuels for the last 20 years or more we might already be on a path to a cleaner, safer future. Morrison and his government fully deserve to become an international pariah and laughingstock.

 

There is of course a valuable role for genuine scientific scepticism. This is a normal part of the peer review process. But this is entirely different to a propaganda campaign deliberately using selective facts taken out of context to undermine the consensus for action.

Edited 4 January 2020 by WigstonWanderer

[leicsmac]

37 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

These purveyors of disinformation need to be nailed and discredited as soon as possible. If not for vested interests undermining efforts to move away from fossil fuels for the last 20 years or more we might already be on a path to a cleaner, safer future. Morrison and his government fully deserve to become an international pariah and laughingstock.

 

There is of course a valuable role for genuine scientific scepticism. This is a normal part of the peer review process. But this is entirely different to a propaganda campaign deliberately using selective facts taken out of context to undermine the consensus for action.

Nail. On. Head.

 

With the addendum that that propaganda campaign will end up causing trouble for the ones spinning it as well as everyone else.

[String fellow]

The major fossil fuel producing and fossil fuel burning countries of the world, along with those who are deliberately depleting their rain forests, seem to be in denial about the impact their actions are having on the planet. Burning fossil fuels creates greenhouse gasses such as CO2, and depleting rain forest reduces the planet's ability to absorb it. The real problem is that there's a tipping point in the planet's overall temperature rise, beyond which nature itself starts to make it far worse. That's as a result of several natural phenomena including rising ocean temperatures (reducing their ability to absorb CO2), rising tundra temperatures (releasing more CO2 from the ground), and shrunken polar ice caps (reducing the planet's albedo). Stephen Hawking spoke about the dangers of us passing this tipping point, which he said could result in Earth becoming like Venus. So when the Australian environment minister talks about being proud of his country's climate change efforts, as the world's biggest exporter of coal, I for one don't believe a word of it.

[leicsmac]

19 minutes ago, String fellow said:

The major fossil fuel producing and fossil fuel burning countries of the world, along with those who are deliberately depleting their rain forests, seem to be in denial about the impact their actions are having on the planet. Burning fossil fuels creates greenhouse gasses such as CO2, and depleting rain forest reduces the planet's ability to absorb it. The real problem is that there's a tipping point in the planet's overall temperature rise, beyond which nature itself starts to make it far worse. That's as a result of several natural phenomena including rising ocean temperatures (reducing their ability to absorb CO2), rising tundra temperatures (releasing more CO2 from the ground), and shrunken polar ice caps (reducing the planet's albedo). Stephen Hawking spoke about the dangers of us passing this tipping point, which he said could result in Earth becoming like Venus. So when the Australian environment minister talks about being proud of his country's climate change efforts, as the world's biggest exporter of coal, I for one don't believe a word of it.

That's a pretty accurate summation, yes.

 

FWIW I don't foresee Earth becoming a Venusian hothouse any time soon (there have been times where both overall CO2 concentrations and overall average temperatures have been higher than the present time and what is projected and things didn't go full runaway train there), but even a (relatively) small change can and will end up affecting the ability to source food and potable water to a great many people who are pretty badly off already, as well as more extreme events elsewhere too. Combine that with both human denial about that fact and the human propensity to try to circle the wagons and wait out a large problem rather than prevent or guard against it before it happens, and the results might not be very pretty.

Edited 4 January 2020 by leicsmac

[yorkie1999]

22 minutes ago, String fellow said:

The major fossil fuel producing and fossil fuel burning countries of the world, along with those who are deliberately depleting their rain forests, seem to be in denial about the impact their actions are having on the planet. Burning fossil fuels creates greenhouse gasses such as CO2, and depleting rain forest reduces the planet's ability to absorb it. The real problem is that there's a tipping point in the planet's overall temperature rise, beyond which nature itself starts to make it far worse. That's as a result of several natural phenomena including rising ocean temperatures (reducing their ability to absorb CO2), rising tundra temperatures (releasing more CO2 from the ground), and shrunken polar ice caps (reducing the planet's albedo). Stephen Hawking spoke about the dangers of us passing this tipping point, which he said could result in Earth becoming like Venus. So when the Australian environment minister talks about being proud of his country's climate change efforts, as the world's biggest exporter of coal, I for one don't believe a word of it.

Thing is, no one from this country has the right to condemn  the impact of other countries actions, we were the ones that started it all.

Edited 4 January 2020 by yorkie1999

[Countryfox]

I can see why the US justified the assassination of the bad guy if all we read in the papers is correct (and it probably is) but why oh why does Trump have to gloat via Twitter ....   he does the same thing with the mad dwarf in Korea ...   this more than anything else is what could start another war.    

[Collymore]

13 hours ago, peach0000 said:

I do have sympathy’s with countries like Australia over climate change. Coal makes up a stupid amount of their economy so it would be so damaging to them in the short term to change that. Other countries with less reliance on fossil fuels are always judge countries like Australia where in reality instead of judging they need to help them find a way around their issues. All countries want to stop climate change, doing so will disproportionately affect a select few.

Not only this but it would be a token gesture if they were to reduce coal exports. It's not like it's a magic switch where it's going to suddenly sort the problem out and change their weather. They could be in a position with worst fires in the future with less resources to fight them due to their damaged economy.

 

From what I understand it is coming about from the difference in temperature in the Indian Ocean from the west and east sides which apparently isn't linked to global warming. If it was to switch (as it can do and has in the past) It would be Australia with torrential prolonged rainfall and East Africa with the hot dry temperatures.

 

I'm not sure how easy it is to forecast this temperature difference but it my be a case of planning for the worst and hoping for the best in future. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Salisbury Fox]

13 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Quite aside from the rights and wrongs of assassinating leading foreign military figures, no one seems concerned that the US has launched an attack at a major civilian airport. Surely this itself is a shocking act of terrorism that sets a terrible precedent? Or is it OK because it’s in the Middle East?

It seems it was a clear surgical strike with no collateral damage, I mean it’s not like he was taken out in the departure lounge.  I would say that Soleimani set the precedent through his involvement in killing US and UK troops. 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

It seems it was a clear surgical strike with no collateral damage, I mean it’s not like he was taken out in the departure lounge.  I would say that Soleimani set the precedent through his involvement in killing US and UK troops. 

...and the part where it was completely extrajudicial and a clear escalation is alright, then? (I know you didn't say that but wouldn't mind knowing the inference here.)

 

Additionally, if there's a game of "X started it" being played between the US and Iran one might want to go all the way back to when the CIA sponsored a coup against a democratically elected leader - or perhaps even further back. This stuff is rarely all that cut and dried.

 

 

[Barrowblue]

On 03/01/2020 at 08:25, Barrowblue said:

We're going to Noosa heads & gold coast may/June undeterred . It would be good to have some national parks to still visit, however I'm hoping that the fires and bad international press doesn't damage the traveling & tourism industry too much. The reliance on those industries is huge in some towns. 

 

https://www.smh.com.au/national/people-aren-t-stupid-bushfire-crisis-scorches-australia-s-image-20200103-p53oke.html

 

This is obviously a more detailed indication of the long term damage I was trying to get at. 

[Salisbury Fox]

32 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...and the part where it was completely extrajudicial and a clear escalation is alright, then? (I know you didn't say that but wouldn't mind knowing the inference here.)

 

Additionally, if there's a game of "X started it" being played between the US and Iran one might want to go all the way back to when the CIA sponsored a coup against a democratically elected leader - or perhaps even further back. This stuff is rarely all that cut and dried.

 

 

Where the killings of soldiers by Iranian supplied IEDs extrajudicial, or does it only matter when someone of note is killed? Yes it is an escalation, but the Iranians cannot expect to act with impunity which is why the opportunity to strike in this manner presented itself in the first place.  An escalation is also running a covert nuclear programme until discovered, targeting shipping, the role of Hezbollah, Iranian involvement in Yemen etc etc

 

I am not absolving the West from blame, I just feel that there are enough people covering that side of the argument on here.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Where the killings of soldiers by Iranian supplied IEDs extrajudicial, or does it only matter when someone of note is killed? Yes it is an escalation, but the Iranians cannot expect to act with impunity which is why the opportunity to strike in this manner presented itself in the first place.  An escalation is also running a covert nuclear programme until discovered, targeting shipping, the role of Hezbollah, Iranian involvement in Yemen etc etc

 

I am not absolving the West from blame, I just feel that there are enough people covering that side of the argument on here.

Guess my point about this is that the US can't proclaim to be the "good guy" and then turn around and do "bad guy" things which this ostensibly is. And it's hardly the first time, either.

 

I'd certainly agree that there are enough people covering this side of the argument on here, just unfortunate that there aren't enough out in the wider world doing similarly.

[Aus Fox]

Good news this morning, well as good as you get in these situations. It’s bloody freezing and hasn’t stopped raining for over an hour. 
Hopefully these conditions we’ll help the fireies get things under control this morning.

Don’t get me wrong this isn’t the end of it and some of those fires will burn on for week.

But a little light relief today in Victoria.

[Guesty]

Trump's just tweeted he'll strike 52 Irainian targets if Iran react in any way. I'm not sure what will happen now. There's no way Irainain backed miltias will not react - they think they're going to paradise and have just had the equivalent of a sort of Winston Churchill assassinated. Plus, the economic sanctions have pushed Iran to a point where they can't carry on in the status quo.

 

I'm not sure if they've really misjudged this assassination - especially with Trump's tweet talking about negotiation - and that this was to stop, not start a war. The Iran leader tweeted the day before the assassination that Trump couldn't do anything after the embassy attack - did Trump just over react?

 

You've now got Iraq having three days of official national mourning for the Iranian general and the Iraqi's who were killed. That's the country the USA are supposed to be helping. That's the governments of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Afganistain who seem to be against or turning against them now. It just speaks to how poor the US' foreign policy has been. 

 

Abandoning the Kurds was a mistake. It basically just said to everyone, we're not even going to pretend to be loyal anymore after we've used you - even if you were our friends. Some of the US soldiers were leaving with Kurdish flags on their vehicles they were so digusted. 

 

They change their policy every 4 to 8 years depending on who's in charge creating power vacuums - meaning allies are also enemies, or allies of enemies. Their internal politics is so tribal that they can't keep a consistant strategy. The main reason Soleimani became so influencial was because he took advantage of the changes in strategy.

 

Whilst Putin and Xi Jinping are brutal dictators, they're always there and 'appear' to be loyal. They keep to the same long-term plan - and slowly but surely, seem to be quietly gaining allies. Russia and China started doing joint military training exercises with Iran two weeks ago (#coincidence?). I'm not going to hyperbolic and say there's going to be WW3; but there is going to become a point where Russia and China say enough is enough.

Edited 5 January 2020 by Guesty