When The War Came To My Reality

 

When The War Came to my Reality.

Aussies have long had this perception of battles taking place far away, fighting for freedom of peoples in other lands.

Even if our continental island seems distant from the big troubles across the Northern Hemisphere, what happens when Australia takes its dutiful turn to host battles to be fought on behalf of its allies?

Let us be all prepared for the physical, social and personal landscape suffered as collateral damage. 

Politicians of different shades can still keep arguing with each other, but the reality for the rest of us at ground level must make us prepare ourselves for harrowing eventualities.

Many things on our media, distracting us with irrelevant matters for so many years, will not matter anymore.

Reality shows will be replaced by reality.   The pandemic will be pushed aside ( if it already has been) by the impact of intense failure of our logistics, energy supply, communications, food and economic grids.  A lack of national unity and leadership can amplify the negative fallout.   A lack of independent purpose and stance will make foreigners increase manipulation of our societal and collective spirit.

Military fight outs can damage our land and natural resources in ways more extensive than the charge of the Light Brigade.  Who, why and what are we fighting for?    Those who urge us Australians to sacrifice and suffer are most likely sitting in the comfort of their leather cushioned offices really far far away.  Oh does not that sound so familiar?

Food shortages in wartime will be more frightening than that of toilet paper in 2020.    Fuel shortages will paralyse more than just jaunts to the supermarkets and beaches.   Innocent individuals can be banished to harsh climate corners of our vast land.   Ports and facilities will be targeted, towns in wrong places sacrificed and the sense of being stunned and conquered can add to our national pysche.

The outreach of intercontinental weapons is not limited to ballistic missiles, but are more deadly using cyberspace, artificial intelligence and sensory devices.   Australia can be held as hostage in the political tapestry of technologically advanced conflicts.   Her dependencies in critical requirements on overseas supply can undo her bargaining counter strengths.   Her relatively smaller population can be no match for her opponents.   Will the Australian government and society be punished for their perceived and actual taking of sides?  Will our military arnaments be such a pittance in capability when we need to rely on them?

Will the outcome of conflict fought out on Aussie soil be not up to us, but more on the decisions, motives and actions of outsiders?

The outcomes of actual conflict in northern Australia can divide the territory of the Lucky Country.  Years of hosting foreign powers can come home to roost in coming to more than hairs with powerful  militaries which see such bases as interfering with their strategic safety and vital interests.  Australia can stage landlocked destruction like a pawn in geopolitical chess.

Will another country save us?
Succesive Australian governments
have opted to serve more of the requirements of powerful so called Big Brothers, rather than gradually assert its own independent stand. Being overly loyal to outsiders does not guarantee a return of favour in an increasingly complex and evolving world of competitive power.

So if and when the war comes to our door step, be truly prepared.  No matter what......

#yongkevthoughts

War and Peace

"What have we done to deserve this?" Quote by civillian father, 14 May 2021, whose home in a building was destroyed by superior rockets shot at residential neighbourhood. This man's wife and several children all died in the ensuing carnage. Instincts of human beings, especially with political power, military capability, financial excess and cultural imperatives, have organised strong structured governments which still readily wage destruction and death on fellow beings who belong "to the other side". All the accumulation of knowledge, technology, philosophy, religion and grief in human history has not deterred the uncivillised habit of killing in the name of defence, freedom, conquest, civilisation and more. Increasingly the names and labels quoted and utilised by intolerant and aggressive political leaders to justify war and conflict bear no resemblence to the real and underlying causative reasons. War breaks out because the leaders we have emphasise more on strive, differences and an inability to reconcile. When you are an astronaut and look back at Earth from the darkness of space, all human beings and their affairs seem so small and fragile. And yet when wars are waged, they are killing each other. This rather basic and vile need and act to kill fellow human beings is an insult to the otherwise good progress of Homo Sapiens, who started killing for food - and now continue to kill each other for essentially tribal dominance, economic competition, financial gains from selling arms and misplaced perceived need to be on the top of the hierarchy. When religion is invoked as the rationale to go to war, it becomes more complex. Perhaps religion is misused to rouse the rabble, increase passions and make individuals willingly sacrifice themselves. For war to break out, compromise, communication and negotiation have already been thrown out the window, like the proverbial bath with the baby inside. Political leaders we get stuck with, through elections and whatever means in different societies, have gone radical, form alliances and pyschologically prepare their populace for the war. They deemphasise shared common values between opponents in a conflict - and can weave untruths to prop up the spirit of troops and civillians they will use as the price of war. It is always the older generation who send the younger generation to their demise. Veterans of the last world wide war, in their old age, still mutter " What was all the death and destruction for?". These aging survivors of horror and pain are convinced war is totally meaningless for the foot soldier and civillian. Yet, in the 21st century, threats of war rattling and beating of drums of conflict continue to be heard. Perhaps the damage in future wars can be less of human deaths, but more disabling of supply, energy and cyberspace networks. ICBMs, oh it sounds so 1970s, can now be supplemented by biological warfare - but in the end, it is the score of mass numbers of fatalties of human beings that are key indicators for the eventual victor. Maybe like the effects of a bush fire, human kind needs to be routed in order to grow better again. World wide forums set up for nations to cooperate over and resolve differences can be just money wasted to hold expensive Town Hall meetings. They did help over many matters over the past hundred years, but still were toothless and ineffective to prevent major hostilities. The severity of two intense world wars in the 20th century seem to be forgotten by a new generation of so called "leaders". "Those who ignore the lessons of history are bound to repeat its mistakes." So, as civillians, as most of us are, what did we do to deserve suffering and destruction in the next major conflict? All it takes is for good women and men to do nothing, in the face of being possibly manipulated by egoistic individuals who urge us to go to war. The latter then retreat to their well protected bunkers, when the rest of us are highly likely to be fodder in this game of destructive chess. #yongkevthoughts

Key Risks for Australia's Security

What do you reckon are the key threats to Australian security as a nation?

In the mist of walking through the hype of different agendas of different factions, let us examine some realities.

1. Why countries were invaded in history includes diversion away from the internal problems facing the leaders of invading armies. Will Australia play into the hands of such ploys?

2 Interference in the internal affairs of foreign nations. The penchant of western societies to criticise other countries for alleged and real breaches in human rights and democratic practices can trigger flashpoints in international relations.

3. Significant decreases in the technological, military and economic power of Australia. Unlike post World War 2, competition stakes have shot up. The largest buyers of arms in the world are all in Asia, a region which the largest island nation is located so close to. Australia is increasingly seen as a place to dig out unprocessed raw materials. It has not sufficiently developed its futuristic sectors to be on the leading edge, unlike the USA, China, Germany, Israel and Japan.

4. Socio-political drivers and religious expansion from other cultures can be a two edged sword for Australia, depending on whose views you ask for.

Western colonisation from the 16th to the 20th centuries was driven by powerful trade, religious and political interplay. The relatively generous migration opportunity offered by Australia to diverse races and religions is a remarkable contrast to relatively closed immigration policies of other nations.
When small South Pacific nations face issues on sea level rise, lack of infrastructure and maintaining their economic growth, Australia no longer holds the monopoly for influence. The Pacific is bordered by other nations like Canada, China, New Zealand and Japan. 

5. Loss of leadership and influence by Australia for neighbouring nations.

South-east Asia is a complex tapestry of religious, political and economic competition. Australian troops sacrificed to stop the tide of Communism there but that has been mostly forgotten in the countries so saved.

6. The temptation to invade Australia to exploit its natural resources. The Imperial Japanese army invaded China and south east Asia last century to expand access to natural and food resources, apart from acquiring territory for a pan Asiatic empire.

7. Climate deterioration in Australia, including drought, loss of arable land and increased vulnerability to inclement weather. Such a scenario adds to the stable of threats within Australia, instead of the usual harping of threats from outside the country.

8. The lack of a viable core population to defend Australia's vast borders. The continuing focus on protecting more of Australia's southern states, instead of its northern coastline, can be due to climatic, population and economic factors, but strategic reality cannot be denied.

9. Burgeoning populations of nearby countries, especially when their cultural make up is so different and Australia is such an empty land with a total current population less than for greater Jakarta.

10. Australia not maturing to a stand independent from allied nations in the past.  

Risks grow when previous strong allies have shown a remarkable record of utilising Australia and its forces for proxy wars.

#yongkevthoughts