Comments on: We need You! (Maybe.)

By: Tristan Egarr

Tristan Egarr — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 21:40:07 +0000

Dan, as you say, you have sworn an oath “to protect you and your interests”. My article does not attack individual soldiers or accuse them of atrocities.

The problem is in what our “interests” are. I believe that the soldiers in Timor-Leste are trying to do their best to help secure the livelihood of the Timorese people. But if Australia is ultimately leading the intervention in Timor-Leste to make a profit, then these altruistic aims are subservient to a much less altruistic end. Therefore, it may be that, in suffering much hardship in the name of good, our soldiers only cause more harm.

It troubles me that you would take offence from this. Don’t we need to question why we embark on each military adventure? How are we to know if our best interests are being served if we do not question what these interests are? I totally agree that we should not simply call our soldiers thugs because they carry guns, and I did no such thing. But I repeat: we need to ask why our soldiers are in Timor-Leste, given that they are there in our name.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 03:43:13 +0000

As a soldier i say:
The army’s purpose is to serve this country in whatever manner is required (within its mandate), it is a purely executive arm. Any action it initiates is a reflection of the government’s intent and through the government the will of the NZ public. We act as we are orderded to (within NZ law) by (ultimately) you, the public of NZ. Soldiers do not act like civilians we are subject to service law and a stringent code of conduct, we must always act as professional soldiers irrespective of our needs, wants or personalities. If you have problems with the work we do, then pressure the government, its your right and duty as a citizen in a democracy.

As an individual:
I am deeply offended by your article, particularly your attitude toward service personnel who have sworn an oath to protect you and your interests both here and overseas. Our service involves significant hardships for us, our families and friends your accusation that we are hired thugs or imperialists has so little grounding in reality that i wonder if you know anyone who is currently or has previously served. If you wish you should e-mail me with any questions or issues you have.

By: Tristan.

Tristan. — Wed, 23 May 2007 02:48:08 +0000

Sue, you state “I find your article full of holes”

And yet you never attempted to point out what those holes were.

Please enlighten us exactly what you find to be incorrect.

On your last point – no-one forgets that the navy float in ships, but it is easy to forget that the army kill people when the media only ever talk about peace-keeping. I have no doubt that most members of our army are indeed trying to keep the peace, but it is necessary to point out that this involves killing. Or would you prefer that we forgoe serious consideration of the world and instead turn outselves into the NZDF’s advertisement/PR wing?

By: Sue Larsen

Sue Larsen — Mon, 07 May 2007 02:46:40 +0000

I am sure who ever wrote this article thought they were mildy funny, sarcastic and amusing. The last paragraph was supposed to pasify those of us who thinks the Defence Force does a good job. As a person who has a tertiary education from one of New Zealands fine Universities, and a person who has a husband serving six months in Sinai to help,aid and protect people I find your article full of holes and pretty judgemental. Maybe a few months in the Territorials having to look after yourself and your mates would make you appreciate what some people do “in the line of duty” Its good that you pointed out that the army carry guns designed to kill people – most of the general public would find that enlightening and new knowledge Maybe you could point out that the Police carry batons or the Navy float in the water in ships.