Australia deploys helicopters & soldiers to order people to GO HOME in one world’s s

You mean as soon as the curve is flattened?

Seems like we've been hearing such lip service and lies from the Aussie government for quite some time now. Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me three times, fool me for the rest of my life.

 

So they are bringing in the military to what? Stand there and take pictures? Because it sounds like they are there to help ...enforce...the lock down.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nation...wcm/36b8e594-6245-400a-868c-f12627f9e4f3/amp/

"Australia’s biggest city Sydney posted a record one-day rise in local COVID-19 cases on Thursday and warned the outbreak would get worse, as authorities sought military help to enforce a lockdown of 6 million people poised to enter its sixth week."

Help.

Enforce.

The.

Lockdown.

Point still stands. That's martial law.

Enjoy!

 

I just linked a national Post article as well. Maybe they are also deeply rooted in far wing conspiracy theories?

Maybe you should attack the validity of the story instead of the source? I mean even CNN gets some stories right.

 

I'm sorry but:

1) The situation we have here doesn't meet your chosen definition of marshal law in post 196. And;
2) You still haven't answered the questions I put to you in post 194.

Well?

 

Yes. It does. The moment the military are used to enforce the restriction of freedoms on the populace which is exactly what that right leaning conspiracy laced national Post detailed.

 

So that means what exactly? It's OK then for US troops to 'impose' marshal law' during emergencies likes floods, and fires etc. But not OK for Australia to do it or the US shouldn't send troops in to help with emergencies even if it means citizens will die?

 

I said you were under martial law right now. That's the reality of your current state of freedoms.

It pertained to the conversation at that point. You made the false claim that wasn't the case. But it is.

 

It’s really good that someone is able to inform us about the imposition of martial law in our country.

 

So your still ducking and weaving over whether its OK to do? (And that' assuming anyone even agrees the state of affairs we are experiencing even meets the definition of marshal law, which I seriously doubt,even using the definition you provided.)

Is marshal law acceptable in certain specific circumstances? If not, why not and does that mean the US shouldn't do it (even though it patently does from time to time during local emergencies)?

 

Wether it was ok was never the question. It was about the current situation of Australia's freedoms.

Do I think you should be under ****ing martial law at this point in time?

No. I don't.

 

Well then it comes down to that being your opinion. As for whether I think it's necessary for movement restrictions (not marshal law) to be imposed? I'll go with the advice given to the Government by our health authorities. They're the ones framing the restrictions that are being imposed based on epidemiology. By and large the government simply takes their advice on the matter. So I'll go with that advice.

I also assume your (slightly opaque) response means you do think it's OK for democracies to declare 'marshal law' (if that's what you want to call it) during local emergencies. So all we're really quibbling about is whether or not this situation is enough of an emergency to warrant it. You clearly think not, but as I said that's just your opinion as a layman. Until provided with convincing evidence to the contrary I prefer to stick with the advice of the experts.

 

Yes, I'm always grateful there are people out there letting me know that parts of the UK are no go areas under Sharia law.