Submitted 15 hours ago by Eyekaytee@aussie.zone to australianpolitics@aussie.zone
curtail the us 100% agree, stop exports to ukraine 100% disagree so they will be last on the list of parties i vote for
insane to think if Australia was invaded i’d want a bunch of other pacifists countries telling me how bad they feel and good luck
Really? No support for Ukraine?
They ally themselves with Trump’s main ally.
Will never vote Greens again.
They are against all arms trade in general. They do support other aid to Ukraine, and support tougher sanctions on Russia and Russia’s allies.
As usual, Greens have a nuanced policy of which one detail is being cherry picked by media to make them seem like they have an unpopular position.
as a green voter this sucks balls, Ukraine support 100%,
Israel support zero
and treat the US as we’d treat Vietnam. etc
C’mon David. This is an untenable take (even if “military export” is being interpreted as “all aid” by some).
But I kinda hate that everyone’s been so vocal for Greens to stop focusing on overseas issues WRT Palestine, but are then outraged at this. Both are important.
What a coincidence that this stance aligns perfectly with Russias stance as well.
100% on not supporting the US. Why the hell wouldn’t they support Ukraine? That’s crazy. If you’re not comfortable with supplying weapons maybe just anything else?
If you’re not comfortable with supplying weapons maybe just anything else?
Yes, that’s explicitly the Greens policy, They are against any weapons trade even to allies. They support Ukraine and support medical and other material aid to Ukraine. They are also for trade sanctions on Russia above what we currently have, too.
Shoebridge has just done a terrible job of communicating that on his second day on the job, not realizing how much media will try to twist a negative spin on anything he says.
Shoebridge said the Greens backed the provision of “basic humanitarian and civil assistance” to Ukraine, and support for anti-corruption efforts, but the party opposed global weapons transfers as a matter of principle.
The party would support providing military aid to Ukraine if it were backed by a United Nations Security Council resolution, he said, but Russia would use its veto power on the council to block any such move.
What? That’s basically saying we will happily send military aid if Russia gives it the ok. Someone has fucked up this stance or the messaging around it.
“so they will be last on the list of parties i vote for”
Interesting take given how completely disgusting the vast majority of political parties are in Australia.
the greens have their red lines and so do i, i say bottom but i live in qld my options are usually
labor greens liberal one nation religious nutters religious nutters nutter party religious nutters save the whales
What is the Liberal party’s policy on supplying weapons to Ukraine? I just looked at their official website, but I couldn’t find any mention of it. In fact, there is an enormous contrast between the amount of policy information on the Greens website vs the Liberal Party website.
The Liberal party website has very little policy information at all, and what it does have is quite vague, such as “put speed limit on spending”. Whereas the Greens website has detailed policies and rationale across a very wide range of issues.
The Liberal party are using a “small target” strategy; which is to say they deliberately do not communicate what their values and intentions are except on a very small number of issues. This strategy relies on the idea that people often don’t think about things that aren’t put right in front of them. If they don’t say anything that you disagree with, then they are more likely to win your vote… and that’s exactly how it seems to be playing out for you.
In my view, if you are picking one idea from the Greens (in this case the idea that they will only provide humanitarian assistance to Ukraine rather than providing weapons), and then deciding to prioritise the Liberal party over the Green for that reason, that effectively rewards the Liberal party for not having any policies. If they have no policies, then they cannot have a policy that you disagree with; but that certainly doesn’t mean what they choose to do will be better than what you voted against.
Wars and the politics and that surround them are not straight forward. It is easy to have an opinion, but it is not easy to solve the problem. So although you might not disagree with one strategy that is put forward, I don’t think it’s necessarily wise to treat a lack of policy as a positive thing (which is what the small target strategy is about).
I used to include labor but their blatant corruption and choosing overseas industry over the people means they are done for me.
The so called party of the people, are definitely not that.
ok rusty
Cherry@piefed.social 4 hours ago
Initially i was peeved off at this but it does feel like the media cherry picking. Hopefully the party can clarify the stance.
Ukraine need this support. But if the ban also includes getting rid of support for russia/isreal/usa etc it has to be discussed. Realistically if they can support in other areas to massively compensate that sounds okaish but i am not sure AUS is in a position to sit on the sidelines as a pacifist nation given its vulnerability as a remote spot.
Realistically it would be good to see all parties put forward who they are offering support to, esp in the age of super interference. It is easy to say i don’t do politics but from war crimes to fuel prices politics are impacting us.