War Powers according to ALP anonymous MP? Not convinced!

If you read the Michael West press release or article below: The crux of it is that having war powers subject to parliamentary approval is too cumbersome for the current global security setting, because most conflicts are with non-state actors and there is not enough flexibility and fluidity in terms of response available if parliament is to be consulted.

This is, of course: nonsense.

Consider the following:

- The current major regional conflicts that could most likely escalate end up resulting in pressure for involving Australian troops - Ukraine-Russia - is obviously not about small, agile, non-state actors. They're all major state actors and it includes alliances of major state actors.

- The current potential threatened world conflict that definitely could end up involving (already deployed) Australian Defence Forces is US-China via proxy Taiwan and Japan. Also all major state actors including alliances of major state actors.

- Iran is next on the list. This also involves all major state actors including alliances of major state actors.

- Referendums can be done easily on line using existing IT infrastructure. The turn around time is not slow. Postal services do not need to be involved.

- With parliamentary intervention and oversight plus referendums, the executive could still have war powers similar to those of the US President in concert with US Congress. In the even of direct threats on Australia and its borders: special executive powers could be introduced. This would only happen in response to 1. A nation openly declaring war on Australia or 2. An open attack on our country and its territories.

If I had to guess I would say that the anonymous ALP MP - if they are even real - is Catholic and wants PM Anthony Albanese to be able to pull the trigger - perhaps on Iran or Ukraine, or both. (China seems less likely given current policy and diplomacy measures). Christian megacult special interests!

The current status quo is unacceptable, an there does need to be parliamentary oversight and veto similar to that which US Congress has. It cannot just be reserved for after the event. The decision to deploy ADF in places like the SCS must be ratified by parliament with a firm majority. That is what the real issue is.

---