1) The Army is strictly apolitical, the application of lethal force is a direct job requirement. No if’s and no buts. Been there and done it.
2) The hearts and minds bit is a collegiate offensive of many agencies: political, intelligence and defence (read Armed Forces Leadership).
War has changed from the 1800s through to the two world wars. Now there is a collateral that has to take in the wider interconnected world as well as the fact, that interconnected world is directly beamed into the living rooms of almost everyone with a TV on the planet.
Distinctly, things have changed so that intentions and actions on the battlefield are now known about as little as a few minutes by the wider populace across lots of nations.
This has, as one can imagine, much more wider connotations. It has to be thought through by that wider group about possible redress by others in the combat zone and at home and places of encampment elsewhere (in potentially hostile zones too).
Yes war is becoming much more high tech, but responses/redress are still forthcoming based on remote killings and these have been evidenced in the Middle East and Africa as an example.
Essentially though, point one is still the true line for the ADF. The other point is a much wider discussion point and would take away from this address.
As for silly cartoons and such: That just pitiful and there needs to be a bit more discipline. Shite like that is for the pub when your out on the pi55 on a wind down.
