ED: An Essay by a student at Carlingford High School in 2013.

Introduction

On November 8, 1965, the Battle of Gang Toi marked a significant early clash between Australian troops and the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War. This encounter, involving A Company, 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (1 RAR), was part of a larger military initiative known as Operation Hump. The battle took place in the Gang Toi Hills, located in the northern Bien Hoa Province of Vietnam, where the Australian forces faced a well-fortified Viet Cong bunker system defended by Company 238. The Battle of Gang Toi was one of the first significant engagements between Australian forces and the Viet Cong, highlighting the intensity and complexity of the Vietnam conflict. This essay explores the strategic context, the battle itself, and its aftermath, illustrating the challenges and sacrifices made by Australian soldiers during this critical phase of the Vietnam War.

Operation Hump and the Strategic Context

Operation Hump was a large-scale military operation conducted by combined American and Australian forces, with the objective of sweeping through and clearing out Viet Cong positions in the region. The operation aimed to disrupt the Viet Cong’s control over key areas in southern Vietnam, thereby weakening their influence and operational capabilities. However, the operation faced several challenges, including difficult terrain, the presence of well-prepared enemy defences, and the inherent difficulties of coordinating multi-national forces in a complex combat environment.

The Battle of Gang Toi was one of the first encounters between Australian troops and the Viet Cong during Operation Hump. It provided a stark reminder of the harsh realities of the Vietnam conflict, where the Viet Cong’s familiarity with the terrain and their use of guerrilla tactics often placed conventional forces at a disadvantage. The battle also highlighted the need for thorough planning and coordination in military operations, lessons that would be painfully learned by the Australian forces in the heat of battle.

The Battle

A Company, 1 RAR, led by Major John Healy, advanced into the Gang Toi Hills on November 8, 1965. The mission for the day was to continue on a westerly bearing, searching for enemy activity and engaging the Viet Cong as opportunities arose. Intelligence had indicated the presence of large enemy concentrations in the area, and the company moved cautiously, aware of the potential dangers ahead.

The soldiers of A Company were soon confronted by a heavily fortified Viet Cong bunker system, skillfully concealed within the dense jungle. The enemy, well-prepared and deeply entrenched, responded with intense machine gun fire as the Australians advanced. The initial contact was devastating for the Australians, with the lead section of 1 Platoon coming under heavy fire as they approached the enemy position. Lance Corporal Richard (Tiny) Parker was among the first to be killed, and several others were wounded in the initial exchange.

As the battle intensified, Major John Healy, the Company Commander, ordered a flanking attack to relieve the pressure on 1 Platoon. Second Platoon, led by a young officer, moved forward to execute the manoeuvre, despite the overwhelming enemy firepower. The Viet Cong, armed with automatic AK-47s and well-positioned within their bunkers, unleashed a withering barrage on the advancing Australians.

During the flanking attack, Private Peter (Gilly) Gillson, a machine gunner, was hit by enemy fire as he attempted to cross the buttress roots of a large tree. He fell forward into the line of fire, and despite the brave efforts of his comrades, including Sergeant Col Fawcett, to pull him to safety, Gillson succumbed to his wounds. The intensity of the enemy fire and the difficulty of manoeuvring through the thick jungle made it impossible for the Australians to recover his body at the time.

As the battle wore on, the Australians began to run low on ammunition, and the situation became increasingly dire. The Viet Cong, sensing an opportunity, started to outflank the Australian position, forcing the soldiers of A Company to withdraw under heavy fire. Artillery support was called in to within 25 meters of the Australian lines, providing a temporary reprieve and allowing the company to consolidate its position.

Casualties and Missing Soldiers

The battle resulted in significant casualties for the Australian forces. In addition to the six soldiers who were injured, two men, Private Richard Parker and Private Peter Gillson, were reported missing. Eyewitnesses believed that both men had been killed in action, making them the first Australian soldiers to be declared missing in Vietnam. Their loss had a profound impact on their comrades, who were eager to return to Gang Toi and recover their fallen mates. However, the operational realities of the Vietnam War meant that this was not possible, and the bodies of Parker and Gillson were left behind as the battle drew to a close.

The decision not to return to Gang Toi was a difficult one for the soldiers of A Company. The US Brigade Commander, facing heavy casualties in other parts of the operation, terminated the mission, effectively ending any hope of recovering Parker and Gillson’s bodies at that time. The loss of these two soldiers weighed heavily on the minds of their comrades, and their sacrifice became a symbol of the high cost of the Vietnam War.

Aftermath and Legacy

The Battle of Gang Toi stands as a testament to the challenges faced by Australian forces in Vietnam. The battle underscored the importance of thorough planning, coordination, and reconnaissance in military operations. The lack of initial reconnaissance and the insufficient coordination between companies severely hampered the effectiveness of the Australian forces during the battle, leading to unnecessary casualties and the loss of two soldiers whose bodies could not be recovered for many years.

The legacy of the Battle of Gang Toi is also a reminder of the sacrifices made by Australian troops during the Vietnam War. It wasn’t until over 40 years later that the remains of Private Richard Parker and Private Peter Gillson were finally discovered and repatriated to Australia for burial. Their return brought closure to one of the many painful chapters of the Vietnam War and served as a reminder of the enduring impact of the conflict on those who served.

In conclusion, the Battle of Gang Toi was a critical encounter in the Vietnam War, highlighting the intensity of the conflict and the challenges faced by Australian forces. The battle demonstrated the importance of preparation and coordination in military operations and underscored the high cost of the war for those who fought in it. The sacrifices made by the soldiers of A Company, 1 RAR, particularly the loss of Parker and Gillson, continue to be remembered as a poignant reminder of the bravery and dedication of Australian troops during the Vietnam War.

A.A.A.D.D.- Age-Activated Attention-Deficit Disorder.

This is how it manifests:

I decide to water my garden. As I turn on the hose in the driveway, I look over at my car and decide it needs washing.

As I start toward the garage, I notice mail on the porch table that I brought up from the mailbox earlier.

I decide to go through the mail before I wash the car.

I lay my car keys on the table, Put the junk mail in the garbage can under the table, and notice that the can is full.

So, I decide to put the bills back on the table and take out the garbage first…

But then I think, Since I’m going to be near the mailbox When I take out the garbage anyway, I may as well pay the bills first.

I take my check book off the table and see that there is only one check left. My extra checks are in my desk in the study, So I go inside the house to my desk where I find the can of Pepsi I’d been drinking.

I’m going to look for my checks, but first I need to push the Pepsi aside So that I don’t accidentally knock it over.

The Pepsi is getting warm, And I decide to put it in the refrigerator to keep it cold.

As I head toward the kitchen with the Pepsi, A vase of flowers on the counter Catches my eye–they need water.

I put the Pepsi on the counter and discover my reading glasses that I’ve been searching for all morning. I decide I better put them back on my desk, but first I’m going to water the flowers.

I set the glasses back down on the counter, fill a container with water and suddenly spot the TV remote. Someone left it on the kitchen table.

I realize that tonight when I go to watch TV, I’ll be looking for the remote, But I won’t remember that it’s on the kitchen table, So I decide to put it back in the den where it belongs, but first I’ll water the flowers.

I pour some water in the flowers, but quite a bit of it spills on the floor.

So, I set the remote back on the table, get some towels and wipe up the spill.

Then, I head down the hall trying to Remember what I was planning to do.

At the end of the day: The car isn’t washed, the bills aren’t paid, there is a warm can of Pepsi sitting on the counter, The flowers don’t have enough water, there is still only 1 check in my check book, I can’t find the remote, I can’t find my glasses, And I don’t remember what I did with the car keys. Then, when I try to figure out why nothing got done today, I’m really baffled because I know I was busy all day, And I’m really tired.

I realize this is a serious problem, And I’ll try to get some help for it, but first I’ll check my e-mail….

The Texas Tribune – Jake Holden

Iran has significantly increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels, raising alarms in the international community. This development defies global demands for transparency and restraint, further intensifying concerns about Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the potential for a regional arms race.

As of August 27, Iran’s uranium stockpile has surged to 164.7 kilograms enriched up to 60%, marking an increase of 22.6 kilograms since the last report in May. This escalation brings Iran dangerously close to possessing the material necessary for nuclear weapons, a development that has sent shockwaves through diplomatic channels and international watchdogs.

Uranium enriched to 60% purity is perilously close to the 90% threshold required for nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has expressed deep concern over this advancement, with its chief warning that Iran now has sufficient uranium to produce several nuclear bombs. This proximity to weapons-grade material underscores the gravity of the situation and the potential threat it poses to global security.

Iran’s relationship with the IAEA, the UN body responsible for monitoring nuclear activities, has deteriorated significantly. Tehran has not been cooperating fully with the IAEA, and recent reports indicate that surveillance cameras installed by the agency have been disrupted, while experienced inspectors have been barred from facilities. These actions suggest an increasing lack of transparency and a growing rift between Iran and the international community.

Compounding concerns, Iran has been installing more advanced centrifuges, which are capable of enriching uranium more efficiently. Eight cascades of IR-6 centrifuges have already been installed at the Fordo site, with additional cascades being set up at the Natanz facility. This enhancement of Iran’s enrichment capabilities further escalates the threat level, making it increasingly difficult for the international community to monitor and control Iran’s nuclear activities.

Iran’s motives behind this aggressive nuclear advancement remain a topic of intense debate. On one hand, Tehran asserts that its nuclear program is purely for peaceful purposes, including energy production and medical research. However, the level of enrichment and the secrecy surrounding its activities cast doubt on these claims. Some analysts suggest that Iran’s actions are driven by a desire for self-defence, aiming to deter potential aggressors by signalling its capability to develop nuclear weapons if necessary.

On the other hand, there is a growing belief that Iran might be using its enriched uranium stockpile as a bargaining chip in future negotiations, particularly with the United States. By advancing its nuclear program, Iran could be positioning itself to extract concessions in exchange for limiting or reversing its enrichment activities. This strategy could involve lifting economic sanctions or securing security guarantees from Western powers.

Regardless of Iran’s true intentions, the rapid increase in enriched uranium and the installation of advanced centrifuges have escalated tensions in the Middle East and beyond. The international community faces a critical challenge in addressing Iran’s nuclear activities, balancing the need for diplomatic engagement with the risk of further destabilization. Whether Iran’s actions are driven by a defensive strategy or a calculated move to enhance its bargaining position, the stakes have never been higher. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether diplomatic efforts can avert a potential crisis or if the world is on the brink of a new era of nuclear proliferation.

As the Vietnam War dragged on, Australians began to question the initial justifications for their country’s involvement. The fear that communism, particularly from China, posed a direct threat to Australia had been a strong motivator early in the conflict. However, as the war progressed and national servicemen began to suffer casualties, public support started to wane.

In 1966, Prime Minister Harold Holt visited Washington and assured President Lyndon B. Johnson that Australia was “all the way with LBJ.” This declaration reflected the strong public backing of the war at that time. When President Johnson visited Australia later that year, he was greeted by large, enthusiastic crowds. Yet, even then, there were signs of dissent, with militants throwing paint and rotten eggs at the President’s limousine and making death threats, though these incidents were isolated.

Despite growing unease, Vietnam and conscription did not prevent Holt’s Liberal-Country Party coalition from winning a landslide victory in the October 1966 election. However, beneath the surface, a significant anti-war movement was beginning to take shape, driven primarily by the younger generation. Baby boomers, particularly university students, became the backbone of this opposition, viewing Vietnam as a disastrous policy pursued by an arrogant, conservative government. As the war dragged on with no clear end in sight, a broader spectrum of Australians began to oppose the war on moral grounds.

The Impact of Television on Public Perception

The Vietnam War became known as the “television war” due to the extensive coverage it received on television. Australians and Americans alike were regularly exposed to graphic images of the conflict, which starkly highlighted the suffering endured by those in Vietnam. The My Lai massacre in March 1968, where a company of U.S. troops murdered 347 civilians in the South Vietnamese hamlet of My Lai, further eroded public support for the war. The atrocity cast doubt on the war’s stated goals of protecting South Vietnam and halting the spread of communism. It also led Australians to question whether their soldiers might be committing similar acts.

By January 1970, the U.S. and Australia were both showing signs of withdrawing from Vietnam, though no specific exit dates had been set. Australia’s position was clearly tied to U.S. actions, leaving many Australians anxious about the future.

The Moratorium Movement

In early 1970, anti-war groups from across Australia convened in Melbourne and agreed to hold a “moratorium,” a term signifying a halt to business as usual. This movement was inspired by a similar U.S. moratorium in October 1969, where over 500,000 Americans protested in 1,200 cities and towns. The Australian moratorium became the largest and most sustained protest movement in the country’s history, with two primary objectives: the withdrawal of Australian troops from Vietnam and an end to conscription.

The movement gained momentum after the Coalition’s victory in the 1969 election, which signalled to many that government policy on Vietnam was unlikely to change for at least three more years. Dr. Jim Cairns, the Shadow Minister for Trade and Industry, emerged as the most visible leader of the moratorium movement. His charisma and intellect galvanized thousands of activists, and he emphasized the importance of maintaining non-violence during the protests.

The moratorium brought together a diverse coalition of groups opposed to the war, including clergy, teachers, academics, unions, politicians, and students. Donations poured in, and while university students had been at the forefront of the anti-war movement, the moratorium attracted thousands of everyday, middle-class Australians. Not everyone supported the movement; its size and intensity were unsettling to many, particularly conservatives like Billy Snedden, the Minister for Labour and National Service, who derided the protesters as “political bikies who pack-rape democracy.”

Despite this opposition, the first moratorium, held in May 1970, was a resounding success. Around 200,000 people participated, with the largest demonstration in Melbourne, where 70,000 people marched peacefully down Bourke Street, led by Cairns. The police remained restrained, and the crowds cheered the demonstrators on. Similar events took place across the country, in cities and rural towns alike.

The second and third moratoriums, held on 18 September 1970 and 30 June 1971, respectively, saw a shift in tone. Left-wing extremists dominated these later protests, leading to smaller turnouts and, in the case of the second moratorium, violence. In Melbourne, police baton-charged protesters, and in Sydney, 173 people were arrested.

The Fallout for Returning Soldiers

The My Lai massacre and the growing anti-war sentiment shifted the focus of many protesters away from the government and onto the soldiers themselves. Unlike the veterans of World War I and II, who were welcomed home as heroes, Vietnam veterans were often met with hostility. Some were spat on, insulted, and even rejected by branches of the Returned Servicemen’s League. This treatment had a severe psychological impact on many veterans, compounding the trauma they had already experienced in Vietnam.

A Defining Moment for Australia

While the moratoriums may not have directly influenced the government’s decision to withdraw troops—Prime Minister John Gorton had already begun the process before the protests—the movement undoubtedly reflected and reinforced a broad collapse in public support for the war. The moratoriums also influenced government policy on conscription, with Cabinet taking steps to reduce the number of draft resisters sent to jail following the first moratorium.

The moratoriums were a defining moment in Australia’s history, marking a significant shift in public attitudes toward authority and war.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ political journey has been marked by mixed results and significant challenges. Despite her impressive resume, Harris has struggled with public perception and complex international issues, raising questions about her potential as a future U.S. leader.

Harris’ simplified explanations of global events, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, have sometimes appeared inadequate, undermining her credibility on the world stage. Moreover, her focus on attacking former President Trump’s foreign policy, while distancing herself from the Biden administration, has left her platform lacking in substantive policy.

The Harris campaign’s embrace of “Brat Girl Summer,” a pop culture trend, highlights a concerning shift towards a vague, vibes-based approach to politics. This strategy, while trendy, fails to address the pressing issues of international relations and national security.

As the U.S. faces a divided political landscape, the potential consequences of a Harris administration are uncertain. With the world watching, the direction of U.S. leadership remains in question, leaving both allies and adversaries on edge. The stakes for global stability, particularly in regions like the Indo-Pacific, have never been higher.

Scammers are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and it’s crucial to stay vigilant to protect yourself from falling victim to their schemes. Scams Awareness Week 2024 is here to help you arm yourself with the knowledge and tools needed to safeguard your money and personal information.

Understanding Scammers: Who Are They?

Scammers are criminals who use manipulation and deception to trick you into handing over your money or sensitive personal information. They often pose as legitimate organizations or trusted individuals to gain your confidence. The Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) urges you to stay informed about the latest scams and to take proactive steps to keep your personal details secure.

Three Crucial Steps to Protect Yourself

STOP – Before you provide any money or personal information, take a moment to pause. If you’re uncertain about the legitimacy of a request, don’t hesitate to say no, hang up, or delete the message. Scammers rely on urgency and pressure tactics, so slowing down can prevent you from falling into their traps.

CHECK – Scammers often impersonate organizations you know and trust, such as MyGov, your bank, the police, or government agencies. If you receive an unexpected request for money or personal details, verify its authenticity by contacting the organization directly using their official phone number or website. Never rely on contact information provided in the suspicious message.

REPORT – The more we share information about scams, the less power scammers have. If you encounter a scam, report it to Scamwatch. Reporting scams helps authorities track and shut down these operations, protecting others from falling victim.

What to Do if You’re Scammed

If a scammer has managed to obtain your money or personal information, it’s essential to act quickly:

• Contact Your Bank: Notify your bank immediately to halt any further unauthorized transactions. You can also request new account numbers if you feel it would increase your security.
• Seek Support from IDCARE: IDCARE is a specialized service offering support to those in Australia and New Zealand who are concerned about identity theft or cyber fraud. They can assist you in creating a personalized plan to minimize the impact of the scam and protect your identity moving forward.

Stay Informed and Vigilant

The fight against scams is ongoing, and staying informed is your best defence. The National Anti-Scam Centre, managed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), operates the Scamwatch website, which is a valuable resource for the latest scam alerts and advice. You can subscribe to their newsletter on the Scamwatch subscribe page to receive regular updates directly to your inbox.

By following these steps and staying informed, you can protect yourself and others from the devastating effects of scams. Remember, knowledge is power when it comes to stopping scammers in their tracks.

Australia stands at the precipice. The Indo-Pacific is now entering the most dangerous strategic period since the Second World War. The People’s Republic of China has embarked in the greatest peacetime military expansion, especially in the maritime domain, seen anywhere since the 1910s. And just as that militarization generated the geopolitical tensions that led to the Great War, exceptionally dangerous Sino-American competition is the defining feature of both Australia’s region and our time.

The Australian military’s reaction to this dynamic and rapidly deteriorating strategic environment had been highly problematic. Dysfunctional platform acquisition and development has been made worse by a convoluted grand strategy which has been far too focused on the rather mundane problems of the prior strategic epoch, as opposed to the extremely dangerous situation the nation was now facing. The result of this dysfunction is the Defence Strategic Review and the new strategic doctrine of National Defence. This comprehensive reform of the ADF has profound implications for the wider Australian military, including the largest expansion of the Royal Australian Navy since the second world war.

Spring in Australia brings warmer days, blooming flowers, and nesting birds—especially the infamous Australian magpie, known for its aggressive swooping behaviour. These black and white songbirds become highly territorial during nesting season, fiercely protecting their chicks by dive-bombing perceived threats, including humans.

Swooping occurs primarily during the magpie’s breeding season, from August to November, when chicks are most vulnerable. Though only about 10% of magpies actually swoop, those that do often remember and target specific individuals year after year. Fast-moving cyclists are particularly prone to attacks, but the birds may also swoop other animals to defend their nests.

Apart from magpies, magpie-larks, noisy miners, and masked lapwings are also known to swoop. Magpie-larks can be especially dangerous, as they attack from the front and may target the eyes. Noisy miners, small grey and yellow birds, often swoop in packs, while masked lapwing/Plovers, which nest on the ground, swoop if their territory is threatened.

To avoid swooping, consider taking alternative routes during nesting season. Protective gear like sunglasses and hats can minimize the risk of injury, and adding fake eyes to the back of your helmet may deter attacks. If swooped, stay calm and leave the bird’s territory quickly.

While swooping birds can be alarming, they’re an important part of our ecosystem. So, as you enjoy the warmer weather, stay alert for these feisty defenders of their nests.

ADS Review – Neil White

As the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide prepares to deliver its final report on September 9, Commissioner Nick Kaldas has issued a powerful call to action, urging the government and the broader defence community to seize this “once-in-a-generation, possibly once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity to make meaningful change.

Kaldas highlighted the alarming fact that, despite nearly 60 inquiries over the past three decades, the suicide rates among Australia’s military personnel have not improved, with up to three veterans tragically losing their lives to suicide every fortnight. The responsibility now lies with the government to take decisive action, even if it means challenging entrenched bureaucratic resistance.

The Royal Commission, which has spent three years investigating the suicides of current and former members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF), has uncovered what can only be described as a crisis—a national tragedy. Kaldas emphasized the need for the government to finally confront and overcome bureaucratic inertia, stating, “We call on this government and succeeding governments to take the courageous step of doing what is needed, what is necessary, and what is right.”

Australia owes a profound debt to its service members, Kaldas noted. “Our nation is indebted to them, and that debt must now be repaid,” he said. The Royal Commission’s findings are stark: between 1997 and 2021, at least 1,677 serving or former defence personnel died by suicide—a figure more than 20 times greater than those killed in active duty during the same period.

Commissioner Peggy Brown voiced a harsh truth that has emerged from the inquiry: the Australian Defence Force, the Department of Defence, and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs cannot be relied upon to solve this issue on their own, despite any sincere efforts they may have made in the past. “We have seen too often that Defence’s default position is to defend Defence,” Dr. Brown stated, adding that much of the work done by these institutions has amounted to little more than “busy work,” giving the illusion of change without effecting real transformation.

The Commissioners’ message was clear: the government must accept the undeniable evidence presented by the Royal Commission and act decisively. Commissioner James Douglas emphasized that the changes needed would not only benefit the ADF and bolster national security but also provide essential support to the Australian families who have sacrificed so much for their country.

In response, Defence Force Chief Admiral David Johnston acknowledged the shortcomings of the past and committed to doing better. “We have heard where Defence has let people down, and we are committed to doing better,” he said. While progress has been made in some areas, Admiral Johnston conceded that there is still much more to be done.

The government has already taken steps to address the issue, acting on interim recommendations from the Royal Commission, including introducing legislation to streamline compensation claims for veterans and their families. However, the true test will be in the implementation of all the Commission’s recommendations.

Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie, herself a former soldier, echoed the urgency of the situation, calling on government and defence leaders to follow through on every recommendation. “Don’t just honour our veterans on Anzac Day—honour and care for them 365 days a year,” she urged.

The final report of the Royal Commission represents a critical juncture in the nation’s approach to military suicides. The government now faces a moral imperative to act decisively, ensuring that the sacrifices of Australia’s service members are met with the care and respect they deserve.

The Biden-Harris administration faces criticism for its perceived inaction against Iran despite reports of over 200 attacks on U.S. troops in the Middle East. These incidents include aggression towards U.S. Navy ships, interference with the Suez Canal, and support for hostile groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in the ongoing conflict with Israel. Additionally, Iran continues to commit daily human rights abuses against its own citizens.

Critics argue that by overlooking sanctions and failing to present a strong deterrent, the administration has effectively allowed Iran to carry out these aggressive actions. Moreover, allegations have surfaced that the U.S. government is not doing enough to combat Iran’s election interference efforts, which reportedly involve cyber operations and disinformation campaigns aimed at sowing discord and undermining trust in the democratic process.

Iran’s influence operations in the U.S. are reportedly on the rise, with some suggesting that the Biden administration’s policies, which include easing sanctions and unfreezing assets, have inadvertently empowered the regime. Despite these concerns, there appears to be a lack of significant response from the administration to hold Iran accountable for its actions.

Critics are particularly concerned about the presence of individuals within the U.S. government who may have ties to Iranian influence operations, raising questions about the administration’s ability to effectively counter Iran’s growing threat. This perceived leniency towards Iran has led to accusations that the administration is prioritizing its own political goals over national security.

The US could probably close down Iran’s election-interference activities, but more to the point, the administration has the same goal as the Iranian regime: it does not want Trump elected, either.

Overall, the administration’s approach to Iran is seen by many as insufficient, with calls for stronger measures to deter and hold Iran accountable for its destabilizing activities.