[1] Native Title exists solely because the Commonwealth Of Australia says it exists and continues to have the power to ensure it remains in existence …… a matter that can be very abruptly changed with a few well-placed airstrikes and 152mm artillery barrages followed by drawing new lines and words on the maps.

[2] Nations and corporations [such as the East India Company] have always readily gone to war to conquer territory, to dominate strategic routes and to gain control of resources in the face of tremendous risks – be those risks casualties, loss of treasure or international condemnation. Not nice ….. but that’s the way the world works.

Australia has a wealth of unexploited resources [including water in northern Australia], a vacillating and weak government, puny defences and a tiny and docile population …. a situation that has, ever before in history, led inexorably to foreign intervention. Why wouldn’t any vigorous country or corporation want to hop in for their chop before Australia is “carved up like a melon” by everyone else?

Now …. about that apology for slandering me as a so-called “racist” …….

your comment displays no understanding of international relations or strategy.

:-0 oh dear, oh dear, you should have checked first …… how many eggs to you have left to put all over your face?

There’s nothing new in your happy delusions; they’ve been seen before “We don’t have a thing to worry about with those Japanese, they’re only short little men with buck-teeth who hiss at each other. They all wear glasses and can’t see in the dark. All they can make are celluloid dolls and cheap goods” [or words to that effect - about November 1941, I think].

All I did was make a practical comment on minimizing one of the risks to the future reliability of water supply for south-eastern Australia …… and you jumped in with irrelevant and abusive posts based on so-called “anti-racist” screeching from back in the ‘Seventies. I’m not going to waste any more of my time on your nonsense.

I am happy to discuss with anyone how to plan for securing long-term reliable supplies of water.

Regardless of what the internet says, your comment displays no understanding of international relations or strategy.

It doesn’t matter how big Indonesia, China, whatever yellow menace you care to posit gets, northern Australia is not going to be invaded, bought etc.

The reasons for this are manifold, ranging from the sanctions an act of war would bring, the casualities; economic, social, and demographic, to the fact that, as I have already said, the land is basically un-defendable and there is nothing there.

If, however, you think the evil nips are going to steal the land from right under our noses, I urge you to educate yourself by taking a look at this map.

It details the types of land use in the Northern Territory. Note the overwhelming amount of crown, freehold and indigenous land ownership. This land isn’t for sale, Graham, only for rent, and ever will be.

You’re right dude, I did imply you are a racist – what you said certainly stinks of it. I don’t know you, so presumably you’re making reference to the colour of your skin or something by arguing that I’ve got it all wrong. If this is the case, I don’t really see the relevance. The colour of your skin doesn’t, sadly, preclude anyone from being racist.

Of course the Colorado River is a good example of just about all the difficulties you could imagine.

That’s quite a sharp aphorism right there; it sort of belongs in Bartlett’s. It’s got a certain ring of metaphoric truth to it. Good one.

The only silliness here is in making grandiose plans to use water that may not necessarily belong to us when the time comes to put such glorious schemes – “pipedreams” – into operation.

[b.t.w. You implied that I was a bull-headed racist. Ooops! You don't know me personally .....so .... can I offer you a few tissues to remove the egg you've splattered all over your own face? L-O-L]

We must defend against these countries that can barely look after themselves – they just can’t wait to start an international war for the sake of some indefendable land, a bit of uranium and some bauxite!! Wooooo! Set loose the dogs of war!!!

That’s a silly statement, and if you thought about any of the realities involved, I have no doubt you would be uncomfortably aware of you bull-headed racism that motivates it.

I do agree about the futility of reversing water, but I would be more inclined to cite those engineering reasons you cited (along with environmental), rather than our evil, imperialist, slanty-eyed Fu Manchu neighbours to the north.

The emphasis should be on the buybacks. This is the cheapest way of getting rid of the irrigation water over-allocation issue.

In engineering terms it is quite possible, of course, but to do it you really have to own the land where all the rain falls on the first place.

Given Australia’s neglectful, inappropriate defence and foreign relations over the past few decades, what gives you the idea that Australia will continue to own any of northern Australia for very much longer?

Back to the drawing-board ….. and savour your grey-water.