The US has long been ignorant of one of the arts of war: to know your enemy. For example, the decision to send combat troops to South Vietnam in 1965 was based on the premise President Diem was threatened by northern aggression rather than a southern reaction to his corruption and oppression.

The 2003 Iraq invasion was based on the false premise Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

Now, the US is teetering on the edge of yet another murderous attack, based on the seemingly false premise North Korea has developed nuclear weapons in order to launch a first strike on the US. However, the evidence is that North Korea is not suicidal, rather that it believes nuclear weapons are the only effective defence it has following decades of US threats and hostility.

America's priority is scaring allies into buying US arms, an electorate that is distracted from repressive domestic policies (and a flaky president), and enhanced US power and investment opportunities.

In Australia's case, as always in relation to the US, ours is not to question why, ours is just to do and die.

Paul Strutynski, Buckajo, NSW

One thought that has been going through my mind throughout the North Korea versus the US crisis is: in teaching and training, people like to use not only the stick but also the carrot. In politics and civic affairs, the same often applies as well. For the very good reason that in offering something approaching what the other person wants, you use the weight of their desires against their belligerence.

We have heard the Korean belligerence; we have likewise been treated to – and to some degree overdosed on – a rather more subtle US belligerence.

That's the stick. It's been in our faces.

Has the carrot ever been tried? If not, why not?

Why spend Aussie lives on US belligerence?

Wesley Parish, Tauranga, NZ

Interesting to see some of the letters in The Canberra Times complaining about why same-sex marriage is not legal in Australia. First of all, they should probably be blaming Bill Shorten, who opposed the promised plebiscite that the Liberal government took to the last election.

The Liberal government was voted in by the Australian people and this is one of their policies. I'm sure if they broke their promise the Labor Party would have a field day criticising them.

Secondly, Labor was in power for six years – yes, six long years – and what did they do about same-sex marriage? Absolutely nought, nothing.

If the Australian people were allowed to have had the promised plebiscite, we would have a result and everyone could move forward.

What is also worrying is the reasons put forward why we shouldn't have the plebiscite. This make-believe excuse that the LGBTIQ people will become victims is ludicrous. The same people point to countries such as Ireland that have same-sex marriage, yet neglect the fact that they got it through a plebiscite.

Some people may be opposed to it for their own beliefs, religious or otherwise. How will these supporters of same-sex marriage react if they don't get their own way? Hopefully, not in the pathetic way the Clinton voters in America and here sooked and sulked because they lost.

Ian Pilsner, Weston

Who knew? Marriage is so progressive now! There I was, indoctrinated into thinking that marriage was old-school and so out of fashion, like LP records and printed books.

Pledging a lifelong commitment to your other half – pffth! Get real. The only constant in lifeis change. The defacto setting for modern coupling was, well, defacto. Proven, it seems, by the higher percentage of defacto couples whose marriages failed to endure. Now, its back! Get on the new bandwagon, luvvies! Marriage is cool and hip again — once we can give it a little progressive rainbow makeover.

I wonder what other institutions are next in line for a progressive makeover?

Given the postal survey, maybe there will be a return to letter writing?

Handwritten, posted wedding invitations – oh, how progressive of you, dear! Such a lovely personal touch. No doubt you'll be capturing the special day on film?

Michael Crowe, Hawker

Your report ("Dutton abandons detention centre secrecy rules",August14, p5) means Dutton can't stop us knowing what happens in his vile prison camps.

Australia's penal laws (for refugees) remind me of what Edmund Burke said about England's penal laws in occupied Ireland circa 1600-1700.

Burke said the laws were: "Amachine of wise and elaborate contrivance, as well fitted for the oppression, impoverishment and degradation of a people, and the debasement in them of human nature itself, as ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of man."

A good description of Dutton's total power. The saddest part of his horror camps is Labor MPs remain silent lest they lose anti-refugee votes.

Cowardice – thy name is Bill Shorten.

What happened to Labor's Light on the Hill? It died of shame.

Meanwhile, Germany's Angela Merkel let 1million refugees settle in Germany.

The moral? If you want a job done well, ask a woman to do it.

I have a dream that, one day, you will be an Australian if you say you are.

Graham Macafee, Latham

After I'd stopped laughing at the idea of Barnaby Joyce being a New Zealander and therefore forbidden to sit in Parliament, I could only thank him for now agreeing with a point which others have tried to get people like Barnaby Joyce to understand.

Barnaby Joyce's father came from New Zealand, but Barnaby Joyce was born in Tamworth, NSW, Australia.

New Zealand law says that those like Barnaby Joyce are able to claim New Zealand citizenship. It therefore doesn't matter whether Barnaby Joyce uses Australian citizenship alone – he can always use another citizenship if he wants to.

He has another hole into which he can bolt, and Australia's constitution doesn't like Australia's lawmakers being able to do that.

Barnaby Joyce has done Australia real service in raising this matter, though.

Tony Abbott is also in this position.

He may well have renounced his British citizenship, but he can't do anything about his British father. Tony Abbott therefore has patrial status. Whenever he likes, he may go to the UK and have the benefits of UK citizenship all over again. He too has another hole into which he can bolt.

Tony Abbott's position in Parliament is therefore also wide open to question.

G.T.W. Agnew, Coopers Plains, Qld

The Icon Water price changes mean customers who consume less pay more per litre of water and some, who consume more, pay less per litre of water.

Most customers who consume less have less disposable income, and so the price changes are regressive.

Some people in small flats pay $30 or more per kilolitre of water when we take the total water and sewerage bill and divide by the amount of water consumed.

The original recommendations from the ICRC (Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission) were worse than Icon Water's latest changes.

The ICRC uses economic theories that justified a 20 per cent increase in electricity prices even though costs of producing and delivering electricity has gone down.

It is the same methodology that has brought us unaffordable housing. It is time to stop economists and their theories making a mess of our economy. We can start by the ACT government, as the owner of Icon Water, rethinking the way we finance infrastructure.

Icon Water is an efficient, well-run organisation and makes a profit. The profit from Icon Water goes to the suppliers of finance and the government. Icon Water could change the way it funds capital works so that customers get the $70million at present in profits currently going to the suppliers of finance.

The government share of the profit can remain the same. We could have a change of prices and give the finance profits now going outside Canberra tocompensate customers whonow pay a high per kilolitre price.

Kevin Cox, Ngunnawal

In the course of his second lengthy advertisement for Sir John Monash (Letters, August 12), Trevor Lipscombe includes the caveat that war memorials and museums "do not celebrate war".

Commemoration buffs like Lipscombe often say this but it misses the point. Only fools celebrate war. The bigger issue is how the relentless and repetitive remembrance of war makes war seem inevitable, particularly to younger people.

10 years ago, the historian Anna Clark, in her book History's Children, was surprised by the number of secondary school students who assumed a "militarised national identity" was "intrinsically Australian."

This number may well have increased since, with the hyped-up commemoration of the Great War centenary years ("Anzackery,"as it has become known), led by spruikers like Dr Brendan Nelson from the Australian War Memorial.

The common threads of commemoration have been sentimentality, euphemism ("the fallen," "the supreme sacrifice") and an emphasis on how Australians fought and died rather than on why and whether it was worth it.

That dishonest and limited vision of war sets us up nicely for the next one. Renaming roads and constructing new statues of dead soldiers serves this agenda perfectly.

David Stephens, Bruce

The letter writers who wax lyrical about the joys of autonomous vehicles puzzle me. I understand the promised safety advantages, though the blind faith that such technology will be faultless strikes me as rather naive.

Do many of these people hate driving and the pleasure that many of us get from operating a motor vehicle?

Do they really look forward to a bland future of sleek, nearly identical machines that supposedly will create some kind of Metropolis-like utopian city of the future? Are they drooling at the prospect of being able move about the streets and roads without ever having to take their eyes off their electronic devices? Or perhaps they relish the thought that they can squeeze in a few extra hours of work each week as they sit in their cocoons and surrender even more of their individuality to technology?

"Oh, brave new world that has such people in it", as Shakespeare wrote and Aldous Huxley quoted ironically.

Steve Ellis, Hackett

I heard Andrew Barr on Chief Minister Talkback on August 11 again brushing off another protester over the ACT government's plans to build public housing across Canberra's southern suburbs.

Barr chose to ignore arguments for community consultation and a mix of public and private housing.

Affected suburbs should follow the Lyons community and its battle with former public housing site Burnie Court.

Form a community association, house by house, street by street, start a suburban newspaper and become unashamedly political.

Lyons supported Greg Cornwall in the ACT's 1998 election and the Carnell government was returned.

Burnie Court was subsequently demolished.

Avoid community councils, which are just fronts for the ACT government and training grounds for future politicians.

Frank Boddy, former chair, Lyons Community Association, Lyons

DEAL WITH PIT BULLS

Pit bulls can kill and maim, leaving huge vet bills and trauma for the victims.

Solution: Require all pit bull dogs to be muzzled and on a lead in public, and be registered as a dangerous dog, if your dog is not muzzled and on a lead, the dog should be forfeited and destroyed.

ACT government, fix this now, before someone dies.

Vivien C. Hinton, Lyneham

ABBOTT OUT OF ORDER

Excuse me, Mr Abbott, but the proposed plebiscite has nothing to do with freedom of speech or political correctness, so don't try to pretend that it does.

Bruce Boyd, Bruce

TURNBULL FOLLY

Malcolm Turnbull states his top priority is keeping Australians safe. So what does he do? Sign up for an American war against North Korea before it has even started. His ineptitude knows no bounds. With a President like Trump the folly of staying in the ANZUS alliance has never been clearer.

Felicity Chivas, Scullin

OBSEQUIOUS P.M.

Malcolm Trumbull, Prime Minister of the Vassal State of Australia.

David Bastin, Nicholls

YES, NO, HO-HUM

With the outcome of the proposed plebiscite being of little direct relevance to most Australians and with neither of the major political parties committed to implementing the outcome, what is the point?

Charles Smith, Nicholls

SWEET REVENGE

With respect to the upcoming postal vote on same-sex marriage, Tony Abbott says those opposed to political correctness should vote no. Alternatively, I suggest that those opposed to Tony Abbott, vote yes.

John Galvin, Weston

HAKA FOR JOYCE

If Barnaby Joyce is found to be New Zealand citizen, and has to vacate his seat in the Australian Parliament, his departure should include a Maori haka performance outside Parliament House in his honour.

John Milne, Chapman

CHINESE CHECKERS

Perhaps there is some good to come out of China having a very lengthy lease on a substantial section of the Darwin port. North Korea might think twice about it being a target.

J. Woodger, Duffy

R.I.P. ALL THE WAY

All the way with LBJ! All the way with GWB! Now all the way with Donald J!

Disasters before! So what's different now? Nuclear disaster.

Marguerite Castello, Griffith

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).