To say I was excited is an understatement. I had joined the army at 17, and having only recently completed four and a half years of officer training I, like many of my fellow soldiers, was raring to go.

It was an excitement not shared by my mother. When I told her the news over the phone, the silence was deafening. No doubt she was thinking about what may lie ahead. Would I come home in one piece? Would I come home at all? Would I suffer emotional, mental or moral trauma? But these considerations were left unsaid.

Two short years later, while posted to an artillery unit in Townsville, my soldiers and I watched with great anticipation Prime Minister John Howard's press conference announcing the deployment of Australian forces to Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks. We thought we were going to a real war! To our great disappointment, it was announced that only special forces would be deploying to Afghanistan at that time.

Twenty years later, I am still shocked by my naivety, and the enthusiasm I once held for participating in war. Similarly, with the benefit of maturity and hindsight I am aghast at how in the rush to war, democratic principles can be ignored to support wars in countries where most Australians have the scantest knowledge of the history, the politics and the people, and which pose no threat to Australia.

That's why I, and other Defence Force veterans and their families, are signing the petition "No War Without Parliament", which is demanding a change in legislation to ensure the decision to commit Australia to overseas conflict requires both a debate in, and a vote by, the Parliament of Australia.

Currently the most important decision that any government can make - to go to war - can be made by one person alone, the Prime Minister. As a veteran, I think this situation shows a disturbing, if not disgraceful, disregard for Australian defence personnel - especially a disregard for the mostly young Australians who enlist. While they have done so willingly, and know that they may be required to kill, or risk being killed, injured or otherwise damaged in the service of their country, they are entitled to know that their lives will not be put at risk for political purposes in wars that should have been avoided.

This is especially so given how little soldiers know about the process of going to war. Defence familiarises its members on topics such as the Geneva and Hague Conventions, the United Nations Charter, the Laws of Armed Conflict and Rules of Engagement. But the processes by which Australia goes to war are covered in only vague detail.

Not that this concerned me, nor I suspect my peers, at the time. As a young adult, the how and why Australia went to war was not a question I even considered, despite a keen interest in and study of military history. I took it on faith that if, and when, a decision to go to war was made, the reasons would be justified, legal and democratic.

READ MORE:

The past 20 years indicate that on all three counts this faith has been misplaced. This is especially so given the evidence that the justifications for Australia's participation in the "global war on terror" were based on bright shining lies. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, nor did it have any involvement in the September 11 attacks. The Taliban was willing to hand Osama Bin Laden over after these attacks, an offer rebuffed by President Bush.

The recent morphing of justifications for the Afghanistan War, such as women's rights, highlights the underlying cynicism of Australia's great ally. Previously, in its ideological struggle against communism, the United States had done its very best to destroy the most liberal government in Afghanistan's history.

By any reasonable definition, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was illegal. Australia willingly involved itself in a war of aggression, which at Nuremberg some 50 years earlier had been described as the "supreme international crime".

Clearly, Australian governments have made poor decisions regarding committing troops to war. Decisions that have had, and continue to have, disastrous effects on service personnel, their families and the broader community.

Given the immense human suffering - including for civilians in the countries where we fight - how can we do better? The very least is to require both a debate and a vote by the Parliament of Australia on the decision to go to war, to ensure the full range of potential consequences are considered.

There has been no situation where Australia's security would have been compromised by such a process. A vote by the Parliament is necessary for our democracy, by ensuring accountability of the government to service personnel and the broader community. It is necessary to minimise the risk of participation in wars based on misleading pretexts, of dubious legality and, most insidiously of all, for domestic political gain.

And it is necessary for our service personnel to ensure the risks they take ultimately have the widespread support of the Australian people as expressed through the Parliament.