Even by the minitrue Australias colonization was not a genocide.
Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people (usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group) in whole or in part. The hybrid word "genocide" is a combination of the Greek word génos ("race, people") and the Latin suffix -cide ("act of killing").[1] The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group".[2][3]
The term genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin in his 1944 book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe;[4][5] it has been applied to the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide and many other mass killings including the genocide of indigenous peoples in the Americas, the Greek genocide, the Indonesian killings of 1965–66, the Assyrian genocide, the Serbian genocide, the Holodomor, the 1971 Bangladesh genocide, the Cambodian genocide, the Guatemalan genocide, and, more recently, the Bosnian genocide, the Kurdish genocide, and the Rwandan genocide.
It doesn't mention aboriginals.
Exactly. In the minitrues list of genocides Australian colonisation is not listed. Most likely because they can't apply the term Genocide to Australain colonisation.
That's not a list of all genocides ever. Here's another Wiki page that DOES reference that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples. I will agree that it's not very easy to apply it to Australia because it wasn't a single coordinated act, but you're not changing history by semantics.
That doesnt stop people screaming genocide at Australians. I'm very proud of the great country we've built in less than three hundred years. I do agree that killing is wrong but as stated in Rayzors links it was war. People die in wars.
No, it wasn't just war. You should look a bit more into the history of your own country.
Also look at the examples of genocide mentioned in that quote. How many of them resulted in the complete extinction of the population? How many of these groups have lower living standards compared to before the genocide? How can you not see how absurd it is to say that it's an "overall positive experience" because now their standards of life are better than 300 years ago and because not all of them died?