Asia-Pacific News
Australia maintains rage against Obama's Iraq policy
Feb 12, 2007, 0:03 GMT
Headlines from The Tech Herald
Talkback
page: 1 2
John Howard is as clueless as Bush as to the best option for their withdrwal in this lost cause. If Howard is so enamoured by the Iraq War, let him send more Australian troops. As usual it is AlQaeda the bogeyman. Tell the 200,000 dead, wounded and displaced Iraqis and others who have needlessly died since the US led invasion about the dangers of AlQaeda. Would all these needless killing and suffering be there if the unilateral US and its moronic sidekicks Howard and the liar Blair led invasion had taken place? Saddam may have been a killer but US has caused far more deaths and sufferings than Saddam during his dictatorship. Diplomatic steps would have been more humane than the warmongering actions of the three stooges, Bush, Blair and Howard. They will go down in history in the same category of mass murderers such as Hitler.
Bush, Howard and their likes ahe the real threat to this world. They are the true TERRORISTS. They hate western democracy and values and would like to do away with them much more than anyone else.
Obama slapped the guy down in such a genteel way.
Obama scores a few more points...
Hey, I think that you all are being far too critical of the Iraq war. As far as the 300,000 Iraquis that have died, well that's war. Many Iraqis invited the US coalition. Before you start arguing and pointing fingers at our elected government officials, then maybe you should look at the facts first and realize that Saddam Hussein was a serial killer. Only a heartless asadine idiot would want him to still be in power there. And to put them in the same category as Hitler is retarded.
I'm happy to see so many comments against Howard and his war-mongering imperialist buddies. As an Australian, I am embarassed so often when Australia follows the US in war or ignoring the Kyoto Protocols, and voting for (or not voting against) Israel at the UN. This article has the title 'Australia mantains rage....' but I think and hope most ordinary Australians are against this war. And as for the argument that Barrack Obama encourages terrorism, the continuing war encourages terrorism much more! And war IS terror.
When John Howard signs up his whole family to go fight on the front lines, patroling Baghdad streets, then his opinion will carry some weight. Until then he can keep his opinions to himself and hide under his desk.
Howard was right, unless you lives in islamic country as non moslem you have no idea what freedom really is, if you don't want to fight them over there, you will fight them on your own street one day.
Please read testimony of former Iraqi general George Sada on WMD.
http://www.amazon.com/Saddams-Secrets-General-Survived-Hussein/dp/B000G YI1QU/sr=8-1/qid=1171244199/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-4226595-4565669?ie=UTF8&s=b ooks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Sada
Mr. Howard would rightly resent any American interference in Australia's internal politics. Until Mr. Obama is elected, his positions are for domestic consumption. So, Mr. Howard needs to learn to be a bit more circumspect.
As for 20,000 troops being half his military - if he feels al Qaida is on a world wide vendetta, it might behoove him to increase its size rather than depending on the United States to protect him.
Its easy for the Democratzis to play Monday morning quarterback and second guess the President. At the time, most of them voted to invade Iraq, and now pretend like they had nothing to do with it, or were otherwise 'deceived' into supporting the war. This from the party that claims to be so brilliant as they deride the Administration for stupidity. Aside from running from the fight, we have yet to hear anything from them that offers a plan for Iraq. The nearest they have come to strategy is to suggest we open a 'dialog' with those sworn to murder us, as we abandon the Iraqis and run for home.
The Australians have it exactly right. The Democratzs have indeed become the party of the enemy. Despite all of their indignation at being accused of not supporting our combat troops, they have done nothing but offer aid and comfort to the enemy. They have politicized the war to the point were victory has become nearly impossible. They whined for more troops in the war, then ranted against the 'surge' once it was begun. Success in this war has never been in their interest, and they have done everything they can to prevent it. They are clearly the party of choice for terrorists, and they have proved to be predictable and dependable useful idiots for them. I'm sure they look forward to '08 with unrestrained glee.
Let Iraq deal with its own bloody mess. We shall defend ourselves when necessary.
Obama needs to get his facts straight. Furthermore, no one should have invaded an unappreciative country.
It's no secret that John Howard has long G.W.Bush's loyal lap dog.
Australia's contributtion role in Irap is supportive / non-combat.
Pershap John Howard should put his troops in combat zone
(like the US). When the body bags start fly home en-mass,
Mr.-Me-Too would understand the situation and stop messing
with other country's affairs.
God Bless John Howard, a man of vision if ther ever was one.
'Bush is a man of steel' We need more men like Bush to keep the crying democrats free.
If Downer wants to sleep with Bush and not Obama, how about we send
The numan nature is quite an amusing one...
Once the indigiones population in Australia and America was exterminated, stripped of all assets and locked up in reservation - the time has come to promote the 'human rights' in all other places, particularely where the oil or some other valuable 'national interests' could be found.
The British, if I am not mistaken, already have being in places like Afganistan and Iraq, way before 9/11 but surely due to some other not less importand calendar day - the Queen's birthday maube?
And the brave Australians always would folow and give a helping hand to their old masters or any new master - the old wone would recommend. So, when a new master called for help in Vietnam - the brave Australians where ready without asking too many questions. Except, maybe, what is the rate of return for a dollar spent...
'God Bless John Howard, a man of vision if ther ever was one'
Moreover, a man of a double-vision ... and double standards if I may.
What really pisses me off is not so much criminality of the West but the mask they wear to hide their real intentions and deeds.
What you have to know about John Howard is his racist background. His father and grandfather owned plantations in Australia's colony Papua New Guinea. On those plantations 'blacks' worked like slaves to gain a profit for his family. Howard has been reluctant to own up to his family's racist past although his has unleashed a number of racist policies in Australia.
I wonder what Bush official put the puppet John Howard on notice that he must come to the aid of the dying Bush Administration? If Mr Howard thinks that this is such a lovely war why doesn't he offer up 20,000 or 30,000 of those fearless Aussie troops to the slaughter. Whats the matter, chicken?
If the commenters on this thread don't think Saddam was a huge threat to the security of the middle east, then you probably were not around for the Iran-Iraq war, the Kuwait invasion by Iraq, the Gulf War(Where Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia were among our allies), the many, many UN Security Council resolutions finding Iraq non-compliant in honoring resolutions or their mandates, the many bombings by President Bill Clinton, gassing of The Iraqui Kurds, slaughter of many thousand of Iraqui Shia after the Gulf War, the burning of the Kuwait oil fields upon fleeing back to Iraq and those oil wells burnt for many months afterward. Then there is UNSC resolution 1441, demanding Saddam disarm and allow further inspections of the WMD programs. The UN Security council voted 15-0 to support action against Iraq, but France opposed military action, so did Russia and China. Turns out they were the three leading benefactors(along with Germany)in the oil-for-food program, administered by the United Nations to help Iraqui population. You all are hopeless if you can't see that after 911 the US tried for over a year to work diplomatically with Iraq through the United Nations. Can you see a pattern occuring with Iran today? The US will just get criticized by toe the line Socialist/communist/ liberal followers who don't learn the history or the facts, if and when military action is required. Please do yourself a favor and wikipedia United Nations Security Council resolution 1441--being informed is not easy, but well worth the investment of time.
page: 1 2
Most Popular Articles on M&C Today
- 1. 'American Idol' Recap: The night belongs to David Cook
- 2. Ashlee Simpson calls Britney Spears 'trashy'
- 3. Eight bank employees killed in deadly robbery in Philippines
- 4. Prince William's ex wedding
- 5. Tsvangirai: Presidential run-off date 'not on basis of law' (Extra)
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
chasemonsterFeb 12th, 2007 - 00:43:18
It is exactly because of incompetent sick-in-the-head neocon freaks like Howard and Downer and our very own imbecile Bush that we are in the mess we're in.
They screwed it up!!! And, they will NOT admit to their FAILURE!!!
They are NEVER going to let go of their phony little war in Iraq because by doing so they will reveal themselves as the bumbling fumbling blubbering fools that they are!!!
Report this comment