General discussion

Locked

Bush tries to dictate Australian policy ...

By jardinier ·
I don't know what kind of coverage the American media gave to John Howard's visit to America, but in reply to a question from a reporter from the Australian newspaper regarding Mark Latham's promise to withdraw Australian troops from Iraq by Christmas, if he is elected as Prime Minister before then, Bush gave a straightforward and honest answer which amounted to dictating what Australia's policy should be on this issue.

Not that Mark Latham will take any notice of this, but I think Bush should have said something like: "I cannot comment on Australia's foreign policy." or: "It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the foreign policy of another country."

Currently 63 per cent of Australians think Australia should never have gone to Iraq in the first place.

I don't think that Bush's comment will endear him to Australians.

Whilst Mark Latham has criticised Bush, he has not done so on a live telecast to the whole nation, and certainly not in a way that would be readily picked up by all Americans.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

41 total posts (Page 1 of 5)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Finish what we started

by TheChas In reply to Bush tries to dictate Aus ...

Julian,

Whether or not Bush is trying to influence Australian policy should not be the question.

Until Iraq has a functioning government and security forces it is short-sighted for ANY government to remove their troops from Iraq.

If all the foreign troops left Iraq tomorrow, the world would be at it's least secure point since the days just prior to World War 2.

Whether we should have invaded Iraq or not, now that we are there, EVERY citizen of the world has a vested interest in seeing the mission through to completion.

Iraq needs to be aided in developing a strong legitimate government. If we leave Iraq without a strong government, the entire Mideast region is at risk for civil unrest.

The best way to shorten the length of time needed to finish the job in Iraq is for EVERY nation to join in the effort.

The bulk of the "heavy lifting" is done. What we need now is the slow gentle work of forming a solid legitimate government.

To allow a new government to sprout and take hold will take a strong united show of force to stop the terrorists.

Every country that pulls out of Iraq strengthens the terrorists and places the world at higher risk.

Yes, we can still protest the war. We need to remind our leaders that going into Iraq was a mistake.

That said, we CANNOT compound that mistake by leaving before the task is complete.

Chas

Collapse -

Chas your totally correct

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Finish what we started

I couldn't agree more with your sediments we have to finish what we started even if it is an unpopular choice. Iraq is now the most unstable it has ever been with different factions attempting to gain power and there would be a wholesale Civil War if all the troops where to leave tomorrow.

We started this mess off and MUST FINISH it as well or we would be worse than Saddam Husein who at least had a form of control over the country even though it was not to our taste but it was under control which now it isn't. We can not leave until there is some form of established Government in place and I have no doubt that it will take many years for this to be a stable government as this kind of Democracy just has never existed in that area previously so they will need a lot of support for it to function and for many years as well.

Col

Collapse -

Your Crazy

by chameleon186 In reply to Finish what we started

Where is the other super power LOL. Nazi germany was a powerful force. Iraq your talking about damn near 3rd world there. Arab state nukes would never make the distance needed. Germany had massive forces air naval and ground and if you remember was trying to pioneer nuclear technology jsut never got off the ground. Nazi's was more than capable of reaching U.S. with it's forces. especially if they managed to biuld up again after europe. I think is what the problem is relates to lack of counter measures. there is still security holes in many systems. It's just a matter of time before one is breached. counter measures world wide will be the only ultimate solution. terrorist live everywhere they do not all come from iraq. They could be your nieghbors for that matter. You need a reality check

Collapse -

What did you read?

by TheChas In reply to Your Crazy

I don't know what you read.

The point of my post is that to reduce the ability of the terrorist groups to continue their attacks, we need a solid unified showing of force.

Not active fighting necessarily, but enough troops in open view that the cowards have no place to act.

The other point is that if terrorist leaders even believe that their attacks are convincing ANY country to leave Iraq, the number and ferocity of the attacks will escalate.

And yes, we are not going to prevent another terrorist attack against the US simply from making Iraq a free nation.

To intercept and capture the terrorists, we do need EVERY nation to be vigilant and share their intelligence information.

Chas

Collapse -

Obligations

by Oz_Media In reply to Finish what we started

Well at this point I must agree that pulling out for any reason would be almost as stupid as the war in the first place.

This was exactly what I foresaw when it started and one of the main reasons I didn't feel that SUPPOSED WMD were justification of such a massive and complicated campaign. We STILL have troops in Afghanistan, this was premature.

What's done is done, we've all been dragged into this next chapter in GWB's life whether we like it or not. Let's see it through and see him out the door so he can go bankrupt another oil company.

Only YOU can prevent re-election. (is that supposed to be hyphenated?)

OM

Collapse -

I think you mean ...

by jardinier In reply to Finish what we started

finish what the US started. A labor government would never have sent Australian troops to Iraq, and Mark Latham at the time seemed mostly concerned at the possibly thousands of children who were likely to die.

Howard felt obliged to kowtow to Bush because talks on free trade were also on the agenda.

What may also not have been reported in the American media was Howard's visit to California, where he met Governor Arnie, and has struck a lucrative deal (for Australia) to supply a massive amount of fuel gas.

I will have to disagree strongly with you on this one Chas. The US invaded Iraq prematurely, based on false information and without the sanction of the UN Security Council. Now it wants all these other countries to try and fix the mess they made.

Let America send more of its own personnel to Iraq, and not leave the job of tidying up to countries who considered the invasion ill-advised in the first place.

Everyone to whom I have spoken today agreed that Bush should not have made those comments about Latham.

You had better start getting used to Latham, as currently he has a far greater chance of becoming prime minister, than it appears Bush has of being re-elected.

Collapse -

A strong statement. Back it up

by sbi-limited In reply to Finish what we started

What America needs is for all of those who are ardent Patriots who have NOT had the opportunitty to serve in the Armed Forces (but feverously believe we should stay the course in Iraq), to immediately sign up and volunteer to go to Iraq until the course is complete. There are 4 branches to choose from. I'm told there's no waiting. I am a Vietnam combat veteran and I learned all about the politics behind Vietnam and I understand the politics behind the Invasion of Iraq. Back up your rhetoric. Go!

Collapse -

Help please

by Oz_Media In reply to A strong statement. Back ...

NObody in the world has been able to provide proof of the politics behind Iraq. MANY have offered proof surrounding SOME points behind Iraq, such as the Oil for Food program, WMD etc. even the president of the United States has not given a clear description of the politics or even the basic resons behiond the Iraq invasion as the focus and intent of the action has changed several times sice the initial invasion.

Perhaps you can enlighten myself as well as other TR peers here who have debated and shon proof behind MANY different reasons for the Iraq invasion. You seem to know more than GWB himself as he has never given a clear reason for this invasion either, not one that is justified and doesn't change a week later anyway..

Collapse -

And that quote was?????.,....

by Garion11 In reply to Bush tries to dictate Aus ...

....Bush gave a straightforward and honest answer which amounted to dictating what Australia's policy should be on this issue.....


Can you post it please??

Collapse -

Here

by Oz_Media In reply to And that quote was?????., ...

++++++++++++++++++++++++
From ABC Radio Australia
http://tinyurl.com/2esq5
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Australian PM ends US visit

The Prime Minister John Howard has wound up his fifth visit to Washington by defending the President George W.Bush against claims that he had intervened in Australian domestic politics.

John Shovelan reports from Washington Prime Minister Howard defended President Bush's stinging criticism of Mr Latham.

At a press conference yesterday President Bush said Mr Latham's proposal to withdraw troops would be "disasterous".

Mr Howard says his answer was consistent with the stance that he's taken.

Mr Howard is on his way to France's Normandy coast to mark the 60th anniversary of the D-Day landing.

He says Europe, should remember the sacrifice America had made in liberating Europe and the debt they owe the United States

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From Ireland Online
http://tinyurl.com/yvf5n
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Iraq pullout would be disastrous - Bush


US president George Bush, facing tough talks with America?s allies, has said it would be disastrous if they pulled their troops out of Iraq.

Pulling out, Bush said, would send the wrong signals to the Iraqi people and to terrorists. ?It would dispirit those who love freedom in Iraq,? he said.

Bush, standing alongside Australian prime minister John Howard, a strong ally on Iraq, made his comments at the White House before leaving Washington for Rome on the first leg of a three-day European trip.

Howard renewed his intention to keep Australia?s 850 troops in Iraq, despite political criticism in his own country.

?It is the worst time imaginable for allies to be showing any weakness in relation to the pursuit of our goals in Iraq,? he said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com)
http://tinyurl.com/2qnvp
Bush, Howard Agree Allies Shouldn't Pull Troops From Iraq


An Australian decision to withdrew its troops from Iraq by Christmas, as promised by the official opposition Labor Party, would be "disastrous," President Bush said Thursday.

"It would be a disastrous decision for the leader of a great country like Australia to say that 'we're pulling out,' " Bush said in response to a question during a joint appearance with visiting Prime Minister John Howard.

"It would embolden the enemy [and] it would dispirit those who love freedom in Iraq," he added.

A few minutes earlier, Howard -- whom Bush praised as a personal friend and U.S. ally -- said it was "the worst time imaginable for allies to be showing any weakness in relation to the pursuit of our goals in Iraq..."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You're welcome.

Remember, you have never actually shown ANY links or valid proof of ANY of your prior statements here when you have been asked to. Make sure you are willing to do the same in future when you start to rant.

Back to Community Forum
41 total posts (Page 1 of 5)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums