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.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Scratches head

by Garion11 In reply to Here

So Bush stating his opinion (which I think is a fact, but thats debatable) about a pull out of Australian troops from Iraq... How does that equal to Bush "dictating Australian policy?"

Collapse -

Well

by Oz_Media In reply to Scratches head

Australian policy is a decision that is completely up to Australia and it is politically incorrect for another leader to be so vocal against another politicians views unless they are running against each other directly. It's poor form, crass, arrogant, it's.....typically American.

If Mark Lathham had visited Bush and said that the invasion was "disasterous", this forum would be FILLED with pissed off Americans, probably responding to YOUR post on how DARE Latham show such disrespect to your president and his policies. You would be SCREAMING blue murder and crying yourself to sleep at night.

Don't even go there, we all know how YOU react to 'foreigners' speaking on YOUR government policies.

GWN doesn't LIVE in Australia how the **** does he know what's best? Isn't that YOUR analigy of people's comments from outside America when you are single handedly conducting a global effort?

Collapse -

Well several countries' leaders actually said that

by Garion11 In reply to Well

Yes we reacted. But the statement by Bush, there is no way it "dictates Australian policy" The headline for this thread should be, Bush was arrogant or something to that effect. Bush didn't tell Australians how to run their country. He simply stated the effect of a cause.

Collapse -

edit for the reply above

by Garion11 In reply to Well several countries' l ...

He simply stated the effect of a choice. Yes it would be disastrous for Australia to pull out. But by all means, please do if you must.

The difference between that statement and what other countries' leaders and people said and did to America was huge. Bush was called a Nazi, America was called the Great Satan, American people were called blind, French went behind our backs to African leaders to try to influence their vote in the UN, etc etc.

I just hope you Australians realize the only reason Latham?? is saying he will pull out Australia is to GET ELECTED. Not the other way around. I am sure he will do it, but there have to be other important issues in Australia besides your alliance with US, Where does he stand on those issues? or Is Iraq #1 issue??

Collapse -

One slight difference

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to edit for the reply above

GWB made a comment on a foreign countries Opposition Policy coming up to an election which appears to show support for the existing Prime Minister and a lack of respect for the other sides views.

And no Iraq isn't the number 1 subject here but then again Mark Latham hasn't been caught lieing to the country either for cheep political gain like at the last election where John Howard was caught out well and truely with his pants down but only after the election when the damage had been done> He has a habit of doing things like this so is it any wonder that Aussies get a bit upset when they see this type of thing that just isn't cricket mate?

Col

Collapse -

Once more you speak ...

by jardinier In reply to edit for the reply above

through the wrong orifice.

As Mark Latham (before he took on the responsibility of leadership) used to personally answer some of my emails, and send as attachments copies of speeches which he had made for publication on my website, I can assure you that he was totally against the invasion of Iraq even before it started.

He is NOT promising a pull-out just to win the election -- in fact he is jeopardizing his chances with this policy because, while 63 per cent of Australians now consider that Australia should not have sent troops to Iraq in the first place, they are also wary that Latham's stand on Iraq may sour America's attitude to Australia on other issues like free trade agreements.

As I have said, the alliance with the US was formed under a LABOR Government in Australia, and it is something that all Australians, including Mark Latham, value greatly.

However this alliance DOES NOT require Australia to agree with the US on all matters of foreign policy.

Collapse -

Europe's Debt to US (by Howard, PM of Australia)

by Garion11 In reply to edit for the reply above

Europe debt to US, says Howard
By Michael Harvey in Washington
June 06, 2004

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,9761652^401,00.html

JOHN HOWARD has issued a blunt message to European nations opposed to the Iraq war - never forget you owe your freedom to the United States.

As the US seeks European support for a fresh United Nations resolution guiding Iraq's post-war transition to democracy, the Prime Minister delivered a pointed reminder yesterday of the bleak future Europe would have faced without American help in World War II.

"Without the decisive intervention of the United States, the future of those liberated countries in Europe would have been very different," Mr Howard said.

"I think it's a lesson that should never be forgotten."

The PM's rallying call came in a speech to the National Press Club in Washington and was warmly received by the largely American audience.









It came as Mr Howard prepared to join world leaders - including US President George Bush, British PM Tony Blair, the Queen and French President Jacques Chirac - in Normandy for 60th anniversary commemorations of the D-Day landing that changed the course of World War II.

Although Mr Howard mentioned no specific European nations, France - the host of this weekend's ceremonies - has been a staunch opponent of the military campaign in Iraq.

"It (the D-Day commemoration) is an event that ought to remind the nations of Europe of the enormous debt that they owe to the United States," he said.

Mr Howard said he spoke as the leader of a nation that was one of few to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Britain during the dark early days of World War II in 1939 and 1940.

The PM used his speech, which concluded the US leg of his three-nation official visit, to mount an emphatic defence of Australia's military role in Iraq.

Asked about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, Mr Howard said he still would not change anything about Australia's decision to commit troops.

He defended Australia's relationship with the US, saying it did not come at the expense of other relationships with nations in our immediate region.

Collapse -

What spew!

by Oz_Media In reply to edit for the reply above

I can't believe that ANY leader whether right or left would make such an inaccurate statement.

"...never forget you owe your freedom to the United States."

This is the type of mentality you would expect from some kid who's dad has been feeding him overpatriotic crap. not a leader of an allied country.

Australia was at war in WWII before the US, as he has aknowledged. Does that mean Europeans owe thier freedoms to Canada too? Canada was the first country to land IN France on D-Day, before the beach landings, specialists in gliders landed behind the beaches to capture a bridge and hold it so that German troops were not backed up by armour. They were also the first to land on the beaches of France in Juno beach, met the strongest resistance and made it farther into France than any other landing on D-day.

Australia and Canada wer ein WWi for several years (nearlt 4) before the uS entered the war. The US provided NUMBERS of troops that helped change the balance of the war. Thier men fought hard and strong after they were bombed in Pearl Harbour, they came, they helped, they celebrated an ALLIED victory. But the world owes nothing to America that we don't owe ALL the allied countries for thier efforts. I praise the men and women of America who fought in the final year of WWII, I also praise Canada's efforts, Australian efforts and lets not forget the people WHO REALLY defeated Hitler, the Russians. Russia stopped Hitler dead, he was spread thin, his armies were unprepared for war in Russian climates, his ego got in the way and he lost his futile attempts to take Russia, thus having no recourse but to give up, he was backed into a corner by the Allies and Russia saw to it he couldn't get out of that corner.

We owe our freedoms to MANY countries and hundreds of thousands of men, too many men for Hitlers troops to wipe out. We won by united numbers not by someone's single hand.

To single out America as the ones to be thanked is in itself thankless. What an idiotic statement from someone with political control.

Collapse -

Furthermore

by Oz_Media In reply to edit for the reply above

I watched BOTH celebrations in Normandy over the weekend. The Queen attended both, Bush was at the Canadian/US tribute, Blair was at the UK's tribute, beither were in attendance together, whether for security reasons or simply political interests.

the display from France was one of undying thanks for the help the allied troops offered, they were in tears as they handed veterans flowers and greeted them with such warmth and affection, they certainly showed thier respects even though they have been shamed and verbally abused by the US for so many years. They were and are eternally grateful, what more can you ask them for?

I think BOTH celebrations were in excellent taste and paid respects to both the veterans and the modern society of the allies involved. It was very tasteful and respectful, do you now need blood from them in order for them to show appreciation?

Collapse -

US Industrial Strength

by ND_IT In reply to edit for the reply above

Most of what I read about WWII, and I do read and watch a lot of documentaires on the war. Historians refer to D-Day as the ALLIED effort to liberate Europe, not the US effort. Could have the invasion been sucessfull without US help? That is debatable. More troops and supplies sure didn't hurt, especially since more casualties were predicted then what occured. I believe Omaha beach was where there was more resistance because of the bombers missing their targets. All the allied nations contributed to a great cause, let's not forget that. But I will say this about my country; The industrial strength of the US was a huge factor in winning the war. We could mass produce weapons, tanks, plans, ships, etc. faster than the Nazi's. Part of that is because of the continous bombing campaign by the ALLIES to destroy German factories.

Related Discussions

Related Forums