General discussion


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 -

Critical juncture

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

Okay Julian, I guess I did kind of side-step the primary issue.

Yes, the US should not be dictating policy for any other sovereign nation.

Of course, since before WWI, the US has been doing just that through foreign aid and economic policy.

George W. Bush does not have the diplomatic skills that his father, or the late Ronald Reagan have.

Combine poor diplomatic skills, election year politics, and growing frustration with the situation in Iraq, and you get a politician talking to his core supporters, not the rest of the world.

I believe that President Bush knows that he cannot dictate policy for other countries. It just plays to the core Republican supporters to talk tough and take the lead by telling other countries what they should do.

The core conservative voters in the US DO believe that the rest of the free world should follow the US into whatever battles are deemed necessary to protect freedom.


Collapse -

But Chas

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Critical juncture

It was Ronald Reagan who called Australia a "State of America" when he was President.

Admittedly he was not a well man and it may have been nothing more than a simple mistake as Australia has been so closely aligned with the US ever since WW11.

I really do not wish to speak ill of the recently deceased but that was a bad analogy that you used there.


Collapse -

The Great Communicator

by TheChas In reply to But Chas


All I meant by the analogy is that Ronald Reagan had the skills and ability to make you feel that you were doing yourself a favor by following his advice.

George H.W. Bush had the knowledge to work behind the scenes to accomplish diplomatic objectives without having to make overt statements.

George W. Bush has neither of those skills.
Of course, it is his bluntness that endears him to many right wingers in the US.

As you have seen from some of the right wing supporters who post in this forum, there is a growing belief in the US that the US SHOULD be telling the rest of the world what to do. And, they better well do what we tell them to, or they are no longer our friends.


Collapse -

Sadly enough

by Oz_Media In reply to The Great Communicator

"And, they better well do what we tell them to, or they are no longer our friends."

Well after so many hard years building strategic alliances with your 'friends', such a process would be wasted as the tides turn.

The common reply when someone says they don't want to be your friend anymore, "Who needs friends like that anyway?"

To work so hard at building free trade agreements (which are not really in Canadians favour as you definitely got the better end of the stick, watch out Autralia)and then have your allies turn on you because you have turned on them is just schoolyard politics.

Many Canadians already resent the US for imposing themselves on others in an attempt to seem as if they are helping. The general concesus I've seen is that you should kep your country IN your country.

Of course by having all of your 'friends' operate similar governments you will have much greater ease at making America a more prosperous place even if at the expense of others. They will acept YOUR policies and ultimately become American.

While this may not seem so bad for an American, to others it appears monopolistic, greedy, sly, underhanded and completely arrogant and self centered. Some don't see this as looking out for Iraq's best interests as much as it is wrong to impose your government upon another.

Now, ridding Saddam's regime and allowing the country to tend to itself with Saudi support would have been OK, if well planned and globally supported. To just take matters into your own hands with some absurd justification just isn't sitting well with most. To then impose your government upon them is just going too far. Had these people requested global help in obtaining a democray well that would be a while different story, if globally supported of course.

Collapse -

But it now gets better

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Sadly enough

In a news report today 11-6-04 it was reveled that the US would not continue the free interchange of intelligence if the Australian Labor Party was elected at the next Federal Election latter this year.

It has just ben stated on a TV News report that AUstralia can not pick and chose what they want to do if they want the exchange of intelligence to continue {Sounds a lot like do as I say and do not question} is now the guiding philosophy that is coming out of Capitol Hill. Well with fiends like that who needs enemies.

Australia and America have literally been joined at the hip since WW11 when an alliance was formed between the US and an Australian Labor Prime Minister but now it seems that the current US Administration will only deal with a Australian Collation Government now days and that if the Australian People dare elect a different Party to power they will no longer pay nice with Australia. Just like back in the 1970 when after 20 years it was reveled that the CIA had a hand in the downfall of the then current Australian Labor Government under Mr Whitlam.

Well those nasty Americans just may have bitten off more than they can chew this time as Aussies tend to get a bit pissed off when told how to act.

What the current American Administration HAS TO LEARN that it is better to entice with a carrot rather than use a bloody big stick to beat you into submission, if a new government is elected into power at our next election I for one hope that they tell the current US Administration when they can jump off and get the hell out of Australia and that includes the proposed joint training facility at Shoal Water Bay for the troops and by all means Pine Gap as well as any involvement in any other US procedures like using Radio Telescopes for any NASA projects. Remember it was the Parks Radio Telescope that was the one that carried pictures of man first walking on the moon and they where prepared to wreck the thing in the attempt to get those pictures. If that telescope had been under American control at the time it would have been locked down to protect the investment and the TV pictures would never have been seen.

Now some here have claimed that I'm Anti American but I am constantly defending America from stupid statements that I run across daily about America being a great threat to the current World Order and other such rubbish touted by those who are really Anti American like the Confederate Action Party over here who are really Anti American but funnily enough take their name from the Deep South of America.

ANyway I've ranted on long enough about this but I am more than a bit pissed off by the current showing of the US Administration and the very poor manner in which they are attempting to influence Australian Politics. At the very least the Leader needs to understand that when he snaps his fingers we are not only required to jump but ask "HOW HIGH & HOW LONG?"


Collapse -

OK I'll be the ugly American -

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

So you don't like it when another leader critizes your elected leader hum - doesn't sit will in your chew hum - so mate - whats you going to do.

Lets see GWB had Germany, France, Russa and a few other critize him going into Iraq you didn't any post whimy about it ... But gee GWB makes a nice comment about your leader and all **** breaks loose.


Collapse -

Figure it out Jim

by Oz_Media In reply to OK I'll be the ugly Ameri ...

When others were saying they didn't want to fight with America and thought it was premature, YOU GUYS WENT CRAZY!!!

Spain are a bunch of whimps, France is full of whiny wimps that must be FOR Saddam, CANADA never wants to get involved but you all cry to us when you need help/ ETC.

SO YES JIM, you DID all go nuts when other countries wouldn't jump on your political bandwagon.

Now when it comes back on you, all of a sudden you are being picked on, POOR OLD AMERICA. Get F*****d Jim, you two faced clown.

You only see what others do to you but NEVER what you do yourselves. Innocent America who just wants the best for everyone and everynoe is just on thier case. Damn Left wing Commie, socialists, they never look at both sides, yet when left wing enws is reported your FIRST utterance is that it does not stand up because it is left wing commie biased crap, while at the same time bitching the left wingers don't listen to both sides and simply write it off as Republican garbage.

Would you pick a side and stick to it for Christs sake! You are all over the place, you have NO idea what you stand for, no idea what anyone is saying to you, no idea what people mean in their comments, no idea at all.

You should read back on your comments, there are MANY MANY where you say one thing then either criticize someone else for doing the same or simply change your mind by posting a contrary opinion.

Stand up and let your brain get some air or something, you make NO sense at all yet go on and on about the most ridiculous and irrelevant garbage.

Figure it out and get a grip, you're losing your mind. Isn't there some form of support you can get for Nam srewing with your head like this?

Collapse -

Spain and France

by JimHM In reply to Figure it out Jim

Spain support the Iraq invasion until they were attacked - then they went soft. France was doing back door deals with Saddam - for oil and didn't want to kill the deals...

Lets see I have a French assult rifle - never fired and only dropped once....

Spain - is cool -

You sir / madam are just a little bit off center - and need some help.. Why bring in the curse words - I didn't ..

Collapse -

Your are right

by Oz_Media In reply to Spain and France

Perhaps I didn't need to spout off with the profanity and for that Jim I do apologize.
Every post from you seems to eiether be calling the messenger an idiot, calling people political names as if in insult etc. You are the first person to discount someone's opinion if it is in any way different than yours. A fellow Republican would even be told he was a commie if he didn't agree with you. You cannot, will not and simply don't want to hear anything other than Jim's thought's, why not buy a diary and play solitaire?

I'm off center? Why because I don't like Bush, then I must be an extreme left winger or a commie socialist or something (as if that is some form of an insult to someone like myself who favour no party).

As for WHO I mentioned it is entirely irrelevant, the point is you wondered why people were so pissed that YOUR president had commented on another country's political practices before an election? Why the **** do you think Jim?

Now once again, MANY countries, in fact all but GB, were strongly opposed to the decision to attack as early as you did. UN unspectors were being successful and were properly inspecting AS THEY WERE SUPOSED TO, but this wasn't quite good enough for Bush as he just doesn't understand how people operate, as he has proven all his life.

So you elect a guy with no idea whoat he's doing and no world knowldge or skills then back him when he goes against the decisions of all his alies that actually do have experience in world affairs and have developed their countries over several thousand years. These countries that OPPOSED your decisions were slammed daily on this forum, were called every name under the sun and were practically spat upon for not jumping the gun with you.

You say "Lets see GWB had Germany, France, Russa and a few other critize him going into Iraq you didn't any post whimy about it ... "

I suppose you are saying that Americans didn't get pissed off when other countries criticized Bush?

You guys raised such a stir and slandered everyone for commenting on how YOU have a right to do whatever you want and others are just a bunch of wimps for not backing you.

Now you have the audacity to think your president can comment on anyone else's political affairs?

You already told the rest of the world they suck and will come crying when they need your help. How can you then expect to have YOUR political opinions accepted by another country?

You already told everyone to F-O and that they are a bunch of losers who don't care about their country.

Somewhere along the line you now feel that your president deserves respect?

Who is HE to turn around and comment on a upcoming elections candidates or their intentions?

If it was an Australian PM that was saying Kerry's policies were disasterour, do you not think that more than half of Americans would be fuming? I'd be watching it three or four times a day on six channels about how inappropriate the cmments were.

No Jim, look in for a change, it workd both ways.

Perhaps you will one day realize that people don't actually look to the US for answers as many have said here, we don't look up ot the US as you are just another country among many, the one that's always at war.

Collapse -

Not quite correct Jim

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to OK I'll be the ugly Ameri ...

What actually happened was the GWB criticized an alternative Leader of another country it is exactly the same as if John Howard {although he is irreverent} stood up and said that he would only support the US if GWB was elected and would cut all ties {if who is it now Kerry?} was elected at the next election.

This is quite a bit more than a bit of building up a supporter it is actually interfering in "DUE PROCESS" in another country and possibly being seen as attempting to swing an election for a supporter and deny all help if the other is elected.

I know you're better than this posting and I can only think that you want someone to point out exactly what GWB did wrong and how he should correct the mistake.

When Germany, France, Russia criticized GWB they where criticizing an elected leaders policy not attempting to swing an election in favor of a certain party after all there was no mention of the apposing potential leader being refused any support if required only a criticism of the current US Policies that is the difference and even the Ugliest American could spot the difference from a hundred miles away and know better than to go anywhere near that one as they are walking into a SHIT FIGHT that just is unwinable. In WW11 Field Marshall Rommel could never understand why the Aussie troops held Trobook when they where vastly outnumbered out gunned and no resupply they should have surrounded which was the reasonable thing to do but what he never understood was that the Germans had got the Aussies backs up by sinking their booze supply while letting in supplies of food and ammo. Now if only the rum had been allowed in there may very well have been a different outcome in Africa. But it all boils down to a very old adage "Never Piss Off an Aussie because it isn't worth the grief that will follow" the Japanese learn't this in New Genia and it was actually Australian Troops who inflicted the first defeat on the Japanese and that was what made them come to understand that they where not unbeatable and in all likelihood was the beginning of the end of the Japanese Conquests of WW11. A hand full of untried Aussies stood up against the best that the Japs could place and beat them back into the sea but only after caring their equipment through the worst possible conditions for 10 days and then standing and fighting a slow rear guard action that decimated the Imperial Japanese Army.

This is something that is unthinkable now days as even the best can only cross that track in a longer time with less weight on their backs let alone dragging heavy artillery behind them. That was something that even Mac Arthur though was impossible and he was beaten out of the Philippines by the Japs so he understood just how effective they really where.


Related Discussions

Related Forums