The war of words between Australian Prime Minister John Howard and US Presidential candidate Barack Obama spilled over into the Australian Parliament on Monday and culminated in a censure motion against the Prime Minister.
On the Nine Network’s Sunday program, Mr Howard slammed Senator Obama (D-Ill.) and the Democratic Party the day after Mr Obama officially announced his bid for the US Presidency and declared that, if elected, he would withdraw all US troops from Iraq by March 2008.
“I think that would just encourage those who wanted completely to destabilize and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory,” said Mr Howard. “If I was running al Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats.”
Senator Obama wasted no time returning fire at Mr Howard’s “cowboy rhetoric”.
“I think it’s flattering that one of George Bush’s allies on the other side of the world started attacking me the day after I announced my [presidential] candidacy,” said Sen. Obama. “I would also note that we have close to 140,000 troops in Iraq and my understanding is Mr Howard has deployed 1,400. So if he is ginned up to fight the good fight in Iraq, I would suggest that he calls up another 20,000 Australians and send them to Iraq, otherwise it’s just a bunch of empty rhetoric.”
On Monday, Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer told ABC Radio, “That would be half of our army. Australia is a much smaller country than the United States and so he might like to weigh that up.”
Australian Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd condemned the Prime Minister’s remarks and moved a censure (vote of no confidence) motion against Mr Howard, citing his “false statement” that terrorist network al Qaeda would be hoping for a Democratic candidate to win next year’s US presidential election.
“To accuse the Democratic Party of being the terrorist’s party of choice, this is a most serious charge,” said Mr Rudd. “To accuse the party of Roosevelt, to accuse the party of Truman, to accuse the party of Kennedy and Johnson … of being the terrorist’s party of choice?”
The censure motion also took aim at Mr Howard’s “gross insensitivity” for lecturing the US on whether or not to withdraw its troops, when more than 3,000 US troops had lost their lives in Iraq. The motion, which was defeated along party lines, further accused Mr Howard of damaging the Australia-US alliance by playing partisan politics.
“Mr Howard must not allow his personal relationship with President Bush to impact on Australia’s long-term alliance relationship with the United States,” said Mr Rudd. “The alliance … has prevailed with such strength and certainty because it has always been above party politics.”
Senator Obama also rejected claims that a US withdrawal would increase the threat of terrorism, noting that the Bush administration’s “own intelligence agencies have indicated that the threat of terrorism has increased as a consequence of our actions over there.”
According to an October 2006 poll conducted by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, this is a view shared by the majority of Australians. It found that 84 per cent of Australians believe the Iraq war has done nothing to lower the threat of terrorism.
Two-thirds of respondents disagreed that the war would lead to the spread of democracy in the Middle East, and 91 per cent said they believed that the Iraq war had worsened US relations with the Muslim world.
Executive director Alan Gyngell said the poll showed a strong trend in the attitudes of Australians toward the Iraq war. Referring to the Australian public’s long-standing skepticism about intelligence used in the lead up to the US-led invasion, Mr Gyngell told ABC Radio, “The debate seems to be over about the reasons that we went into Iraq, that is 84 per cent disagree with the statement that the threat of terrorism has been reduced by Iraq. There’s pretty strong agreement that is hasn’t worked.”
He also said that, “There’s a very strong view that the US has too much influence on our foreign policy.”
These sentiments were expressed by Mr Rudd yesterday in the Australian Parliament, when he said the Howard Government had spent too long following the lead of the Bush administration. “Mr Howard and Mr Downer as well have become followers, not leaders, when it comes to international affairs. And when it came to Iraq in particular, they just followed the American lead rather than doing the responsible thing for Australia and the world,” said Mr Rudd.
Prime Minister Howard is seeking a fifth term in office later this year and, like President Bush, he is beginning to experience a powerful backlash from the electorate who want a deadline set for withdrawing Australian troops. And like the November mid-term elections in the US, the unpopular Iraq war is shaping up to be a determining factor in the looming Australian federal election.
Mr Rudd, who has pledged to withdraw Australian troops from combat roles if he is elected, has said that “being a good ally … doesn't mean that you have to comply with everything the United States says”. He added that he would not “leave our ally immediately in the lurch” and would act only following “clear-cut consultations with the Americans”.
An AC Nielsen poll published on Monday gave Mr Rudd’s Labor Party a 16-point lead over the Howard (Liberal-National) Government, with Labor leading 58 per cent to 42 per cent on two-party preferred terms. Mr Rudd’s personal approval rating registered at 65 per cent – the highest by an Opposition Leader in decades.
He attempted a vote of no confidence in the prime minister in the Australian parliament Monday, although failed to carry the censure motion by 60 votes to 82. It was the 19th such motion Howard has faced since coming to office in 1996.
I would suggest the Australiam PM not comment on the American political process as most Americans are not too keen on foreign politicians meddling in our elections. Furthermore, I don't appreciate his injections that are both uninformed and perpetuate further divisions in America along party lines. Barack Obama has consistently worked toward bipartisanship in American politics in an attempt to remind Americans that whether conservative or liberal we are all concerned about our own safety and the safe return of our troops. So I would say if you want to create further political divisions do so in your own country and leave an excellent and intelligent politician like Barack Obama alone!
Written by Michelle from CA
on 2/13/2007
I'm endlessly fascinated by the insistence that those against the war are all a bunch of socialist/commie terrorist apologists. Except that if more than two thirds of the United States is against the war and upwards of 85% think it's resulted in LESS security and more terrorism, you run into a small math problem.
While horribly over simplified, you can break the US political spectrum into three almost equal chunks: 1/3 Democratic, 1/3 Republican, 1/3 "Other" or independents. I fall in that last category, by the way.
So while people like brushing the democrats with a broad brush, the numbers point to the fact that pretty much everyone here has spotted this war for what it always was -- a chance for the Shrub to to something his daddy couldn't in the first gulf war (oh, and to make money for his buds in halliburton). Of course, the fact that it was something Bush the Elder WOULDN'T do due to the heavy casualties on all sides, not to mention that horrid quagmire occupying a country tends to bring...
Yeah, W sure showed his dad.
So don't try making me out to be a socialist (as a Libertarian, that's about as opposite a belief system as I can think of at the moment) or anti-war (hell, I'm still enormously torqued that we dropped the ball in Afghanistan and STILL haven't captured bin Laden) -- I'm anti-stupidity. And I'm against anyone -- Australian or American -- being sacrificed on the altar of this war profiteer's paradise.
Written by Yohannon
on 2/13/2007
Obama's right about the Ozzie BS on the troups. Put up or shut up mate. Yeah the truth hursts. Like Bush being a pussy and running from Nam, just like his bum buddy Dickie. Fat and lazy more like, and a thief to boot. Only the armchair cowrads support this war and the old men that should know better. Leadership is about getting us out, now.
Written by Bruce at the DOD good 'ol USA
on 2/12/2007
I absolutely agree with PM Howard! He is (unfornately) right on the money. Not only would the Al Quida wait with baited breath for March 2008, but also all the other terriorist groups around the world.
Bush was arrogant and foolish to send even one of our troop members into harm's way,and he's still not satisfied. Only reason he did was to settle his father's vendetta, and he has miserably failed, at the tune of killed and maimed troops, the destruction of thousands of years of beautiful historical buildings, and the total waste and misappropriation of US money by the billions!
This entire war is a disaster!! And it's getting worse and worse each day..no way should we wait until March of 2008. All troops should be brought home NOW!
Written by Bonnie Merritt
on 2/12/2007
Here is a question for Mr. Obama and his fawning fans...who have contributed more serious effort, genuine/real/honest support and actual physical and mental sacrifice to the war effort? Australia's 1,400 troops? Or America's 140,000,000 democrats? And don't give me the blarney of democrats still funding the war. That is pure politcal calculus on their part. Now that it is not politically expedient, they are trying to de-fund and withdraw ASAP. So, what is the answer to the above question?
I'll take 1 Australian troop for every 100,000 democrats any day.
Written by Michael York
on 2/12/2007
I am a Democrat and, thus far, a supporter of Senator Obama. However, I am wondering what kind of a message it sends to the troops on the ground, who are sweating it out on a day to day basis, that the Senator would pull them out so quickly?
I would love to hear his answer to this.
Written by Emeline Ingersoll
on 2/12/2007
Obama is 100 percent right and I noticed a lot of military veterans on this site but you fail to mention how many of our soldiers hate being in Iraq. We have lost 3000 soldiers and still counting and what is really being done in Iraq, some of my friends just came back from there and they already said it's a waste of time. The Sunnis and Shites want to fight each other let them and then why not go in and clean up the mess and then stabilize Iraq. I just feel it's a shame that so many poor white, african american, latino, chinese and various cultures are losing their lives and no political person has their child in Iraq. In two years when Bush is out of office what can we really say the death toll will be way over 5,000. Iraq will still be destablized and Bin Laden would not have been captured and the Taliban will be back in power.
We can use all the words in the world to cover up the real issues but the bottom line is the end result and in two years can you actually see an end result?
Think about it.
I also don't believe Hilary should be elected I am tired of the last thirty years Bush or Clinton as president likes get a new person in power that can change the course of america.
Written by Military Vet
on 2/12/2007
For all the sheep who call Iraq war illegal etc I have one simple question. How come the Balkans war unleashed by US, and EU at the behest of Muslim world was legal ?
We invaded a soverign country with "human rights" excuse when we have done nothing in worst situations in Darfur, Kashmir, Tutsi-Hutu etc. The net result was a terror enclave called Kosov at the door of Europe implicit in supplying bombing material both for the Madrid, and London bombing.
People who oppose the Iraq war are biased, lack the courage to face reality of an civilatioanl conflict, or are connected with Saudi money- this includes two past US secretary of states- Madelien Albright( US port deal), and James Baker(Lifelong Saudi plus the attorney for Saudi in their suit against 9/11 families in US). Saudi, and other Wahhabi are also funding the Sunni death squads repsonsibel for most coalition deaths.
Written by Anil Dalpat
on 2/12/2007
John Howard is absolutely correct, that gives him a right to an opinion. Brave Australians have been killed in this war, that gives him the right to an opinion.
Australians have been our strong allies since we were attacked, they have fought on in Afghanistan as well as Iraq and they have been bombed in Bali for their trouble. We owe them a debt of gratitude, as well as the other members of the coalition who have stood with us, some far more reluctantly then the Australians.
So it embarrasses me as an American to see ungrateful idiots denigrating John Howard. Especially for telling that pandering, substance-less, unelectable child Barack Obama not to undercut the mission when there are still Australian (and American lives at risk.
I just wish our politicians had such clear vision and courage to articulate it, and that we didn't have a population that just wants eye candy and butt kissing.
Regardless, well said Mr. Howard.
Written by Bill Grant
on 2/12/2007
Read a transcript of any recent Bin Laden or Zawahiri tape or read a transcript of any speech Ahmadinejad grants a western media outlet. If you read most of these transcripts without knowing the speaker, one would conclude they are reading the words of a democratic presidential candidate. Face it, you quislings, the enemy is counting on you, is talking to you and is sounding like you. OF COURSE they want Obama and his kind to win!
Written by Kim Lawlor
on 2/12/2007
Bill Grant is an Idiot. Send out troops home where they belong.
Written by US Citizen
on 2/12/2007
I think you mean Obama would withdraw troops by March 2009, not 2008. He can't be elected before November 2008!
Written by
on 2/12/2007
I am sure that Howard would not like American money, movie stars, tourists, spinsters and politicians to interfere in Australian domestic elections. Yet he encourages that with his ill-thought out incendiary remarks. Barak Obama is a US Senator, the member of the majority party in the US Senate and US House of Representatives and to which more Americans belong than the Republican party. It might be smart for Howard to remember that Al
Gore, the Democratic nominee, got more votes than Bush in the last
presidential election (the electoral college process gave the election to BUSH), so the MAJORITY of ÅMERICANS are maligned by Howard's remarks in defense of a lameduck Republican president
s policies which are now, based on opinion polls not supported by the Americans or Australian majorities. Dumb, rude, and outrageous, Mr. Howard. This could be a forecast of"Howard's End"
Written by An American Democrat
on 2/12/2007
John Howard may be playing race politics by attacking Obama. Australia, and John Howard in particular, are not exactly open minded about people of color. Other candidates running for president of the U.S. have advocated pulling troops out of Iraq, but John Howard did not mention them. Given that his opinion ratings are in the toilet, John Howard may be playing the race card in Australia to boost his ratings by attacking a Black American. In any case, he needs to mind his own Aussie business. If there is anything Ameircans resent, it is interference by outsiders in our elections. Nevermind that we do it all the time to other countries. We just hate it when others do it to us--so butt out John Howard!
Written by CVA
on 2/12/2007
I wish Kevin Rudd would go and do something useful and piss off.
Written by Luke
on 2/12/2007
Personally, I think John Howard needs to mind his own business and stop meddling in our affairs.
Written by Jar Jar Binks
on 2/12/2007
Howard is a racist, and a very stupid one and that. Before the Bush-self-serving Iraq War, terrist organizations had no footing in Iraq, but now Iraq becomes the playground for various terrist organizations. Is Howard blind so that he cannot see? No, he's simply trying to mislead. And Obama is absolutely right to invite Howard to send more Australian troops to Iraq if Howard really belives what he said. Like a stupid PM, like a stupid FM. That stupid FM of Howard even said that because Autralia is a smaller country so Obama's suggestion doesn't hold water. Ha ha, 1,400 Australian troops vs 140,000 American troops in Iraq? Does Australia have a population which is 1/100th of that of America?!
Howard, if you think American blood is cheap, think again.
P.S. One comment claims here that Howard is right because there has been no terrist attacks in America since the start of Iraq War. Before you said that, you have to prove that there would be terrist attacks in America without Iraq War! You think people're stupid or what?
Disclaimer: I'm an Asian living in the States.
Written by Hsing Chen
on 2/12/2007
Dear Sirs:
Bravo to Mr. Howard to seeing and saying what is not politically correct to even think here in the States due to Mr. Obama's colour and religious Muslim upbringing. You have to see the media push for Obama; a man who has zero political experience, zero diplomatic experience, thinly veiled reverse racism, being pushed as the next Bobby Kennedy! The best minority candidate for President is Governor Bill RIchardson, a man with golden diplomatic and political credentials is getting no press because he is not in the extreme left and is only Hispanic and not black. The "America Haters" in the far left of the Democrat party have a true Manchurian Candidate in the works for the US presidency. The PM is a "Stand Up Guy" for speaking truth in the face of this orchestrated media love fest for a dangerous man with secretive and dangerous ideas.
Be well and God bless,
Dr. William Wong
Written by Dr. William Wong
on 2/12/2007
Mr.Howards needs to "Mind His Business". Is his son or daughter in Iraq? George Bush does not have any relatives over there so he doesn't care. And let us get one thing straight, Obama is not against the soldiers -- he just wants them home early before they die.
Written by Angie
on 2/12/2007
John Howard is a champ. Sometimes the truth hurts, as in this case it seems to have hurt mr. Obama. it is understandable that he takes offense at the strong language Mr. Howard has put forward but unfortunately it is the ultimate truth, and some things can't be said as nicely as everyone would like. So keep it up Australia, keep it up America and hopefully some of this responsible activity will rub off on Canada, who sits back and enjoys the safety others provide while criticizing those who risk their profession and their reputation to do what is right.
Written by Calvin
on 2/12/2007
Here's a gentle reminder for those with a short memory. At the onset of the war in Iraq, anyone opposed to the war was told that "you are either with us, or with the terrorists." Since then, history will reflect that the leaders we were supposed to be "with" had sold a war based on lies and bad intel. The Middle East is more unstable than ever. 3000 Americans have lost their lives, (my nephew being one of them), and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have died. There are several corporations that should be charged and tried for war profiteering. Is this what civilized people call a success?
The only way peace will ever be acheived is through diplomacy and dialog. A good example should be demonstated by our world leaders.
Bring them home NOW! Obama '08
Written by Lory
on 2/12/2007
It's "censure" not "censor". The headline is wrong..
You're on google news right now, so you might want to fix it, lest not look like you learned to spell at George W. Bush University.
thanks!
Scott Beibin
scottb@lostfilmfest.org
Written by Scott Beibin
on 2/12/2007
Im sorry the majority of war monger who read this article wont get it. Mr Howard, you are wrong sir and you might just worry about your own election issues, much less ours. As for the gentleman who suggested 'weighing it up' if the size of your country dictates your military contribution, shouldn't your voice in the conversation be proportional as well? And to the gentleman in the army.. im sorry you feel that way. I would have thought that you would have developed a clear perspective and not what I perceive to be slanted.
Written by Langston
on 2/12/2007
Austrailia can't possibly be only 1% the size of the US, so why do they only have 1% of the troops? If sending 20,000 troops to Iraq would be sending half their army, then they "owe" us some troops since we've sent our entire army there.
There's no proof that Iraq has any specific terrorist associations other than those that we've fostered by starting that war. So why would pulling out help the terrorists? If we pull out they don't have the fertile politcal stance they've been using and they won't have the automatic sympathy of those in Iraq that have been helping them.
Written by R. Schofield
on 2/12/2007
Howard knows the greatest threat to the survival of Western Civilization doesn't come from without, but from within. More western leaders are needed to call out the utter relativistic insanity pervading the feel-good, unserious western socialists. We will never win another conflict, nevermind war, as long as military might is made impotent by the weak-kneed among us. Obama's platitudes are safe and easy and sound good. Men like Howard are unafraid to make serious statements in a serious world. Does anyone really doubt what Howard said is wrong? That those who would harm us prefer democrats to republicans? Please...
Written by Joseph Iruku
on 2/12/2007
I am sorry that Mr. Rudd does not get it. I am also sorry that Sen.Obama does not get it. As a army veteran I do understand that giving the enemy any kind of hope is wrong. Not only is it wrong but extremly dangerous. Though I do not agree with the war, I will stand behind our soldiers 100% and hope that our fine Senators, and some Republicans remember their words are heard by the enemy too. PM John Howard I salute you Sir.
Written by Jack
on 2/12/2007
Censure in the headline, not Censor, please.
Written by Mike
on 2/12/2007
Its about time someone from the AficanAmerica comuinty stood up for the Good of our country, that will contuine to pave for our future promies for the Generations that will come, God Bless America, And this Young Man is The Blessing that USA need for keeping the promies, Lets not loose our vision.
Written by Antonio Ford
on 2/12/2007
It seems to me the United States has had no terrorist attacks since invading Iraq. Does anyone remember WWII? There was censorship then and no daily body counts under democrat presidents. If the same policy in effect now had been used then, the average daily body count would have been more than 900. Or to compare that with Iraq, there were more killed every month in WWII than in the entire four years in Iraq. Should the U.S.A. have pulled out after the first month and left our allies to fend for themselves?
Written by Richard Bradley
on 2/12/2007
Bill Grant is an idiot.
Written by Ryan
on 2/12/2007
Howard is a racist, and a very stupid one and that. Before the Bush-self-serving Iraq War, terrist organizations had no footing in Iraq, but now Iraq becomes the playground for various terrist organizations. Is Howard blind so that he cannot see? No, he's simply trying to mislead. And Obama is absolutely right to invite Howard to send more Australian troops to Iraq if Howard really belives what he said. Like a stupid PM, like a stupid FM. That stupid FM of Howard even said that because Autralia is a smaller country so Obama's suggestion doesn't hold water. Ha ha, 1,400 Australian troops vs 140,000 American troops in Iraq? Does Australia have a population which is 1/100th of that of America?!
Howard, if you think American blood is cheap, think again.
P.S. One comment claims here that Howard is right because there has been no terrist attacks in America since the start of Iraq War. Before you said that, you have to prove that there would be terrist attacks in America without Iraq War! You think people're stupid or what?
Disclaimer: I'm an Asian living in the States.
Written by Hsing Chen
on 2/12/2007
Several White Democratic presidential hopefuls have called for a pull-out of troops from Iraq, but Australian PM Howard must not have heard these other supporters, instead he has zeroed in on Obama, the only Black candidate.
Is it that Howard is just showing the racism that Australians were once famous for?
Written by George Simms
on 2/12/2007
Howard will be just washed away with Bush in the history. Those who kill innocent people ro speread democracy in a UNDEMOCRATIC way is nothing more than a blood sucker vampire. Australian need to do the right thing, just sent Howard to Texas Ranch to clean some Bush.
Written by Cohen
on 2/12/2007
We must thank Mr. Howard for pointing to the disloyal among us. It would seem we Americans are afraid to face them down. In consequence, we will lose another war against another utterly amoral ideology---and with it we will jettison more of our self respect and capacity. The presumed success of the Democratic Party will accelerate our decline into British-like dependence and degradation. I could die of shame.
Written by Don Carlson
on 2/12/2007
You stand with American Traitors, or you stand with American Patriots.
Currently, Mr. Howard stands with those who aid and abet American Enemies.
Written by lonnie
on 2/12/2007
Actually, Obama is only running up for the candidate of Democratic Party, he has not been as an American President and even President candidate of Democratic Party yet! It is ironical when Mr Rud criticised Mr Howard's opinion on Obama.
Since we are living in democratical countries, Howard has right to criticize Obama's opinion like Mr Rud, Brown, Kim and others have right to criticise Mr Bush on Iraq.
Written by Michael
on 2/12/2007
John who? Howard is about as relivent as yesterday's left over potatoes & everything he says as well.......:)
Written by GB Illinois
on 2/12/2007
Just a question: The US Presidential Elections aren't till Nov 2008. So are you certain that the quote: "If elected, he would withdraw all US troops by March 2008" is correct?
Written by Peter W. Roel
on 2/12/2007
I can't understand why the "terrorists" in Iraq would be so happy about a US withdrawl. The whole point of september 11 was to kill as many Americans as possible while doing as much economic damage. They understood they couldn't kill all of you, so they were attempting to undermine your economy as well. As long as you stay in Iraq, they have easy access to Americans they can kill, they have a great recruitment pitch (fight the imperialist heathens in Iraq!), and you have to shill out 90 billion a month for the dubious privilige of bringing democracy to people more concerned with killing their friends and neighbours who don't see Islam quite their way. 9/11 was a wildly successful fluke they can't ever repeat (every flight would become flight 93), but now they have an even greater success: the Iraq war. I suspect the terrorists will pray Obama loses so that the "evil empire" can continue to bleed itself dry. Way to help the terrorists.
Written by Grisha
on 2/12/2007
Howard is right about Democrats. Most Democrats are uninformed. Study the past 25 years of Iraq's history before making any comments. Most Dems can't tell you one thing Obama proposes, except this blip regarding pulling out the troops. The UN refused to do the right thing regarding resolution 1441 before the war in 2003. Research the oil for food program and see that France refused to support use of force against Iraq as proposed 15-0 in the Security Council. Too bad Russia, China, Germany and France were well invested in Iraq, or there could have been a diplomatic solution, perhaps. Look now to find the lack of support by the EU and NATO to fully contribute adequate troops to Afghanistan. These wars are crucial to stop Muslim extremism, to send a strong message that the free world won't cave to the demands of the likes of Al-Queda, Hezzbollah, Hamas, or the myriad of splinter groups around the planet. At least Australia has the nerve to change its immigration laws to require immigrants to learn english and Australian history to help encourage assimilation.
Written by Bradl
on 2/12/2007
Reading Howard's statement about Mr. Obama made me want to boycott Australia. I can vote in the US; overseas I can only vote with my American dollar. I teach college. Many of my students are active duty or retired veterans. And yes, most are men and women of color or the first generation of their family to attend college. I've seen a Special Forces veteransweep and tell me, "I will go to hell now for what I've done." When I offer the plea "following orders," he says, "I'm the one who put my finger on the trigger." He takes moral responsibility. Billionaires of the world benefit from this invasion; the poor die, are maimed, and lose their children.--Terry D
Written by Terry Darcy
on 2/12/2007
Kevin Rudd has his head up where the sun doesn't shine. He knows damn well the enemy wants us to withdraw he just won't admit it. He's just using this nonsense for political gain. What a panty waist he is. He needs to get in the real world not the socialist one he lives in or desires.
Written by Dave
on 2/12/2007
No one can define "victory in Iraq" because the whole thing is a shuck.
Just imagine, going to war for one reason, then admitting it was all a little white lie, and making up new reasons. The ugly fact is that not one person has been able to explicate what "victory in Iraq" would be, it's all an emotional illusion, an hallucination, mass hysteria.
Bush does not understand Iraq, of course, does not speak the language, has no understanding of its significant place in the long history of civilization, as shown by his idiotic "training" of Iraqis, as if putting them through military drills is something they've never done before? And as if running their own country is something new to them? This is the land of Hammurabi and the earliest human civilizations.
Bush is the "emperor with no clothes", and Howard is still remarking on the finery. Some folks can see, the scales are off their eyes, can see him in all his intellectual vapidness.
But some still imagine Bush makes sense, and think that "we can't leave before the job is done". But they cannot tell us what their word "job" means. All they can repeat is some tripe about "a free Iraq" (and what is free?) "able to defend itself" (just as it was under Saddam?).
Elections don't make sense when everyone just votes for their tribal leader: this is a country run on principles that precede western "industrial democracies". But some, like Howard, blather on, making fools of themselves.
Written by Doug Korthof
on 2/12/2007
Who is a better Crony of Bush Howard or Blair ?There should be a Poll in UK and Australia.
Written by arunmehta
on 2/12/2007
Mr. Howard has simply stated the obvious and his fellow countrymen condemn him. While I'm weary of the international bash-bush month, the majority of Americans are envious of Australia's strong stand against islamo-terrorism in the home land.
America has "houses of worship" filled with thousands of muslims chanting in the streets. "there is no god but allah and hezbollah is his army". The fact this isn't happening in Australia is a credit to Mr. Howard's leadership.
jeff kelley
san diego, ca
Written by Jeff Kelley
on 2/12/2007
I can't believe this!!!!.....Are we forgeting just this short time what was the reasons why Bush was shouting "WAR", "WAR", "WAR" towards Iraq? If you already don't remember....it was over a false alligations that Sadamn has nuclear weapon or planning to build one and that there was connections between Sadamn and Bin Laden. Are any of these alligations true???? The answer is: "NO", "NO", "NO".
So, if the entire "WAR", "WAR", "WAR" was based on false pretence, is it acceptable for more young brave Americans or even Auzzie soldiers to die on this war? Mr. Howard, do you know how it feels like to lose a son/daughter, husband/wife, brother/sister, friend etc to a war that was not necessary in the first place? Mr Howard, are Iraqis people living in better conditions today than before this war? Mr Howard, do you think before you speaks? Mr HoWARd, do you think because your name have "WAR" in the middle means that people should follow your war thinking? Do you really believe in yourself why you're supporting Bush? The answers to all these questions will be: "NO", "NO","NO".
Written by I love America.
on 2/12/2007
I can tell 'ol Howie 'good on yer mate' we would'nt have a job without all his hot air. Mind you neither would Osama and the rest of them, We think he's nearly out of a job not mention his head so we have to keep posting the same old stuff on these websites. I have it right here, it goes like this - 'The terrorists in Iraq are feeding on the traitors who don't want to see another pro war oldie bashing the peace makers who just want to appease the terrorists, etc, etc' Its getting boring. But then so is 'ol Howie. Put some panties on mate and ship out to the fight. Ours boys have done enough. Time to clear up the mess you've made yourself mate and shut the f**** up right.
Written by Bruce at the DOD good 'ol USA
on 2/12/2007
Emeline your comments are a joke! The Democrats arent the only ones funding the war, the whole US is. We're just sick and tired of seeing our troops getting wounded and killed everyday. If your prime minister wants to continue the fight in Iraq than let him. To answer your question, it wasnt the 1,400 Australian troops, its the 140,000 Americans. Sure you guys have been a great help, but I'm pretty damn sure the US has taken the brunt of it.
Written by US Citizen
on 2/12/2007
Howard is bordering on interference in our elections.
Where did Aussies get this person? It makes Australians look bad, to keep this Howard person in power, representing Australia to the rest of the world. Many folks will not forgive Australia for allowing Howard's interference.
Written by Doug Korthof
on 2/12/2007
I think the word in the headline should be CENSURE. And so it should be. It seems like such an uneducated, uninformed thing to say - pity it's coming from a national leader. (Not that US leadership sounds any more intelligent.)
Written by David
on 2/12/2007
Unfortunately, PM Howard is another puppet of the Bush administration. At this juncture, it won't matter what ones political affiliation is in the U.S., since Bush has trashed the reputation of the U.S. around the world, through his arrogance and utter disregard for researching the truth. General Powell tried to warn him several years ago, but hey, General Powell was "reeled" back into line by Bush's political cronies. As we move forward, why hasn't anyone thought of IMPEACHING Bush for war crimes, fraud and totally misleading the world? You can impeach former President Clinton for oral sex with a cow, but not Bush for the direct killing of 3,000+ U.S. troops and countless Iraqi innocents? Come one people ... get real.
The unfortunate truth is that withdrawing all of the U.S. troops at this juncture would be tragic. I believe the troops should scale down by 30-40 percent. The allies of the U.S. should *bolster* their troop levels to up the forces to a level of at least 200,000. With the allies help and backing (both troops and funds), the force as a whole should act in humanitarian / peace keeping ways, versus trying to be the world's police force. The allies need to pull back and let the Iraqi's clean up their own mess, with guidance (when asked for) from other countries throughout the world.
Emphasis needs to be placed on uniting all of Iraq's sects, to resolve their unique political issues. This conflict cannot be resolved MILITARILY!!! If the Iraqi's themselves do not try to take OWNERSHIP in their future, then the country is doomed.
Lastly, those of you who want the troops to stay in Iraq should go ENLIST in the military and go to Iraq and "express" yourselves. Until this becomes a "personal" issue for the "arm-chaired" politicians, this war will continue to spiral out of control. President Bush, his *Daddy* and Dick Cheney need to experience this directly. Either send your own loved ones into the fray or work steadfastly to get everyone else's loved ones out of this.
IMPEACH Bush and his cronies!!!
Written by Concerned Citizen
on 2/12/2007
I found it annoying that the Austrialian Prime Minister will indulge in insulting Senator Barack Obama and the US Democratic Party.
In fact what the Bush stooge meant to show was his prejudial perspective by attacking Obama. While di the dumb prime minister attack Senator Clinton or Senator Bidden who all advocate for the withdrawal of the American troops from Iraq
Maybe the PM needs to be education in the American political judisprudence wherre varyinf opinion are a well framework for our democracy. I hope he realize that Obama has more rights than the Aborigies which are subjugated in opressive acts by the HOward government.
Finally, the PM should mind his damn business and stay under with his kangaroos.
Written by Barnaby
on 2/12/2007
Thank you Mr Howard for your honesty and fair assissment of the present day and future democratic party. Because of their lack of principles the war on terror is greater than would have been if the Clinton presidency had the _alls to stand up for what is right - just war is something that they(the demos) have not shown a glimpse of understanding. I am glad Mr Howard has the fortitude to clearly identify the ramifications of an Obama or for that matter a demo victory in 08.
Written by JLM
on 2/12/2007
What the hell do you think yer doin. This is an american election you bas***st*rds we aren't interested in your BS about our democracy. We'll bomb bloody Sydney and teach you all a right good lesson. Go back to yer kangaroo farms an leave the killin to the togh guys.
Written by Bruce at the DOD good 'ol USA
on 2/12/2007
I don't understand the need for an Australian No 1 official to speak out against a stament made by an american presidential candidate.
Why Obama and not all those that before him have taken the same policy stance?
Written by Mike Miami
on 2/12/2007
Kim Lawlor doesn't seem so bright either with the racist comment. Way to keep that beast alive. I very much hope that most republicans don't have the same perception and that Kim Lawlor is just a bad apple.
Written by 1 of 5 democrats from Idaho
on 2/12/2007
I agree with the prime minister. March 2008 is like the 2 minute warning in football. You cannot tell them when the team is going to quit, there is no buzzer. Do you really think the terrorist are going to mount an all out offensive before March the 25th because if they dont the game will be over. Anybody with common sense would lay low and wait until the time ran out
and then they would not have to fight the allies,only the Iraq
army. I'm Not real bright but this is insane. I will say one thing though about the war,B52 bombers always get attention.
Written by common sense
on 2/12/2007
Barack Obama is a terrible leader
What I find very disturbing about this man is that he is colluding with corrupt Nigerians- who are stealing billions from Australians, Americans, etc in internet scams
The Nigerian government is one of the most corrupt governments on earth, and supports this fraud that cheats good people
But Obama is right in there colluding with them
Clearly this guy deals with criminals
Completely untrustworthy!
Written by Kelly
on 2/12/2007
Someone should remind Mr. Howard that by reinforcing himself and his country as an American/West European proxy in a resurging Asia is contrary to Australia's long term interests. Blindly aligning his geographically isolated (from the European mothership) country with the neocon agenda of the American right, he is courting disaster. I also suspect his attacking Obama has racist undertones. Why didn't he attack John Edwards (a white democratic presidential candidate) who has publicly acknowledged that his vote in the Senate to go into Iraq was a mistake and, like Obama, vows to pull our troops out if elected president. Hillary too has made similar pronouncements.
Furthermore, one would hope Mr. Howard and his ilk in Australia would have more sense than to alienate the Democrats when it is quite likely that, after gaining control of both houses of Congress, they will win the presidency.
Written by injun, North Carolina, USA
on 2/12/2007
We may only have 1,400 troops on the ground in Iraq, but lest it not be forgot that we are also serving alongside you in Afghanistan, a war we were more than happy to join in YOUR hour of need. We are also involved in a number of operations in our own region, something that is of far more concern to us and prevents the US or UN of having to worry about such conflicts/missions. We are the first guys there when a military coup in Fiji, the first there for relief when a tsunami devastates, the first to help East Timor enforce its people’s will to become independent and the first restore state of law in the Solomon Islands. We happily commit our small armed forces to all these causes, that yes are in our interests, but at the same time have little impact on our country. All at the same time as defending our own vast borders with the small amount of resources that we have left. We are the largest island nation in the world and as such have the largest amount of coast to patrol/defend. We are also have Indonesia on our doorstep, the largest Muslim nation in the world, for the most part a country of great people, but a government corrupt as hell, with rising levels of extremism and anti-western sentiment.
YOUR president and YOUR country called us to Iraq, telling us that if we did not come along, we would be AGAINST YOU and FOR terrorism. So now we are stuck this idiotic war because of YOUR intelligence and your threats, we are under more threat than ever from terrorism and many Australian’s have lost their lives at the hands of terrorists since Iraq began.
We are only a small country and our economy and our national security interest lie with the US. Australian's love America and Americans, our cultural is moving closer and closer to yours. We are more than happy to join your causes, I doubt before this week that the majority of the US population even knew we were even in Iraq. In fact I doubt any American knows that Australia is the only country that has been in every war alongside the US in the last century and a bit. We were there when you led us to Vietnam too, we may not have lost as many lives in Iraq as you have, but we lost a hell of a lot there. No complaints from us though, we owe you a debt of gratitude for saving us from the Japanese in WW2. In closing, we have done nothing but support America and the one time we actually stand up for ourselves and so much question your foreign policy we get completely trampled on. Remember who your true friends are, remember who was there in your hour of need, we may be small, but we are still someone, we too have a stake in how Iraq turns out.
Side note: I seem to remember at the time of the Iraq a lot of jokes being made about France and surrendering, I can't wait to see if you guys have the same sense of humor when people start labeling the US cowards when you throw up the white flag in Iraq.
E-mail
Print
To
Buzz Right Back on this article