A couple of days ago,Tony Blair announced a major withdrawal of British troops from Iraq under pressure from the British military and the British Labour party, who don't want to be lumped with the responsibility for his folly at the next election. Apparently British military command thought that the withdrawal should be even larger. As we know, though, good sense and the best interests of one's country take a back seat to the desires of America in the minds of those who compete to become best beloved of George Bush.
After bleating for the past two weeks about how Australia is 'needed' in Iraq to train the Iraqis to "stand on their own two feet", and sending 70 more Australians to the war in honour of Dick Cheney's visit, John Howard has been forced to defend his position as he simultaneously backs the British withdrawal of their troops. In Howard's mind he is probably applauding their action as it makes him appear the more steadfast Bush-lover. The blatant nature of his hypocrisy is astounding.
AFTER warning that any withdrawal of coalition troops from Iraq would create catastrophe, embolden terrorists and increase the bloodshed, the Howard Government has described a significant pullout of British forces as "good sense".
6 comments:
downer was sure taken by surprise by the whole turn of events. Funny!
So, he's now a Labour-Doodle?
It's always good to withdraw troops from Eurasia.
Yeah that was great seeing Howard erring an umming over 'their withdrawal not a plus for terror' where our withdrawal of 1000 less troops would be. Admittedly we're running security in a province and our lads would have to be replaced but still politically rubbery.
"Admittedly we're running security in a province"
oh come on, that's a bit of a joke. our mission in iraq is simply not to get shot or take sides in the civil war. every single iraqi we train already works for someone else and that someone ain't us. the training is worthless in terms of security and our numbers are too few to actually accomplish anything militarily. (although that's a false argument too, no number of soldiers would be sufficient, unless they were stormtroopers.)
No, we actually are. Small though the contingency is. Of course its the bunnies and skipping through meadows province where we are least likely to be shot...
define 'running security'.
Post a Comment