Just as US soldiers and National Guards who’ve completed their tours in Iraq are being conscripted by stop-loss orders, recalls and the like, then sent back for a second round, Australia has received new orders. The New Europeans (Spain, Poland, Netherlands and so on) are all pulling out, and its up to us to fill the gap.
Of course, there’s no mention of the US in Howard’s announcement. Supposedly, this is a response to personal requests from the British and Japanese Prime Ministers. Older readers will recall that exactly the same farce was played out with our commitment of troops to Vietnam. Anyone who believes the government’s line might reflect on what kind of response Blair and Koizumi would get if they requested from Howard something the Bush Administration didn’t like, such as ratification of Kyoto.
There’s no strategy here, just hanging on and hoping things will change for the better. There’s no sign so far that the presence of 150 000 troops has done any good. The insurgency/resistance/terrorists are far more numerous now than they were a year ago. They gain legitimacy when they attack foreign occupiers, and lose it when they attack fellow-Iraqis. I hope that the new Iraqi government, when it emerges, will maintain its campaign commitment (watered down at the last minute) to demand a schedule for withdrawal, but if it doesn’t, Australia and Britain should be pushing the US to set one.
Tthe decision raises some other big issues for Australia that don’t seem to have been considered. In particular, there’s the possibility of war with Iran. Have we received assurances either that there won’t be any US military action against Iran or that, if there is, Iraq won’t be used as a base? To ask this question is to answer it.
John Quiggin 
I do not understand this women were better off under Saddam They were beheaded raped executed, particularly for being “prostitutes” I have not forgotten of that poor young woman whose father killed her because Urday raped her.This in a society which in theory carried a 3 year sentence for honor killing(oh wow) but men were hardly ever prosecuted. Their husbands sons and fathers were murdered. So they were murdered by secularists, terrific. They were better off because of rules such as 5 years maternity leave.An example of the great feminist Saddam, in 1998, Saddam ordered all women secretaries working in government agencies be dismissed.
I am not persuaded that those who trot out the women were better off under Saddam give a hoot for women.
They should look through the eyes of a man forced to watch his daughter, wife, mother or sister gang-raped by Saddam’s agents says Masa Hussaain
So Howard is sending 450 more of our troops to a “safe” place in Iraq, to replace the Dutch, who are withdrawing because of domestic opposition.
Is this because Bush whispered in Howard’s hearing aid that he needs more help from his deputy sheriff in propping up a diminishing coalition of the willing? And in return we should be grateful for the FTA? Payola for the national party, paid for in the blood of our soldiers.
Or is it because the Japanese asked for our protection, and our balance of payments suggest we should oblige? What does this have to do with “doing our bit for democracy in Iraq”? Have we sunk to the level of mercenaries for hire? Perhaps we should be demanding that the Japanese pay our troops for their protection.
And exactly what are the Japanese doing in Iraq, despite massive domestic opposition? Does this have anything to do with the 130,000 barrel-a-day Al-Gharaff oil field, just 65 kms away from their camp in Samawah, to which the Japanese were negotiating access during the 1990-91 Gulf crisis? Their engineering expertise is undoubtedly being put to good use in building the appropriate access infrastructure.
Once again, why are we sending 450 Australian troops to protect the Japanese in Iraq? And let’s do without all the sanctimonious baloney about “seeing it through”, and not “cutting and running”, as we “bring democracy to the brave Iraqis”.
When Iraq becomes a Shi’ite theocracy under sharia law, there will be no democracy for women. Further, the americans have forced the Iraqis to sign a law that opens all their national resources and services to foreign exploitation for the next 40 years. Any attempt to nationalise those resources and services will be met with retaliation from the military bases established by the coalition of the willing throughout Iraq as the occupation entrenches.
That’s not democracy. Australia should have no further part in this desperate and farcical adventure if we value our national honour.
Why are the Dutch withdrawing from Iraq? Is it, as suggested above, because of domestic opposition? But I am sure that would not be the only reason. We are lucky to be blessed with a leader with “the heart of a gambler”.
Michael B, Iran has not rejected the Franco/German/UK initiative,—get your facts straight. The Iranians have agreed to temporarily halt ENRICHMENT which can be used for BOTH peaceful purposes and nukes depending on the degree of enrichment.
Its fine not to trust the Iranian regime and Khan undoubtedly sold the Iranians some technology, perhaps even the gas centrifuges–uranium/hexafluoride enrichment system. That doesn’t prove Iran is making a bomb as the IAEA will agree.
The point is that the onus is on you to prove they are making a bomb and even if they are, like the DRK, for you to refute that this is the only way for the Iranians (given political realities) to guarantee deterrence to a US attack.
No comments as to why Israel should have a bomb (widely accepted) but Iran can’t?
Explain to us the sense of US non-proliferation policy –invading on trumped up pretexts– when those actions are to create the very opposite effect ?
We don’t trust Robert Mugabe either, nor the undemocratic anti-human rights torturing DRK, Egypt, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia inter alia, but I don’t see your arguments for clobbering them, exposing some inconsistency perhaps in your ‘no trust’ doctrine?
Ros
So given your outrage over the torturwe of Iraqi women under Saddam howe do you feel about former senior Ba’athist Iyad Allawi rehiring thousands of former secret police officers?
Peter Kemp your that ‘The point is that the onus is on you to prove they are making a bomb and even if they are, like the DRK, for you to refute that this is the only way for the Iranians (given political realities) to guarantee deterrence to a US attack.’ Well another way to stop a US attack would be to completely open up too inspectors and open ones country up to free elections. As for your comment on Israel having the bomb, well I have absolutely no problem with this. They have been repeatedly attacked and threatened with complete annihilation by far more numerous neighbours. I also do not think that Israel will drop a bomb on Australia but I do not have that much faith where Islamic crazies are concerned.
michael b – When Coalition forces kill Iraqis, in Iraq, they are responsible for their actions and no one else.
Is this unreasonable?
Ros – Women could drive, vote,dress as they wished and attend university.
Yes, some were killed or saw members of their family killed, but not because they were women. Saddam killed or oppressed anyone who opposed him.
Saddam – the equal opportunity tryant.
Women in Iraq are now expressing fears that they may loose some of these fundamental rights.
Ros – Women could drive, vote,dress as they wished and attend university.
Yes, some were killed or saw members of their family killed, but not because they were women. Saddam killed or oppressed anyone who opposed him.
Saddam – the equal opportunity tyrant.
Women in Iraq are now expressing fears that they may loose some of these fundamental rights.
“What about Khan’s nice little earner in selling Pakistan’s nuclear technology – a fact that he was pardoned for rather put up against a wall and shot as he deserved. ”
But Pakistan is on our side, as witness the Pakistani govt’s actions in the Habib case. Make up your mind who’s wearing the black hats here.
Ian, Juan Cole I presume. And your point?
Expressing fears, and very sensible too. But the fact is that Saddam had women raped beheaded gaoled and sacked from their jobs. And yes they were killed because they were women, check Amnesty International on “prostitute” killings. So the point about an Iraq where 60% of the population are women and they were set up to win 25% of the place in the election. And you seriously offer vote as a right under Saddam! At least they really did get to vote on Jan 30
Michael B: As I said ”political reality” meaning Iran is not going to allow itself to be humiliated by bowing down to a unilateral US whose military capacity is somewhat reduced these days. Iran has friends as well, such as Russia who are building a REACTOR for them, and China who will veto any US Security Council sanction resolution.
By saying you approve? that Israel has the bomb illustrates the double standard perfectly. You don’t feel threatened by Israel but the Iranians do and therefore your perceptions must have precedence. Where is the logic in that?
You like many, are incapable of putting yourself in their shoes just for one minute, let alone understand the dynamics of a nation which WILL be the regional dominant player in years to come, in what is fast becoming a multi-polar world.
By ‘Islamic crazies” I assume you mean the Iranian government, a partly democratic one which neo-con policy (and yours) cuts the ground from right under Khatami and his fellow moderates. Congratulations !
Ros, Michael B was arguing that the US led invasion was, in effect, spreading liberal democracy and therefore improving womens rights. It’s not that simple.
Now it’s OK for Iraqi women to watch their men be killed and their children maimed by cluster bombs because they came courtesy of the US – “terrific”.
I’m not persuaded by those who trot out that Iraqi’s are better off now. They should look through the eyes of a woman who watches her child die of an easily preventable disease.
Also Michael B, if Iran is so crazy, list the number of countries they have attacked in the last 30 years or so. Who pissed them off by helping Saddam attack them in the 80s? Would you really blame them for still being a little pissed off with the US.? This historical background seems to be missing from your ‘clobber them’ thinking.
Somebody shoots at you and you respect the accomplice who supplied the bullets? Think about it.
Any advance on June as a nice time to start bombing the sh*t out of Iran to get rid of their nukular weapons programme?
May be nuts, but then again…
The “new” old US enemy in the Gulf is still Iran. AUS troops are in Iraq to prevent the Iranian Badr Brigades moving in, rather than to stop Suuni attacks.
The mullahs must be splitting their sides lauging at the fix they have put the Great Satan in.
Aint the ME grand. The fun never stops.
(note, all reports seem to come from the same source/reporter, but there don’t appear to be any to the contrary).
cp, what are ‘nukular’ weapons programs, is this the new Bushspeak?
Assuming you mean nuclear, there are no guarantees that intensive bombing will eliminate all nuclear facilities, many of which are underground.
If the US does this unilaterally, what the rest of the world will do to the US economically could be far worse but I would leave that thread to Pro. JQ.
peter – yes, an attempt at levity. Many sincere and abject apologies if I offended you.
I think it would be insane to attempt that sort of thing, but I wouldn’t put it past them (the US). Distract, destroy, decamp. Let’s never finish anything off properly, just find someone else to impress (or slaughter) with our big guns.
“Well another way to stop a US attack would be to completely open up too inspectors…” MB
Well, it didn’t work in Iraq recently, did it?
One thing I’d like to know is whether the ADF’s ASLAV’s have been fitted with the Kevlar spall liners. These garments are great for absorbing the impact of IED’s. Seeing the carnage on Iraqi roads, I wouldnt take my vehicle out of the garage without one.
Peter Kemp, what double standards re Israel and why should Iran feel threatened by Israel. Has Israel threatened to destroy Muslim countries and wipe out all Muslims etc. Does Israel systematically teach racist filth at Israeli schools in the same way that anti-Semitic filth is taught in Palestian schools (with the support of EU money) and elsewhere in the Middle East. Israel, it is true, might well take action to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. But they can hardly be blamed for thinking that if they don’t Tel Aviv might soon obliterated. I also suggest you ask young Iranians what they think of the current government or ask your girlfriend or wife whether she would rather live in Israel or an Islamic country. I simply can’t take seriously anyone who thinks the actions of the current regime in Iran have any merit or that the onus is on others to prove that its intentions are peaceful– this is simply taking anti-Americanism and post-modernism to a mad extreme. I also find it amazing that you are so willing to criticise western governments but so easily brush over the evils of Islamic regimes such as Iran.
I suggest you go to the Apposites of Islam site and read some of testimonies of those who have suffered under regimes like Iran – http://www.apostatesofislam.com/apostates/g1/ibnw_index.htm
See who they blame for their and their friends and relatives experiences – it is certainly not Israel.
John, on the issue of Pakistan – well I certainly think the US has made a mistake by tying itself so closely to the current regime. However, there are no easy choices when it comes to dealing with Islamic fascism. In hindsight this might turn out to be a good or a bad call – If Middle eastern and Islamic scholars in western universities paid more attention to such issues and less to playing down the threat of Islam (John Espisito and crowd) and attacking the US we might have more insight.
Jack S: Yes but it didn’t have to be that way–jaw jaw instead of war war I think WSC said.
cp, right on
Don W: The golden rule is, open up to inspections, nothing found, US accuses you of lying and invades.
Blix expressed this so well-paraphrasing-You’ve been told to find the witches, the fact that there are no witches becomes unacceptable to the US.
MB. I think you’ve been hung out to dry
you are hopeful Peter, the US is germany’s biggest trade partner after Europe and despite all the disagreements and the Iraq war it has been business as usual for both of them. So if you consider Europe the best bet for some kind of sanctions this example wouldn’t offer much hope. I have no doubt that for Asia or South America for example it would certainly be business as usual. Mexico would introduce sanctions against the US, I don’t think so.
The US is beginning to make some political concessions to the Suuni ethnics insurgents, as opposed to Islamic jihadists.
Patrick Cockburn mentions the fact that the US, never mind the Shiites, is unlikely to win an defeat the mass-based Suuniis.
This means the Suunis are now in a position to negotiate with the US. They may be able to cut a deal with the US, agreeing to stop their attacks in order for a time-tabled US withdrawal and a guranteed stake in power.
….
The only problem with this is that Suuni nationalists and sectarians have been attacking Coalition-symp Shiites these past few years. The Shiites & Kurds are now in the majority. There is no love lost at all between the Shiites/Kurds and the Suunis who have been so busy massacring them these past few decades.
Ahh the joys of militant ethnic politics. So the Shiites will not be keen to share power with the Suunis. Iraqi democracy may be in the way of peace.
And then there is the problem that the Suunis have no oil in their region. Which means that without a guaranteed share of power their income will be close to zero. They will fight hard for a share of the dough.
But the US has to find some way of stopping the Suuni insurgency turning into a civil war that will force the Iraqi Shiites into alliance with Irani Shiite axle of evil. This will hand Southern Iraq to Iran on a platter.
Man the ME is complicated. Whose brilliant idea was it to get involved in this mess in the first place? Dont remind me.
re Michael B:
Iran (or ancient persia) is a culture and a place none of us understand.
Our reasoning why they can’t have nuclear weapons is justified only by fear and misunderstanding.
But is it you that opposes the sale of uranium? 4,000 tonnes a year from 1 mine alone in south australia, one of the by products being plutonium, of which some will have a half life of ~325,000 years.
Iraq sure wasn’t perfect, but how high was it on the list of horror countries? Contrast it with northern african countries such as somalia, and our allies saudi arabia. And not to mention north korea, the country we made the most noise about but seemingly have erased since 2003. Our picking on the small (25million), already contained (quote colin powell) and serverly depleted enemy (how many operational planes where in the iraqi airforce?) guaranteed military success, with little chance of civil resolution.
Have no doubt, extreme forms of fundamentalism, represents a great threat to our society.
Fundamentalism has many varieties:
* communism
* enviromentalism
* religious (islamic, christian or jewish)
* economic rationalism
I recongize the threat posed by all of the above
And the extreme forms practiced by bush, mixing religion and politics, leads us down a path as dark and bloody as the crusades.
I can’t believe the army captains are pulling the everyone who is going to iraq wants to.
Marketing and Damange control by the spindoctors in our country are amazing – and the deepness that this distortion penetrates our media is bewildering.
But then i guess i slept through politics 101.
We all need to be concerned about Iran. George Bush, at a press conference in Germany, has just confirmed that it is a country ruled by “moo-lars”.
I’m not sure what they are, but they sound nasty!
How to deal with them isn’t so clear. George went on to say that talk of a US attack on Iran is “ridiculous” but that “all options remain on the table”.
I hope that has cleared it up for everyone.
Those of us here in the US get more of a chance to hear the neocons speak than you folks overseas – most recently this past week at the conservative political action conference. Make no mistake, attacking Iraq was about building an empire, not about doing anything good for Iraqis – not that they are opposed to something good happening but that is beside the point. They are happy to have Australia help out because it gives them political cover at home (we DO TOO have a coalition!) but dont think for a moment that there will be any payback down the road – And as for “defense” we are all worse off, not better off now that Saddam is gone. Sure, he was a bad man but he wasnt going to attack any of us and he HATED the religious crazies. We have opened a can of worms that will probably never be closed again. And it looks like Iraq will now be run by friends of Iran and religious types. Not such a good trade from our point of view.
Gosh fellas, here I thought Australia was now a cvilized place with roads, opera houses, Olympics and all that stuff, but it seems you have some people there who will voluntarily read Hitchens. A real shocker, eh?
1. Alphacoward, You state ‘Our reasoning why they (Iran) can’t have nuclear weapons is justified only by fear and misunderstanding.’ After reading this comment, I have decided (no doubt many people will be pleased to here), that there is nothing usual to gain from trying to argue further with reality challenged individuals such as yourself. Go to the web sites run by people who have fled Islamic countries such as Iran and see how they feel about the likes of Iran having the bomb or who is the biggest threat to human culture Bush and his fellow radical Christian buddies or Islamic fascism. Ibn Warrah – The author of why I am not a Muslim is a good place to start as is Irshad Manji- the Trouble with Islam or Ayaan Hirsi Ali the incredibly brace Dutch politician of Somalian origin who was forced to change sides to the Dutch conservatives because of the refusal of the politically correct in her country to do anything about the appalling issue of violence against Dutch Muslim women by Dutch Muslim Men (not George Bush or Tony Blair). Now of course these individual are not white Anglo Saxon academics theorising about the supposedly unique democracy that Islamic countries (including Sudan see John Esposito) are developing or blaming Israel and the yanks for most of the problems of the world. However, they do have some direct experience of oppression and all live in constant fear of being murdered (not by the Mossed or George Bush by the way). At one time so-called social progressives would have been queuing up to support them –but not now.
< >
No, ABC News, The Economist and various other sources. My point is that the most likely outcome of the current situation in Iraq is an authoritarian state – similar to those in Egypt, Syria and Jordan – which pays occasional lip-service to democracy through electiosn to largely powerless assemblies and represses its people – including its women – on a regular basis.
A regime, in other words, which is most likely to resemble a milder version of Saddam’s regime than anything westerners would recognise as democracy.
However, given that the likely alternatives are an Iranian-backed thoecracy and an extended civil war similar to that which occurred in Lebanon, we’re probably stuck with trying to produce such an outcome.
However lets be honest about it and not gush on about “democracy”. Allawi’s Iraqi National Accord carried out terrorist atatcks in Iraq – such as bombing buses and clinics – in the 1990s. Ahmed Chalabi is a convicted embezzler, a murder suspect and has been accused by the US of being an Iranian spy. Jafari, the likely next Prime Minister spent the 1990’s as a guest of the Iranian Ayatollahs – I fail to see how this bodes well for the status of women or religious minorities in an Iraq under his control.
“Fighting to end the torture” is a much nicer slogan than “killing 100,000+ people and spending US $300 billion+ to make the torture less common and slightly less severe.”
< >
and the facti s that since Saddam’s fall there has been a massive upsurge in criminal violence largely targetting women and islamic vigilantism.
You may regard it as a major advance for women that they’re now being pack-raped by criminal gangs rather than by Uday’s minions and that they’re now being beheaded by islamic vigilantes rather than by members of the secret police. I don’t.
< >
Actually I made no mention of the right to vote at all. Try and have a stricter regard for the facts than, say, George W Bush.
< >
How about “reality-challenged individuals’ who worry more about the hypothetical bombs Iran might have one day than about the actual bombs Pakistan has right this second?
MB,
Your solution to the “reality-challenged” is to listen to people who have “fled Islamic countries”. Why? Are they more objective than you?
Ibn Warraq is a nom de plume for a person who claims to be from the Indian sub-continent. He’s not Iranian. I’m not sure he’s “fled” from anywhere.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was born in Somalia, but “fled” Kenya (not a Muslim country, BTW) to avoid a marriage arranged by her father – not a problem that’s Islamic, BTW.
Irshad Manji was born in Uganda (not a Muslim country), and her family might have “fled” from there when she was 1 to Canada, where she has lived since.
JQ performs a valuable service in initiating conversations on a range of topics and in maintaining an ordered space by balancing the competing priorities of freedom of expression and civility. In addition, one is exposed to mental frameworks, behavioral habits and emotional fixations that one does not usually meet in one’s workaday world. I my case, acquaintance with RWDBs is a novelty to me no less entertaining and educational than a trip to the aquarium, and Melbourne has a very good one, which I recommend.
RWDBs, I have discovered, come in many shapes and colours. So I do not want to imply that what I have to say about them applies to all of them. I draw upon my memory of several threads and some reference to this thread to make a few observations in the spirit of analysis and in the hope that I neither affront nor offend.
An important distinction between RWDBs and others is their willingness to believe that US government rhetoric maps closely with US government action. (This is the mirror image of the reflex anti-Americanism of some of the Left that presumes cynicism, hypocrisy and dishonesty.)
Fathers of daughters may recognise a parallel in this RWDB behaviour. Some adolescent girls fixate upon the imagined admirable qualities of some spotty youth or other. In the heart and mind of these girls this inoffensive but altogether unremarkable chap becomes a knight in shining armour, a paladin who can do no wrong. Most girls grow out of this romanticism and a desire to be tenderly dominated. It seems that frequently RWDBs do not.
The first fantasy is indomitability.
The United States is straining its economy and its private and public finances to breaking point. In 1950 the US economy comprised 50% of the world economy. The US was the source of virtually all investment capital. US corporations dominated technological development. In 2005 the US economy comprises around 20% of the world economy and this figure is falling relentlessly.
The US military is overstretched. Recruitment is plummeting. There is persistent talk of the reintroduction of the draft.
The second fantasy is unity of American purpose
Bush won the 2004 election with a paper-thin majority in Ohio assisted by some questionable electoral practices. A majority of Americans now oppose US policy in Iraq.
Bush’s 2005 Federal Budget attempts to wind back subsidies and support schemes that prop up the economies of the very Red States that voted him back into office. It is likely that many of these voters will ask why their economic security is being sacrificed to an apparently endless venture in Iraq and the wider Middle East.
The third fantasy is American steadfastness.
This is the element that forms the closest parallel to the Vietnam fiasco. In 1968 President Johnson was prepared, if necessary, underwrite the US war effort with US gold reserves. He was dissuaded from doing this by Clark Clifford who had been told by Wall St Bankers that this would destabilise the US economy. Sooner or later Wall St is likely to make the same call on the US Middle East adventure, especially now it is clear that it will be impossible to take Iraqi oil as booty. (I recommend a perusal of Executive Order 13303 on this important point.)
So what does this have to do with Australia?
On the very day that Johnson was to make his speech announcing a scaling down of the Vietnam War, Prime Minister John Gorton spoke in parliament announcing his steadfast support of military intervention “until the job is done.” In an embarrassing oversight the Johnson administration had neglected to tell its allies about its about-face.
The United States is neither world saviour nor monster. It is a nation subject to vicissitudes and to consequences of enormous ambitions. It is also a nation that is suffering a progressive dimunition of its freedom of action.
Australians would be well-advised not to expect too much from the United States.
And RWDBs need to learn how to cope with their disappointments and to move on.
“Fathers of daughters may recognise a parallel in this RWDB behaviour. Some adolescent girls fixate upon the imagined admirable qualities of some spotty youth or other. In the heart and mind of these girls this inoffensive but altogether unremarkable chap becomes a knight in shining armour, a paladin who can do no wrong. Most girls grow out of this romanticism and a desire to be tenderly dominated. It seems that frequently RWDBs do not.”
So is it just a coincidence that most RWDBs are male?
To all the the cowards and chicken hawks:
“Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience…Therefore [individual citizens] have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring.”
Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal, 1950
“Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.”
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
“The act of those guys climbing up on the Sydney Opera House and painting ‘No War’ on there, I thought that was a fantastic bloody thing. It was disgusting, the fact that they had to graffiti a beautiful landmark in Australia, but that’s what it fucking takes to be heard. They’re not going to let the average person stand up and say, ‘This is what’s wrong’.”
Heath Ledger
Sydney Opera House NO WAR
to the chicken hawks, et al:
when is enough, enough?
or do we stay in Iraq for years, decades?
Yet, the real question is: how many ADF lives are enough?
Not sure who you are angry with Ian. it obviously wasn’t clear but the second part of my post was in response to Michael H. as a brief read might have demonstrated. I didn’t understand you point about Allawi in relation to my comments. I am not sure why why you are attacking me though, maybe you aren’t,I assumed I was y, because women still get a bad trott. My aplogies if i am accusing you of not reading correctly and it is fact me that is confused.
I just don’t like the sanitising of saddam and his henchmen. After all it is those henchmen who targetted women candidates. And as don’t many Iraqi feminists. Kurdish women I find are particulalry offended. And if it me that you are accusing of finding pack rape better if it is criminals I find that remark a bit off.
The 100,00 as I am sure many have mentioned before does have some problems. However I would not argue that the deaths of Iraqis is not awful who ever or what ever caused them.
but I am not arguing your side killed more than my side.
As the Iraqis struggle to build a better society which will it seems require a need for reconciliation and all that entails in the way of forgiveness and abandonment of anger it is wierd that we here have no problem arguing about whose moral and who isn’t and hating those who disagree with us. I guess they can only be greatful that we can’t get any closer to participating in their affairs than shouting on the web.
Katz help. I think that I am a RWDB and it would seem therefore may have a penchant for spotty faced youth and a desire to be tenderly dominated (oh my god)and if I understand have a tendency to naively see the US as saviour. Before I decide to cope with my disappointments and move on, or seek a brain transplant I don’t know what a RWDB is. Right wing dead Brain? Really Whacko Deceitful Bastard. Reckon World Deserves Bush. Reactionary white do badder. I really don’t know. it is somehow appealing to know when being insulted, or is it a compliment.
Hey Carlos – resorting to quoting Heath Ledger?
Desperate times I guess!
RWDB = Right Wing Death Beast.
Some folk take is as a badge of honour, most probably worn next to their VC – for “Valourous Chickenhawk”.
Take it however you like.
Paul and Ros, I don’t know what gender most RWDBs are. I don’t know what gender you are.
I do know that a RWDB called Tipper used to post on this blog. I assume it was not Tipper Gore, but beyond that one couldn’t tell for sure whether it was a he Tipper or a she Tipper.
Tipper caused JQ problems with his/her unparliamentary language and was threatened with exclusion. JQ spared the rest of us the trauma of reading his/her obscenities. Perhaps the content of those obscenities may have provided a clue to Tipper’s gender.
In short, the gender(s) of most RWDBs remains a mystery to me. All I know is that a large proportion of them write like romantic girls.
Fyoder, I know I said I couldn’t be bothered arguing with dogmatic individuals such as yourself anymore but I can’t let your latest bit of nonsense go unchallenged. You state that ‘Your solution to the “reality-challenged� is to listen to people who have “fled Islamic countries�. Why? Are they more objective than you?’ Well the current situation is actually like in the early days of the last century when intellectuals could not say enough good things about the Soviet Union while dissidents (and rational lefties such as George Orwell and Arthur Koestler) were very well what the reality was but were not listened to.
At the present time we have academics such as John Esposito (the most influential middle eastern scholar in the US) who not only pretend that extremism is a minor problem within Islam but actually sing the praises of individuals guilty of massive human rights abuse such as Hassan el Turabi the Sudanese politician/religious leader/opposition leader and general scumbag. Now I would suggest that the testimonies of individuals fleeing the repression he was responsible for in the past and who had relatives murdered and tortured or forced to convert to Islam are more worthy of hearing than some dickhead academic who thinks western men not doing their fair share of the dishwashing is a worse crime.
Faced with such dilemmas and criticism from real Muslim moderates or from people who not longer regard themselves as Muslim because of the sickening oppression they have witnessed, many social progressives, in an amazing leap of logic, bestow on head banging extremists such as Tariq Ramadan the title of moderate. They are offered university jobs and listened to with respect by social progressive elites. The fact that the likes of Ramadan will not condemn the stoning to death of women etc or distance themselves sufficiently from Islamic extremists is neither here not there.
Re Sudan – I note that the US though not France, Germany or some other European country is being criticised for not putting pressure on the current Sudanese government – I would like critics of the US to spell out now what they and other countries should do and not wait till after the fact and simply criticise them for whatever action or not action they take. Re Iran what should be the policy towards that country – if the US does not talk tough, whether it intends to invade or not how will the mad mullahs who run that country be persuaded to give up the bomb. But of course that’s not the real issues for as Salmon Rushdie (I think) suggested many western liberals are so anti-western that are unable to recognise that there are worse things that can happen to Muslim women than wearing jeans and listening to rock music.
alphacoward – you obviously don’t have any close friends in the ADF, in particular the Army. The vast majority of soldiers actually want to do the job they are trained to do. There will be stiff competition to get a place on those next deployments. They are not dumb, they recognise the dangers but they also recognise the good work they get to do and be proud of. Any soldier who said that they did not want to go would quickly and easily be replaced.
Do I qualify as a Chicken Hawk because I wasn’t deployed on operational duty during my 13 years in the Army? (Despite the dangers I was exposed to like misdirected artillery and tank fire and intentionally directed small arms fire.)
I love those peacenik signs “Don’t send our Boys overseas” – have they asked them whether they want to go? What if they really want to go? What if they don’t want the pacifists protesting to stop their deployment? Do the soldiers’ views not count?
Razor, there is no gentle way of telling you the following information:
Armies are very expensive establishments that sane governments deploy with great prudence in pursuit of attainable national interests and objectives.
Armies are not travel agencies that cater to the wanderlust and adventurous spirit of its personnel.
Razor, there is no gentle way of telling you the following information:
Armies are very expensive establishments that sane governments deploy with great prudence in pursuit of attainable national interests and objectives.
Armies are not travel agencies that cater to the wanderlust and adventurous spirit of its personnel.
Steven Kyle writes:
“And as for “defenseâ€? we are all worse off, not better off now that Saddam is gone. Sure, he was a bad man but he wasnt going to attack any of us and he HATED the religious crazies.”
I don’t get it! – Originally, the US was criticised for supporting Saddam. Then it was criticised when the US (largely) went to the aid of a sovereign nation – Kuwait – when Saddam invaded. Then after liberating Kuwait, the US was criticised for not ‘getting rid’ of Saddam. Now that the US removed Saddam, it is criticised again. And added to that, revisionism is occuring to the effect stating that Saddam wasn’t all that bad after all!
Hey guys, which is it. Pick you poison!
Roberto, are you arguing against Steven Kyle or are you arguing against the “guys”?
As one of the “guys” I don’t feel compelled to support Steven Kyle.
If you think that all of us “guys” think the same way, then prove it and move on to your substantive point.
Katz – what are you talking about? The use of “Guys” was not meant to be gender specific.