Thoughts on the Iraq War

[melwil]

1. Am I the only person who has trouble believing anything George W. Bush says? "We're going to win the war." Yeah. Right. "Increased troop numbers will be welcomed" Pull the other one. "My name is George W. Bush" sorry, I just don't buy that . . .

2. Can someone please teach him to say 'nuclear'? Please!

3. On to a more serious thought. My gut feeling at the moment is that a large amount of pressure is now going to be put on the Australian government to embed our forces with Iraqi forces. This morning, there was an article quoting the Australian defense force head saying that Australians won't mind troop losses in Iraq. (Of course it gets trickier when it comes to bringing the right body home). Then Bush continued to talk about troops being embedded. We've already been asked on at least one previous occasion. It all seems to add up.

Will Howard give in to the pressure? Well, it is an election year, so my feeling is that Howard's going to pay very close attention to Australian reaction to the Bush plan. There's no way that he'll do anything this year that would lose him major votes, not even for Bush.

Am I totally insane on thinking this? And what would it mean if we were asked, and if Howard did go throuh with it? Thoughts?

Comments

[peacockharpy.livejournal.com]

It's my belief that pronouncing nuclear as "new-kyoo-ler" is Bush's way of saying "I'm a down-home kinda guy."

Most people here in the US aren't behind the "surge," and the Democrats we've just put in the House and Senate had better darn well step up to the plate to oppose it.

[lizbee.livejournal.com]

This morning, there was an article quoting the Australian defense force head saying that Australians won't mind troop losses in Iraq.

*raises eyebrows*

If I recall my history classes at school and uni correctly, parts of the Australian public have yet to forgive the (relatively low) troop losses in VIETNAM. We're still getting around to dealing with Iraq.

[melwil.livejournal.com]

If our media is forced to censor coverage of deaths in Iraq, such as the US is doing in stopping the footage of coffins, then the Australian public would buy it much easier. We've seen almost nothing of the soldiers who've been injured over there (apprently there's quite a few of them) - they've been banned from talking to the media.

Then there's the ban on Australian soldiers keeping blogs . . .

It's only when family members, like the Kovcos, make a fuss that anyone realises that the government may not be working for the soldier's best interests . . .

[dee255.livejournal.com]

Howard will do whatever Bush tells him to do and everyone will vote for him anyway because he'll promise more Family Tax Benefits and give us a $20 tax cut.

Business as usual.

[melwil.livejournal.com]

Ah, the $20 tax cut. I can use that to buy my first house *g*

I think he'll do it if our troops are embedded with 'safe' Iraqi units. I don't think he wouldn't do it in Baghdad. And Bush wouldn't give him a dangerous one - wanting Howard to win here again.

I think Howard's more concerned about Rudd than he ever was about Beasley, Crean or Latham. Rudd's got massive popular appeal because of his time on Sunrise, and he's a manipulative bastard at times, changing things just enough to get votes.

I'm interested to see how this one plays out.

[lima-sierra.livejournal.com]

2. Can someone please teach him to say 'nuclear'? Please!

I've shouted that at the tv more times than I'd care to admit *grins*. It's nu-clear, not nu-kill-er! Grk.