|
|
Post by Vestirse on Sept 3, 2007 1:06:01 GMT -5
I fail to see how Bush, idiot that he is, has anything to do with this. As I read it, the Australian government is responsible for this. Or is our beloved Bush also the PM of Australia and I've been living under a rock all this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vestirse on Sept 3, 2007 2:24:36 GMT -5
So how does Bush factor into all this...?
|
|
|
|
Post by Altan on Sept 3, 2007 3:58:41 GMT -5
Not just Oz but Britain also.....all I can say is "suckers."
Long term is Australia is hopeful the the USA will come to their aid when China knocks at their door with some force....if that will happen eventually? And the neo-cons in that govt' are thinking that all the time...I would.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ajeno on Sept 3, 2007 4:30:21 GMT -5
All hail,the world must bow before us or else.........j/k  Hopefully with this prick out of office soon things will change.I hear he has plans for massive air strikes against 1,200 targets in Iran though.I guess he's trying to raise more hell before he leaves office. |
|
|
|
Post by 2bob on Sept 3, 2007 5:19:03 GMT -5
fark off bush  |
|
|
|
Post by dannyd on Sept 3, 2007 5:57:12 GMT -5
We've voted Howard in thrice. The man is brilliant. He must be playing Bush. Just you wait.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vestirse on Sept 3, 2007 20:33:20 GMT -5
I seriously would like to understand this. Roll your eyes all you like, but I'm still in the dark about how Bush is responsible. The link you provided goes nowhere. Is he forcing the Australian government do this or something? Or is the APEC security US run...? Go ahead and spell it out.
EDIT//
You know it seriously just dawned on me that King George meant our own Dubya. Don't ask me why I thought you were talking about some obscure monarch. Anyway, I still don't know why are mad at Bush and not mad at the Australian government who actually ordered this ... or did he provide the security and declare the national holiday? From where I'm standing it's almost like blaming Hitler because so many nations tried to appease him at first. He didn't make them use this approach... they chose it. Same for the nations that followed his example.
PS - This is not to defend Bush as I think he is a little sh*t as much as any of you do, but if he didn't force someone to do something against their will, I don't see how he is responsible for the actions of another - Australia in this case. Grant that you may have an asshole in a high place. I sympathize - we have several dozen of them.
PPS - Of course if I'm missing some vital detail, let me know
|
|
|
|
Post by LaFace on Sept 4, 2007 0:47:55 GMT -5
Howard has been out of touch with many current issues for a number of years now, most notably since he was last re-elected in 2004.
It's ok though, we get to vote come November in the federal election. It will be the first time I am allowed to vote, and I'm excited to be able to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by ConceptDesign on Sept 4, 2007 4:38:11 GMT -5
No, Australia is not the USA's bitch. But John Howard is King George's.
|
|
|
|
Post by rob on Sept 4, 2007 11:29:59 GMT -5
I seriously would like to understand this. Roll your eyes all you like, but I'm still in the dark about how Bush is responsible. The link you provided goes nowhere. Is he forcing the Australian government do this or something? Or is the APEC security US run...? Go ahead and spell it out. EDIT// You know it seriously just dawned on me that King George meant our own Dubya. Don't ask me why I thought you were talking about some obscure monarch. Anyway, I still don't know why are mad at Bush and not mad at the Australian government who actually ordered this ... or did he provide the security and declare the national holiday? From where I'm standing it's almost like blaming Hitler because so many nations tried to appease him at first. He didn't make them use this approach... they chose it. Same for the nations that followed his example. PS - This is not to defend Bush as I think he is a little sh*t as much as any of you do, but if he didn't force someone to do something against their will, I don't see how he is responsible for the actions of another - Australia in this case. Grant that you may have an asshole in a high place. I sympathize - we have several dozen of them. PPS - Of course if I'm missing some vital detail, let me know  |
|
|
|
Post by cjsdad on Sept 5, 2007 8:01:14 GMT -5
The forces supplied by the UK and Oz are token forces.
Doesn't detract from the fact that these guys can lose their lives just as easily, but token is token.
Does that make either of them the "bitch", maybe, dunno.
I would submit that Crocodile Dundee guy and the Wiggles as proof that often the US belongs in the "bitch" category.
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
Post by cjsdad on Sept 7, 2007 8:15:52 GMT -5
I read that current Oz troop levels are 1,500, with 550 in combat roles. www.voanews.com/english/2007-09-05-voa3.cfm?rss=asiaC'mon floyd. If you dislike this war, that's cool. I never wanted this one either. Afghanistan....absolutely. Iraq.....no way. If we wanted to do this, it shoulda been done back in 1991 when it had worldwide support. Hell, even ol' Saddam couldn't believe they left him in power and then hung the Khurds out to dry. My point is this....this is the USA's war. Everyone else's involvement IS token. Perhaps we are arguing semantics. And I would NEVER attempt to minimize the PERSONAL sacrifices of soldiers from any country. But when the US sends over 150,000, and Oz sends 1,500.....that, to me, is token. If you wanted OZ to denounce this war, just say it. Bitch.....or ally? Back in the day we all came together when the chips were really down. This is just Oz's way of saying, "yeah, we're still with you.....we don't like this particular war, but we're still friends and friends back each other up" With a token display of troop deployment. |
|
Szymon Von Zalyn
Full Member
50% Polish of Prussian descent, 25% Italian, 25% kalmyk, but 100% English.
Posts: 367
|
Post by Szymon Von Zalyn on Sept 16, 2007 6:50:54 GMT -5
In Britain, Tony Blair used to Bush's bitch!
|
|
|
|
Post by EA Observer on Sept 16, 2007 8:08:56 GMT -5
Well, the way I see it, at least among the political leaders, even a token support and participation in the war is a symbol of solidarity among these countries that share common cultural and historical roots, namely British. So, it doesn't really surprise me that more Australian and British leaders support the war than oppose it. I even suspect that, in Australia's case, it wants to maintain as strong a relationship with the U.S. as it possibly can, because it feels uneasy or even, paranoid, about the growing power of its Asian "neighbor", China, in addition to Japan, which already surpassed Australia - at least economically and politically in Asia as its main regional rival. Its economy isn't faring that well currently, compared to either China or Japan, which certainly doesn't help.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ave` on Sept 16, 2007 8:25:42 GMT -5
First of all, I beg to differ.
I dont think a country can be any country's bitch.
Do you mean the leader of these specific country?
The answer is quite easy actually..any country that consort with America specifically Bush for petty reason like because they need America's power and influence definately is his bitch.
Heres the million dollar question.
ARE you his bitch?
|
|
