[naturalman1975]

Fascinating... the man makes this speech only hours after the Australian embassy in Jakarta is bombed, and he doesn't even mention it.

I guess he couldn't fit that into his prejudices at short notice.

[KangarooJacqui]

In announcing the October 9 election, John Howard asked: "Who do you trust to lead the fight on Australia's behalf against international terrorism?" The Australian voter is being asked by John Howard to trust a man who has, since September 11, sought to exploit a fear of terrorism for his own political ends; a man whose unnecessary and costly decision to involve Australia in the invasion and occupation of Iraq has led to increased terrorism in and around Iraq and raised Australia's profile as a terrorist target; a man who used faulty intelligence, without questioning it, to support a political decision to go to war.

Mr Woolcott, kindly shut your socialist piehole before I fly down to Melbourne and slap it shut. But only after asking: So the war in Iraq is to blame for everything? Do you even remember the Bali nightclub bombings of October 2002, in which 88 Australians died?

This is the sort of leftist-propaganda-masquerading-as-intellectual-opinion-and-therefore-as-fact which is doing our country so much damage.

To see it printed in a paper I once aspired to write for, makes me slightly nauseous.

[DB]

Gee, if only Australia would have lay low during WWII perhaps the Japanese wouldn't have bombed them...

Ya right...

[jim35]

Funny, I didn't know that our DemocRATs had control of the Aussie press, too!

[naturalman1975]

Australian forces can leave, however, because we have less than half of 1 per cent of the coalition forces in Iraq.

Wonderful logic... because we only have a comparatively small number of troops in Iraq, we don't need to have any.

Obvious problems with the idea.

(1) The effectiveness of our troops has only a limited amount to do with their numbers. What counts is what they are doing - Australia's military is based on having a small, highly professional defence force. The idea is to do a lot with small numbers. It's not always the best way of doing things, but we are experts at it now.

(2) in a world where political appearances are so important, numbers are a very tiny part of the story. While I am very proud of Australia's contribution to the war in Iraq, the fact is our contribution has a large symbolic value over and above it's military value. We put troops on the ground because that is the clearest way of showing the world that the United States had our support. Keeping those troops on the ground now is the clearest way of showing the world that the concept of a democratic Iraq has our support. When you commit troops, even a small number, you make a powerful statement of commitment - one of the most powerful statements you can make. Yes, we could withdraw our troops without vast military implications - but that would have significant political and diplomatic implications - and Mr Woolcott is being deliberately misleading if someone with his experience pretends not to know that.

I served in the first Gulf War - where Australia's contribution was even less than our contribution to this one - a few ships, basically. But we knew then, that what was most important wasn't the size of our force - but the fact of our force.

Someone like Woolcott probably wants conflicts resolved through diplomatic and political means rather than force of arms. That's a fine goal - but if that is what he believes, then he should (and must) realise that that means the symbolism of forces is a powerful way to make that more likely. Treating our troops only in terms of numbers and military impact gives greater validity to the idea that that is the only way to solve conflicts - and I doubt he believes that.

Rather, he places diplomatic platitudes above diplomatic facts.

[Piefloater]

Richard Woolcott is a has-been who never really was. He should go and do some gardening, think about the good old days and leave the important stuff to people who have a clue.

[Brian Allen]

Good post -- and astute comment!

Richard Woolcott is the living walking breathing illustration of the weakness in Australia's systemically-and-irreversably-flawed and essentially-fascistic system of government in which the self-annointing, self-appointing, self-enriching, self-perpetuating and abjectly parasitical so-called "permenant public service" has taken upon itself such powers as render Australia's elected politicians effectively irrelevant and actually redundant -- and the greater Australian Nation but the host to its rapacious appetite.

That Richard Woolcott and his Aussie-taxpayer and Arab-banker-enriched ilk and their obscenely elitist, anti-Australian, anti-American and anti-Human-Civilization Aussie-media mates will always follow the dictates and toe the line of Australia's and the FRee world's enemies should surprise only those too stupid to know they're being lied to and/or too mean-spirited and/or greedy to care!

Best ones -- B A

[Khurkris]

My money says he also wears womens undergarments.

"This is the wattle,
the symbol of our land.
You can put it in a bottle,
you can hold it in your hand!
Austalia..Australia..Austalia...We Love Ya!"

[HHFi]

He forgot the biggest myth of all: "If you just don't do anything to antagonize terrorists, they'll leave you alone."