|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted on 01/16/2003 4:00:28 PM PST by knighthawk
THE Howard Government would go to war with Iraq without the support of the Australian people, Defence Minister Robert Hill said yesterday.
Using some of the strongest language yet on a possible war with Iraq, Senator Hill said a "line has been drawn in the sand" and action could be taken within weeks.
"Obviously, if it gets to armed conflict and the Australian Government determines we need to be a part to safeguard Australians then we would like the support of the whole community," Senator Hill told ABC Radio.
"The defence force obviously would like the support of the whole community, but we have executive responsibilities and we will exercise them as we see as in the best interests of Australia."
The Opposition yesterday labelled Senator Hill's comments "outrageous".
The statements echoed the strident language used by President George W. Bush in recent days.
They also came as British Prime Minister Tony Blair gave a passionate defence of his tough stance on Iraq.
Mr Blair used Prime Minister's Question Time in the House of Commons to make an emotional case for standing firm against Saddam Hussein, even if the UN eventually declines to back military action.
He emphasised the immediate danger which he argued Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction posed, saying that if they were not eliminated they would eventually end up in terrorists' hands.
"The threat is real, and if we do not deal with it the consequences are that our weakness will haunt future generations," he said.
"Does anybody believe that if we don't take a stand as an international community now . . . that some terrorist group is not in the future going to get hold of this material and use it?"
Meanwhile, the US has asked NATO to support possible military action against Iraq with airborne early warning (AWACS) aircraft, force protection and other means, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld confirmed yesterday.
However, President Bush had made no decision to use force to disarm Iraq, he said.
"But it does take time to plan, and just as we're planning with individual countries, it seemed appropriate, to the extent NATO wished to, to begin that planning process," Mr Rumsfeld told a Pentagon press conference.
He said the request had been taken up by the executive North Atlantic Council (NAC) in Brussels yesterday.
He hesitated as to whether the support was non-combat in nature, noting that some allies already had indicated they were prepared to participate in combat operations.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the proposals were of a "deterrent and defensive nature" and followed NATO leaders' pledge to support the UN process on demanding Iraqi disarmament.
"The discussion is at a very early stage so there's really nothing definitive at this point," Mr Boucher said.
In Brussels, an official said the NAC had a general discussion of the proposal, describing it as being in the early stages.
Besides the AWACS aircraft, the US request set out plans for deployment of Patriot missile defence systems in Turkey and other military support if that key NATO ally was to come under attack in a war with Iraq, the official said.
"Turkey's a member of NATO, and if there's a conflict in that part of the world, that's an appropriate issue for them to address," Mr Rumsfeld said.
NATO was also asked if it could play a role in a post-conflict peacekeeping or humanitarian operation in Iraq, the official said.
Alliance member Hungary is already training 3000 Iraqi exiles it says could serve in a US-led military-civilian administration in Iraq after a war which could oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
Labor foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd said Senator Hill sounded like Mr Rumsfeld.
"Robert Hill uses the language of the US administration of lines in the sand against Iraq and then says, outrageously in my view, that there's no circumstances in which Iraq will even comply with UN requirements," Mr Rudd said.
"Senator Hill also said he didn't give a damn whether the Australian people supported this war or not.
"I think the Howard Government is becoming more arrogant by the day in its handling of Iraq policy."
Soldiers knew they were there to serve the elected government, making a lack of bipartisan support for action against Iraq mostly irrelevant, retired SAS commander Brigadier Jim Wallace said yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not convinced. I am convinced, however, that Saddam and his Generals have just a short time left in Iraq. They can take exile, or they can take assassination.
I think the Arab countries know that Bush is serious about this, and I think they will decide to handle it in their own way.
Im Australian and proud of it and I support the USA 100%. I wanna live with u guys, Im sick of this head in the sand aussie attitude, if its true. someone marry me so I can move to states
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.