Australia, U.S. May Agree Free Trade Pact This Year, Bush Says

Bloomberg News ^ | May 4, 2003 | Morag MacKinnon

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Crawford, Texas, May 3 (Bloomberg) -- Australia and the U.S. may by year's end reach agreement on a free trade accord and submit it to the U.S. Congress for approval, U.S. President George W. Bush said.

Bush, after his first meeting with Australian Prime Minister John Howard since the start of the Iraq war, said he is ``firmly committed to'' to the treaty. The two leaders also discussed Middle East peace, operations in Iraq and North Korea's efforts to develop nuclear weapons, they said at a joint news conference.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Bush Doctrine Unfolds :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below:
	click here >>>	Bush Doctrine Unfold	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[Beck_isright]

Good. That's all that needs to be said on this subject. Let's do it.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Rewards for Iraq...

[livius]

Sounds good to me. We should also reward Spain, which could not contribute troops because of the influence of its socialist party and all of the anarchists who hang out in Barcelona, but which was an extremely loyal and outspoken supporter.

Countries who were there with us should get maximum benefits. The rest - mainly, France, Germany, Russia, Canada and Mexico - should be given a dry spell and time to rethink their positions.

[AdamSelene235]

Isn't it odd that you need a "deal" for "free trade".

If trade were free you could simply buy and sell goods from whomever you pleased.

This sounds more like American's freedom of trade is being held captive for use as a political instrument.

[Temujin]

Indeed, all trade should be free. It gets rid of uncompetetive firms.

[American Soldier]

Free trade can only exist between free men. The Anglosphere (excluding New Zealand and also Canada until such time as their federation is free of French influence) ought to be a free trade zone. China, Russia & Co. need not apply as far as I'm concerned. I'm no teamster but I don't believe in making our blue collar workers compete with the labor rates of people who get thrown into Chinese prisons and forced to work for free for 12 hours a day because they held an "unauthorized" Christian worship session.

[AdamSelene235]

So, I gather you would be in favor of Free Trade with Joe Stahlin and Pol Pot.

*I* wouldn't trade with them. But I wouldn't try to force that decision upon you unless my very existence was threatened by your actions (as was the case with Stalin).

Take our sugar subsidies: Today, if you try to bring sugar into America, we send ships with guns to stop you. We do to ourselves what a foreign power would do to us in a time of War. We are blockading our own ports!

[WhaChuLookinAt]

So, I gather you would be in favor of Free Trade with Joe Stahlin (sic) and Pol Pot.

Sure, why not? They're DEAD - what harm can they do?

[WaterDragon]

We should have a free-trade zone with those who fought with us in the Coalition of the Willing. That would have a number of nations sitting up and taking notice.

[Temujin]

I sure would.

But they wouldn't.

Becuase all their lousy inefficient industries would all be undersold by competetive forigen firms.

[KevinDavis]

I think that is what going to happen. What would be neat is a new UN based on the collation of the willing...

[Carry_Okie]

Rewards for Iraq...

At the likely expense of American meat producers (beef and sheep ranchers, & mostly Republicans). They've been playing currency games for years to dump on the American market.

[Cathryn Crawford]

I guess. I don't know much about it.

[Dan from Michigan]

If it's TRUE free trade, I back it. If it's horsecrap like NAFTA and GATT, then I'll back it about as much as I'd back a gun grab.

[AdamSelene235]

I think that is what going to happen. What would be neat is a new UN based on the collation of the willing...

No, that wouldn't be neat at all.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list