Howard defiant on Iraq ('Throw me out')

theage ^ | February 18, 2003

[Indy Pendance]

Prime Minister John Howard challenged the Australian people to throw him out of office if they did not like his policy on Iraq.

"If the public at the next election doesn't like the job I've done, they'll throw me out," he told the Nine Network after a Newspoll showed his personal standing had slumped as he supported US action against Iraq.

Labor, which insists on a new United Nations mandate for military action, was equally defiant in the face of the poll, which showed a further slide in Opposition Leader Simon Crean's popularity.

Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd said Labor's national security policy was non-negotiable, adding: "And frankly, we don't give a damn what opinion polls have to say."

Newspoll showed the Coalition led Labor by 51 to 49 per cent on a two-party-preferred basis.

Mr Howard's approval rating dropped to an eight month low of 48 per cent, down from 65 per cent following the Bali bombings last October.

However, Mr Crean rated only 31 per cent and Mr Howard led him in the preferred prime minister stakes 56 to 21 per cent.

Mr Howard, who ruled out a plebiscite or conscience vote over war with Iraq, said he did not think public opinion had settled on the issue.

But in the end he would do what was in Australia's best interests and the people would have their say at the next election.

"My job is to do what I believe is right and I think it is right to take a stand against the spread of chemical and biological weapons because I'm worried they'll get into the hands of international terrorists," Mr Howard said.

Mr Crean said he thought his own popularity had slumped because of the uncertainty and angst associated with the talk of war.

"People don't like it, they're frightened for the consequences here, they're uncertain as to what is going to happen, and I think that that is a turn-off to all political leadership," he said.

"If you look at the poll, there's been no bounce for anyone, including the Greens (who unconditionally oppose war)."

The Greens, meanwhile, were angry that Iraqi propaganda was using the massive anti-war protests in Australia and round the world to claim international support for Saddam Hussein.

Greens Senator Kerry Nettle said his regime had caused death and torture to many Iraqis.

[Man of the Right]

The cultural war is global. Basically, the world is divided into two kinds of people. Conservatives recognize that actions have consequences. Consequently, they tend to act with consequences in mind. The left tends to live for the moment.

If Australia did not support the U.S., there would be no material consequence in the short run. Australia would save a few hundred million dollars and a few Aussies would be alive who may be killed in combat (non were killed in the Gulf War). However, over the long run, Australia would have no allies, because the U.S. is the only nation on the planet with both the ability and will (at least while a Conservative is in the White House)to defend Australia against global terrorism and regional powers such as China, North Korea and Indonesia. If Australia were attacked directly, Britain and New Zealand would offer token material aid. A few countries--Spain, Italy, perhaps Japan--would offer polite conversation. The rest of the world would ignore Australia even while it was destroyed.

Howard represents the older generation of Australians who remember or studied Australia's experience in the early 1940s, when Japan was on the march.

What we're seeing in the Axis of Weasels is the end of the collective defense. Every country for itself, as in the 1930s.

[Indy Pendance]

Australia also realizes there is a huge muslim population knocking on their door.