Comments on: Aussie Combat Troops Home From Iraq

Woman Suicide Bomber Kills 15 In Diyala Province; Top Shiite Opposes U.S. Bases

[ausus-2009]

incog-nito,

Will 2009 then be looked upon by historians as the year that the US went and hid under its bed?

[omaar-101]

Posted by ausus: Shortly after the outbreak of World War II, the British abandoned all but Europe and the Middle East.

Had it not been for the Marshall Plan, all of Europe might have been under (Stalinist Rule) after World War II. As it was, a hasty withdrawal of US troops after the war led to Russian troops over-running Eastern Europe.

Without the Berlin Airlift all of Berlin would have fallen to (Stalinist forces). Without US-led forces, Korea would have fallen to Kim Il Sung.

Perhaps the neoisolationists would not have minded these outcomes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Japan and Most of Western Europe is (Socialist) A$$ Hole an None of them are ******* & Bemoaning those facts either.

Stop trying to Fear Monger & Muslim Mongering, because these people have their life and nothing you say here can detract from their Lifestyle.

Canada & India are Socialist too.


The World does not march to our Drums, its called Variety of Life.

What Works here will Not an Does Not Ring well Elsewhere.

We Live in a Militarily Ran, Capitalist Society..Simple an Plain.

The `Patriot Act` has taken Much of what was Freedom, in this Country and You said Nothing about it, yet Agreed without Reading, the Fine Print.

You can`t do anything without Big Brother looking at You on Public Camera, Your Phones being Tapped, The Websites you visit, being used against you and Your Email being read.

[incog-nito]

zeeZedzee: Each person''s power to affect history is of course extremely limited, but people are not completely powerless. They had the chance in 2004, they''ll have another chance in 2008. It may or may not change things, but at least there is a chance.

[ausus-2009]

Unfortunately, no country individually or group collectively, including the United Nations, has much of a record in keeping the peace or stopping expansionist dictatorial regimes.

Shortly after the outbreak of World War II, the British abandoned all but Europe and the Middle East. Had it not been for the Marshall Plan, all of Europe might have been under Stalinist rule after World War II. As it was, a hasty withdrawal of US troops after the war led to Russian troops over-running Eastern Europe. Without the Berlin Airlift all of Berlin would have fallen to Stalinist forces. Without US-led forces, Korea would have fallen to Kim Il Sung.

Perhaps the neoisolationists would not have minded these outcomes, but it is doubtful if they had come to pass we would be having this free and open communication today.

[zeezedzee]

incog-nito you said, "Tell that to Mr. Bush!" ... I''ve tried, but if you think the American people can get this idiot to listen to anything we have to say then you''re sadly mistaken. The average US citizen has no voice, had there been a vote with the truth instead of his made up lies about attacking Iraq then it''d never have happened. Unfortunately the facts, the truth, it''s all hidden from us. They do as they please, so don''t blame all US citizens for what the president has done. Not all of us want him to be doing what he''s done and we''ll all be celebrating when he''s finally out of office! More people than not want us out of Iraq. I don''t have all the answers in the world either, personally I''d take this stand about the USA, either leave us alone or be nuked, but as a 56 year old citizen of the USA I''m sick to death of this country sticking its nose in everyone else''s business as if we''re supposed to be the leading police agency for the world. That''s just my 2 cents view, but we really don''t have that much say about our government!

[incog-nito]

The USA can not afford to continue to police the world alone without the equal support of those other nations who have given their word to be part of the policies agreed upon to keep peace in this world. I don''''t get it!

Posted by zeeZedzee at 11:31 PM : Jun 22, 2008

Tell that to Mr. Bush.

[ausus-2009]

TruUSA, Your attack on Obama is not relevant to the current string. You make a lot of accusations without concrete evidence. ubrew12 tends to make unsubstantiated statements as well, but at least he (or she) is on topic.

[zeezedzee]

Why is it that the USA always has the largest number of troops, by far, policing other nations than any other countries send? Why is it that when the UN, or Nato, or whomever decides to go police another nation that it''s predominately with American troops with the majority of deaths being USA lives? Other nations, like Australia for instance in this news story, pull out all together and abandon the USA while we continue to lose our children over there! Where would Australia have been had the USA not been there for them during WW2, where would the UK have been had we not backed them during WW2, and why is it now that the majority of young soldiers dying falls upon the shoulders of USA mothers and fathers? Where are the other nations who have vowed in the past to be part of keeping peace in the world? Why do these other countries not do an equal share, and why does it seem that the USA has 1000 times the amount of troops as everyone else does? The USA can not afford to continue to police the world alone without the equal support of those other nations who have given their word to be part of the policies agreed upon to keep peace in this world. I don''t get it!

[ubrew12]

ausus said: "It worked in the rebuilding of Japan after World War II. "
Maybe thats the problem. America is always trying to recreate the conditions of WWII under which we were the good guys, saving the world against its own fascist desires. Reality: when WWII started, our military was smaller than Romanias. Maybe we were the good guys because we had NO CHOICE but to enter the war as pacifists, true reluctant warriors who would rather be doing ANYTHING other than fighting. And we paid dearly for our ignorance of the ''killing arts'' in our first forays into combat.

Today, we ''shock and awe'' with the best that $600 billion a year in military spending, and an entire warrior culture dependent on that social spending, can generate. But, when the dust lifts, we''re no longer seen as the good guys. The people we''ve conquered see us as an empire, and with some justification recognize we''re an empire of oil. You talk to ordinary Americans, and they don''t even know where these countries are, or why we''re invading them. Furthermore, they seem to accept the notion that we invaded them because THATS WHAT WE DO! I mean, why else would we have this kick-*ss military! We are not reluctant warriors, we are all too happy to be out and about, killing a hundred thousand here, a hundred thousand there, bringing oil, I mean democracy, to their world. Eisenhower warned us about ''them'' (the military/industrial complex): but he didn''t warn us about US.

[ausus-2009]

"But, impose our own regime against the locals? When has that EVER worked?"

It worked in the rebuilding of Japan after World War II. Other than whaling, they have been excellent world citizens since America rebuilt that country''s governmental institutions. The US even introduced trade unionism to Japan.

[ubrew12]

ausus said: "Don''t you agree that the Taliban had some nasty habits, eg amputation or death for those that opposed their regime"
YEs. They were about as bad as the Saudi regime that currently own Saudi Arabia and does all you just mentioned. Funny though. THOSE guys are our best buds.

I don''t want the see the Taliban back in Afghanistan. I just don''t think its our beef, let the Afghans settle it themselves. For some reason a substantial fraction LIKE what the Taliban represent (probably MORE because they are anti-NATO than for any other reason). Build the pipeline, work to keep Pakistan as an ally. No one can long ignore the U.S., including the Afghans. But, impose our own regime against the locals? When has that EVER worked?

[ausus-2009]

ubrew12,
Don''t you agree that the Taliban had some nasty habits, eg amputation or death for those that opposed their regime, the treatment of women as cattle, the blowing up of symbols of other religions, helping Osama, training people to go overseas and blow up those who do not toe their narrow Islamist line, etc.

[ubrew12]

ausus said: "I take it you are an apologist for the Taliban "

The Taliban are a grass-roots Islamic movement in Afghanistan that is deeply popular. They aren''t a cabal or a Saddam-like dictator that can be taken out and forgotten. I have enough respect for democracy, popular movements, and the right to self-determination for Americans as well as other people, to respect what the Taliban represent to the AFGHANS, which at the end of the day are the only people who''s opinions MATTER on the Taliban.

If we keep this ''imposition of will'' on the Taliban, we may end up losing not only Afghanistan but also Pakistan. Ironically, the last American president to understand the value of popular independence movements against foreign aggression was Jimmy Carter, who used the precursors to the Taliban to embroil the Soviets invaders of Afghanistan in their own private Vietnam (and thereby hastening the end of the Soviet Union far more than Reagan ever did). And What did the Soviets want from Afghanistan? (ownership of the VERY same pipeline we''re now claiming ownership over). In the end, either the Afghans will own that pipeline, or no-one will own it. That''s not a threat. That''s an historical observation of the power of locals over the self-determination of their own lands and cultures.

[ausus-2009]

ubrew12,

I take it then you are an apologist for the Taliban and think that they were wonderful democratic people who respected women''s rights, the rights of others to religious freedom and were just providing hotel space for Osama.

[ubrew12]

ausus said: "To ascribe Australia''s motives in Afghanistan as being about oil is both cynical and ignorant. "
Well, I''ll leave the ignorance to you, if you think I was talking about SAUDI oil having to pass through Afghanistan instead of Iran. Take a look at YOUR atlas: Central Asia is south of Siberia. Not that it matters to you: the Aussies get their oil from Indonesia. The Aussie ''good guys'' are at the international forefront in wave energy technology (which generates usable power in waves down to 2ft, but has already survived 100 year storms and waves up to 100ft along the Southern coast). The Aussie ''sheep'' followed their American owners into Afghanistan to impose an oil pipeline from central asia to the Pakistani coastline that''s owned by the Americans (rather than the Argentinian consortium the Taliban preferred, and for which they were executed). But, don''t worry, the American right will remember your contribution (by moving there once they are kicked out of America).

[ausus-2009]

ubrew12,

"Newsflash: The liberals own their government. You can run, but you cant hide."

Just another example of your ignorance. The Labor Party has the Australian Federal Government and every State and territory government. The only major place where the Liberal Party is in power is the city of Brisbane, but not the State of Queensland where it is housed.

[ausus-2009]

ubrew12,

Of course the Taliban was tied to 9/11. They housed Osama and his terrorist training camps.

Obviously you have no understanding of oll. Australians pay nearly twice as much for gasoline as Americans, hardly cheap oil. Oil is transported by ship and not by pipeline to Australia. It is an island continent.

Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and the UAE are not landlocked. If you had a proper look at your map the area of land between these countries and Afghanistan is called Iran.

To ascribe Australia''s motives in Afghanistan as being about oil is both cynical and ignorant.

[patriot12436]

cdfoxtrot
Your comment is about the same as military intelligence, the two do not go togetther.

[patriot12436]

As much as i usually disagree with feelfree4u, i have to say i agree 100% about Iraq. I wish our leaders were as smart as the countries who have brought their troops home. The Aussies are not running with their tails between their legs, they just applied common sense.

[rheola-2009]

Even the war-mongering Brits want out.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by cdfoxtrot at 05:42 PM : Jun 22, 2008


If you are an American, is the above statement not a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black?
Particuarly over the last 8 years of G.O.P. rule.