Found this, rather interesting, any comments? 04 February 2003 Leaked Memo Underscores Howard Government’s Deception George Bush has a ring right through John Howard’s nose’: Brown Alexander Downer’s statement to New Zealand officials that Australia is not in a position to withdraw our defence personnel from the Gulf underscores the Howard Government’s deception of the nation. “Who is in a position to determine when the Australians come home if the Government isn’t ?,”Senator Brown asked. “This directly conflicts with Mr Howard’s assertion that the Australians would not be involved in Iraq if George Bush uses nuclear weapons. His assertions are hollow. “George Bush has a ring right through John Howard’s nose,” Senator Brown said.
Been done. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16939 I still can't get over the willingness of those who dismiss US evidence regarding Iraqi possession of WMD as being circumstantial, and then turn around and hold up "a leaked memo" as being proof of Howard government deception. *shrugs* But as I said, we've been there. I honestly don't know if the Howard government is being coerced in some way or not. I don't know why the assumption is that if anyone supports the US, they are obviously doing so by shotgun. Surely it is possible that they simply agree with the US?
Commenting directly on this particular headline though... I'm at a loss to see how it "directly conflicts" with anything. Howard says that Australians will not be involved in Iraq if the US uses nukes. The US has stated that they're not intending to use nukes unless attacked by WMD first. What conflict? If I cared a about them a little more, I'd despair over politicians.
right sure fact that both bush has come out and said that Nukes would be perfect for taking out SUSPECTED chemical sites and that a british minister came out and said "sure we will use nukes" why again should i think they wont?????
The US is not going to use nukes, unless there is retaliation for Saddam using WMDs first, and I can't believe anyone actually thinks that. It's hardball statesmenship; an attempt at intimidation. It's funny that all those who consider Bush a total liar on everything he says about Iraq having WMDs hold on to his words about using nukes as frikkin gospel. Obviously some are very selective in picking and choosing truths to fit pre-conceived notions.
Perhaps it's just because some of us wouldn't put anything past Bush at this point. Anything goes...I hope the optimists are correct and it's just talk to scare Saddam. Once the first nuke flies, what little MAD reasoning that the countries in that area have for holding back will dwindle. My worse fear is that the US will think of using these termed "little nukes" or bunker destroyers, and the contamination result will be minimal. Why? Because until now there's been this underlying fear that if one nuke is used, everyone will be affected, which is probably true. But if a country's usage proves otherwise, then other countries may make a calculated assumption that a slightly bigger nuke may not affect them as well. I hope that's a too pessimistic viewpoint and dead wrong.
nukes i dont understand all the worry about the us using nukes when you keep saying that sadam has no wmd's. if he does have the wmd's would you like to just sit around and wait until he has the abillity to deliver them wherever he would like.
US has being twisting arms since the preparations for the 1441 UN resolution. First US was pushing for a clear statement at the end of that resolution spelling out clearly that the use of power will be eminent if Iraq doesn’t comply. They were not getting any support for that at all, so they made other UN members to believe that a harsh threat will also be OK. They all agreed to that and now US is turning the translation of the last paragraph as an obvious translation to the use of force and saying they don’t need a second resolution. “Willingness of those who dismiss US evidence”…Really? What about those that ignorantly are willing to believe anything without the facts so that the death of thousands of civilians could be justified?? It is hypocritical to demand a dictator government to account for the weapons we sold, it is hypocritical to think that Anti-Americanism is a threat to us, or that any country will one day get the upper hand and screw us in return for that screwing that we being doing for many, many decades. I think any country has the right to judge our actions, any nation has the right to build mass-destructions weapons (we have the high tech weaponry and abuse it at our own will), we attack any country without international consensus. The more nations that have that weaponry, the less bully US will have to be. Many nations signed the non-proliferation treaty, little they knew on how US was going to capitalized on that! :m:
