Aussie President John Howard slams Obama...

[xyzer]

This afternoon I saw Obama responding by saying USA had provided 160000 troops to Iraq. Australia should've sent 20000 troops since Howard is so concerned about terrorism. However, Australia only sent 1400 troops...

This marks the latest 'political upstart, Obamas' petty juvenile approach to foreign relationships! I see some posters are encouraged by this playground remark? Can't you just see it on the grammar school playground ? "My friends are better than your friends"..."I did more than you did"!?
These devotees are probably the ones who complain the most that Bush acts like a cowboy but at least he is restrained and tactful in his remarks about other allied leaders?
I think it marks Obama as just another undignified opportunist! It also displays his naivete' and use of juvenile : 'babble' when he gets in front of reporters.
Strike two against this bozo! I'm amazed that some crowd around and even want to touch this latest political holyman?:eek:

[Matt W]

So, you encourage world leaders to intervene in America's internal affairs, xyzer? Interesting....

[rmnunez]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

[rmnunez]

I don't think solidarity and commitment in the US-led effort to erradicate international terrorism is most accurately reflected in the number of troops contributed. I think capability, resources, location, trade and other relations play a role. Tell Obama its a 'white' thing between Christian anglo blue-eyed native English-speakers, something a black Muslim could never undertand.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Matt W So, you encourage world leaders to intervene in America's internal affairs, xyzer? Interesting....

Sure, if they want to but it might be hard and unlikely to succeed, but might makes right, so if they can do it, more power to them.

[rmnunez]

Its not the same thing. When Obama criticises Australian foreign policy practice the Australian government should and can reply, properly does. This is not what is meant by intervening in the political affairs of another country. When a government sends a candidate money or officially endorses his statements, that would be more like it.

[Sappho]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary That's rich, I doubt that australia couldn't have spared a few more thousans troops, saying that they were too smart to get too involved in such a disaster would have been better.

To give 20,000 troops for The US's disposal is to give more than 1/2 of our armed forces. Has The US contributed more than 1/2 of it's forces to the middle east - ofcourse not - so why should we. Our contribution is at the same percentage as that of The US.

You do realise that we have only 21,000,000 citizens...... and the US has?

As to the other point made by some such politican over there telling our Prime Minister to but out of their internal affairs............... well right back at ya baby........... The US struggles to stay out of other nations internal affairs.

[Gods_Mercenary]

First of all, why would you give any troops for a foriegn country's disposal?, second, if the war is that important, I'm sure that a few thousand more troops aren't out of your reach.

[Sappho]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary First of all, why would you give any troops for a foriegn country's disposal?, second, if the war is that important, I'm sure that a few thousand more troops aren't out of your reach.

Yes.... It is out of our reach to provide very many more. We have the south pacific on our doorstep. We have our own foriegn policies to consider.

And as to giving troops for a foriegn country's disposal..... we are allies.... that's why we did it.... to show our support.

Why don't you know this?

[Gods_Mercenary]

I do know this, although it was probably done to appeal to the powerful U.S., but it seems like a one way deal, you follow the americans into hell, and you get, what? protection in case someone invades? seems unlikely, from what I understand australia has one of the better militaries in the region.

If it is out of your reach then the prime minister should understand why Mr. Obama believes it is out of our reach to continue the war. We too have our concerns and the pressure of being the U.N.'s rotwieler

[rmnunez]

In his 2006 memoir “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama allowed that he was “sympathetic to the pressures Democrats were under,” adding: “I didn’t consider the case against war to be cut-and-dried.” Obama changes tune toward opposition - Examiner.com

Yes, I agree with Obama.