Change course, Bush urged from all sides

US President George W.Bush left Washington yesterday bound for the Asian economic summit in Vietnam with advice from left, right and centre ringing in his ears to change course, not only in Iraq but on foreign policy in general.

Good Idea. Start with securing the borders of Iraq and then attacking the terrorists lines of supply and if that means destroying the factories from whence they obtain their explosives for IEDs then so be it.

In whatever country they are located.

The anti-war terrorist appeasement brigade have achieved one of their aims. They can now draw parrallels between Vietnam and Iraq with some degree of truth after the mid-term US elections. In ’72 and ’74 when the South Vietnamese needed support the then Democrat majority denied them hope allowing the Communist North to re-arm courtesy of the USSR and subsequently invade South Vietnam.

The assassinations, reducation camps and communists policies resulting in poverty and terror for the remaining millions who couldn’t flee is now history. I would just hope we don’t repeat history just because we have forgotten the past or never understood it in the first place.


  • Dear Kev,

    I see that you now wish to bomb the be jesus out of the neighbouring countries eg Laos, cambodia etc. What good did that do.Do you want to start a world war. This is supposed to secure Iraqs borders. The weapons are not all coming from outside.

    I suggest that most of the IED’s are made from explosive and munitions that the americans failed to secure when they disbanded the Iraqi army and sent them home without pay with their guns and the keys to the armouries and storage depots. Tons an tons of stuff went out the front and back doors beacsue there were not enough soldiers to secure them.

    Sure they may be getting technical advice from the Iranians and the Syrians re the rigging of shaped charges and the like but I would venture to say that out of the 300,000 they sent home there would be a large number of trained men who could rig these devices. They are surely passing on their skills to a ready and growing group of resistance fighters. They might not defeat the US militarily but they have won the PR battle – see the election results. Sound familar kev.

    Don’t forget the US is a democarcy and are not politicians supposed to bend to the will of the majority.

    How can you secure the Iraqi borders with 130,000 men. Bloody impossible. The Americans could not do it in Vietnam with 500,000 men. Rumsfeld did not want more troops sent depsite the advcie of his military men.

    The only solution to these problesm kev is a diplomatic solution with all parties involved. Yes even members of the axis of evil.

    Partition the country along ethnic lines as best as can be achieved and get out of there.

    No “faux platitudes” or gloating but sensible advice. Using guns is not working and that is plain to see with the casualty count of soldiers and civilians mounting every month. Ethnic cleansing is happening and it is not the terrorists who are doing it. It is the Sunnis and the Shia.Iraqis are killing each other.

    The US sought to bring peace and demcracy to Iraq.

    Even you can see that this is not possible with the ethnic and religious divide in that country.

    Partition and get out.

  • Peter
    The war was not lost in Vietnam.
    There was a peace agreement, remember that?
    North Vietnam signed on the dotted line after the Christmas bombings.
    The North did not abide by the terms of the peace accord – they rearmed. America did nothing. They and the rest of the world sat on their hands (that includes you and me, Peter) and did nothing while the Vietnamese were slaughtered.

    And so on to Iraq.
    The question is – do we want to support democracy in Iraq?
    If no then we leave it as is, and don’t blame Bush (although he may have started it, it is those that do not support democracy who would be to blame)

    The main reason that the war in Vietnam was fought for so long is that it was fought as a defensive war. That is, the allied forces were located in South Vietnam taking on the guys from the North and their mates. This is because the politicians were responsible for what the troops could and could not do. What should have happen is that the president should have said: “General, go over there and sort out the problem and let me know when you have achieved it.”

    The Vietnam War would have lasted less than 12 months as the allies would have attacked the North and hit their infrastructure and supply lines from Russia and China. There would have been no Ho Chi Minh trail as supplies would not have got that far.

    You want to secure the borders in Iraq? Attack the infrastructure and supply lines. Where ever they are. You see no one is afraid of the Americans any more because world opinion means that they are accountable for every misdeed, no matter how trivial while the others can hack off innocent peoples heads and show it on TV and the internet and be proclaimed freedom fighters.

    The Americans will now change things in Iraq because Bush has lost power in the Senate. When they leave Iraq, my bet is they will adopt an isolationist policy. They have the technological advantage. They will produce alternative energy, maybe Hydrogen, and become self sufficient in their energy needs. If they sell this new technology to India and China then the Arabs are buggered as demand for their oil will dwindle. The huge profits will disappear.

    America will cease to act as the world’s police, and who could blame them Peter?

  • The horror of the Democrats is that the Arab world knows if you can inflict 3000 KIA on the US, the US is on the way out…..the Play Station generation won.

  • Dear Cav,

    Still cannot fathom how one is going to secure the borders of Iraq.

    It is bordered by Iran, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

    It reminds of Cambodia,and Laos. 500,000 troops and the might of the US Airforce could not fully interdict the supply lines from the North.

    peace treaty – can’t recall a peace treaty but perhaps a truce and pasue in the bombing. The tanks rolling into the Presidential Palace in 1975 seem to suggest otherwise. Are we to see the same mad scenes from the US embassy in Saigon play out again from the green zone.

    it is not possible unless you declare war on Iran etc and invade those countries. This would top disaster with disaster. “disaster” is a word that Balir seems to have accepted about the situation there. Johnnie and Dubya are still in denial.

    I saw that windbag Downer on the “Insiders” on Sunday trying to make out that the only real trouble is in Bagdhad.

    He must have forgotten the UK soldiers in the South who are copping casualties.

    Is the US now more worried about its international prestige and will continue in the quagmire and lose thousands of more troops so that the politicians can save face. Reminds of Vietnam once again.

    Kissinger said today that all stake holders should be called together to talk and sort out a partitioning of the country.

    It appears that Iraqis are voting with their feet and are moving to safe areas especially if they are Sunni’s.

    Get on with and save the iraqis from more msiery and save US and coalition lives.

    Who the hell appointed the US as the worlds policeman? There are many flaws in their political system and their culture yet they suggest that they must force others to adopt it.

    Thank God we inherited the Westminster parliamentary system which is more accountable than theirs. They can keep their system.

  • “This would top disaster with disaster. “disaster” is a word that Balir seems to have accepted about the situation there. Johnnie and Dubya are still in denial.”–peter

    During the interview, Sir David suggested that the West’s intervention in Iraq had “so far been pretty much of a disaster”.

    Blair replied: “It has, but you see what I say to people is why is it difficult in Iraq? It’s not difficult because of some accident in planning, it’s difficult because there’s a deliberate strategy – al-Qaeda with Sunni insurgents on one hand, Iranian-backed elements with Shia militias on the other – to create a situation in which the will of the majority for peace is displaced by the will of the minority for war.”

  • Dear Gary,

    It is a bloody disaster; Bush finally realises it so did the US electorate.

    Why do you think that Rumsfeld got the bums rush.

    That is a man that covered himself with glory – him and that other draft dodger Cheney. He has been the invisible man since November.

    He probably thinks that there are few “dead enders” in Iraq to clean up.

    gary are you still in denial and do you really believe that the US is winning the fight in Iraq.

    Where is the evidence?

  • Peter prove that Howard knew of no WMD”s?

  • Dear Gary

    Major Tinley was told in pre war breifings by US war planners that they did not have any hard evidence.

    you don’t think that this infroamtion and doubt was not passed to tthe man of steel by the Texan.

    Spin and bullshit came up trumps. The former Australian emabassador let the secret out of the bag last week when he was reported to have warned that the Us etc incldung Australia was planning to attack Iraq very shorltly after September 11.

    Gulf of Tonkin all over again. Do you remember that spin turned out to be bullshit. Got them into another wrong war for the wrong reasons.

    55,000.00 dead was the result.

    Howard’s explanation was this was the view of the emabssador and not of the government.

    Do you still believe the liar.

    Billy Hughes was bad enough but this guy takes the gold medal for deceit. The same that they said about Highes applies to Howard :

    “too deaf to listen, too loud to ignore and too small to hit”.

  • Dear Kev

    Refreshing news from the iraq study group.

    It is timely that at last Bush will have some decent advice now that Rumsfeld et al have been discredited.

    Wonder when Little Johnnie wil get the message or are we going to stay there when the Yanks bug out. He is probably receiving too much crappy advice from Lord Downer of Baghdad.

  • Dear Kev

    Good to see that Bush is finally coming out of his state of denial.

    Do you still think that they are winning there?

    Have not heard much from Bolt lately. He seems to have gone missing in action like good old “Dick” Cheney.