You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Obama fights back after PM Howard attack
2007-02-12
US presidential hopeful Barack Obama today challenged John Howard to commit another 20,000 Australian troops to Iraq after the Prime Minister attacked the senator's plan to bring American troops home. The US senator accused Mr Howard of "empty rhetoric" in his criticism of his stand.

"I think it's flattering that one of George Bush's allies on the other side of the world started attacking me the day after I announced," Senator Obama said in Iowa. "I would also note that we have close to 140,000 troops in Iraq, and my understanding is Mr Howard has deployed 1400, so if he is ... to fight the good fight in Iraq, I would suggest that he calls up another 20,000 Australians and sends them to Iraq.

"Otherwise it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric."
Ouch, ouch, ouch. Mr. Howard has a mark on his face from that one. Obama can apparently counter-punch.
Mr Howard earlier attacked Senator Obama's plan to withdraw US combat troops from Iraq by March 31, 2008.
Our story yesterday here.
He said Senator Obama's pledges on Iraq were good news only for insurgents operating in the war-ravaged country. "I think he's wrong. I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilise and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory," Mr Howard said on Channel 9. "If I were running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory not only for Obama but also for the Democrats."
Posted by:Steve White

#16  ouch, OP! That's gonna leave a mark :-)
Posted by: Frank G   2007-02-12 18:05  

#15  Hey whirlwind: a simple google search of "Salman Pak" +training +"Al-Qaida" turned up 16,000 hits. Here are a few of them:

Salman Pak - Iraq's Own Terrorist Training Camp
N. Training of al-Qaida by Iraq
White House Fact Sheet
Captured Iraqi intel confirms pre-war links between Saddam's regime and terrorists
Iraqi Officers: Al Qaida Operatives Were Trained For War Near Baghdad
Posted by: Old Patriot   2007-02-12 17:09  

#14  Big Bad George Bush.

Big Bad Republicans.

Wonderful, wonderful Democrats.

Kind and Generous Moslem Brothers.

There.

Now we know what the election season trolls will be saying for the next few months.

Yawn.

Obama has serious self-esteem issues and is so "sensitive" one call only guess how happy the Muzzies would be if he were presidient. Not only that, but he's black, to boot, and more in line with the blacks-as-slaves (history, Sudan, ets.), or blacks-as-our-bitches (Kofi). Besides, he would be a "perfect" replacement as a US public leader--and they'd finally be rid of that pesky Condi Rice slut.

Howard is correct in his assessment. If you give a date certain regarding troop withdrawl, the enemy will merely save their resources and WAIT IT OUT. Duh.

As for Al Queda's involvment/connections in Iraq, please, troll operatives, please research the archives on this site. There's plenty of info on the subject.
Posted by: ex-lib   2007-02-12 17:03  

#13   John Howard, as I ponder about this, doesn't really have a 'dog in this fight' as goes Iraq.
Apparently, smn, you haven't heard that Australians are fighting - and dying - in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I'd say that gives Australia a "dog in this fight". Barrack Obama's ill-chosen words give aid and comfort to the enemy, just as the US Congress gave aid and comfort to the NVA by refusing to support the South Vietnamese Government, as the US had a treaty committment to do.

Let Obama run for president this election cycle. So far, his words are destroying any hope he has of winning this time, or any other time. The more he talks, the less electable he appears.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2007-02-12 16:59  

#12  Al Qaeda had been in Iraq for some time by 2003, being trained by Saddam Hussein's specialists in the arts of hijacking, bomb making and running experiments in chemical weaponry -- on dogs mostly, from the evidence -- on one side of the Salman Pak training campus

Phase II report from the Senate Intelligence Committee
"Postwar site exploitation of Salman Pak has yielded no indications that training of Al-Qa'ida
linked individuals took place there"

Perhaps you'd like to share your evidence with the US Senate.
Posted by: Angel in the Whirlwind   2007-02-12 10:54  

#11  It doesn't seem the kind of thing you'd enjoy, Excalibur. Leave the lovebirds to one another, eh?
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-02-12 10:28  

#10  That picture looks like it belongs on a toothpaste ad.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2007-02-12 10:23  

#9  If I said, "F*ck Obama and the camel he rode in on." would this be a useful suggestion or just empty rhetoric?
Posted by: Excalibur   2007-02-12 10:08  

#8  "Otherwise it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric."

Is this his new campaign slogan?
Posted by: tu3031   2007-02-12 08:53  

#7  tw, it's the whirlwind thingy. His moral compass needle is off it's center from all that tumbling in the clouds.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-02-12 07:48  

#6  Al Qaeda had been in Iraq for some time by 2003, being trained by Saddam Hussein's specialists in the arts of hijacking, bomb making and running experiments in chemical weaponry -- on dogs mostly, from the evidence -- on one side of the Salman Pak training campus, while Hussein's specialists trained up more Iraqis in these and other esoteric skills on other side.

Honestly, Mr. Angel in the Whirlwind, I'm only a little suburban housewife in the depths of the Midwest and yet I've seen the evidence. How is it that you've managed to keep yourself ignorant?
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-02-12 06:48  

#5  Challenge PM John Howard indeed. It sickens and disgusts me to listen to one of these people flap their gums about Australians commitment to the GWOT. During WWII Australia lost 30,000 killed in action, 40,000 wounded, and over 20,000 prisoners of war. Mostly just average "Auzzie blokes" like thier US counterparts, answering their nation's call. To add to support against the axis, South Africa lost nearly 9,000 killed, 14,000 wounded. New Zealand suffered 11,625 killed in action, the highest rate of KIA's in the Commonwealth. I can't help be ponder how many bloody mess lines this aspiring young piece of kak has stood in.

"Id like to be seen as an average Australian bloke. I can think of... I can't think of a nobler description of anybody than to be called an average Australian bloke." Prime Minister John Howard
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-02-12 06:14  

#4  they will more than likely take a short cut through Iraq, instead of being polite & going the long way round

You mean via Siberia or China?

What a dimwit.
Posted by: phil_b   2007-02-12 05:27  

#3  "If I were running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory not only for Obama but also for the Democrats."

With hindsight, it might have been better for Howard to have prevented AlQ from getting a foothold in Iraq. "Regime Change" was easy; getting the right regime is another thing entirely.

Al-Qaeda wanted the Saddam regime overthrown;
the "Coalition of the Willing" was happy to oblige.

Why Hussein Will Not Give Weapons of Mass Destruction to Al Qaeda
Al Qaeda wants the Hussein regime overthrown. There's also good reason to believe they want to incite a U.S. invasion of Iraq to draw new recruits into the Al Qaeda campaign against a so-called "Crusader"-Israeli alliance aimed at conquering the Middle East.

Now we are in the bizarre situation where "regime change" in Iraq was seen as part of democratisation and liberation of the Middle East;
but where a "just peace" between Israel / Palestine is now seen as instrumental in bringing about a peaceful solution in Iraq.

It will matter little whether the Coalition "stays the course" or "cuts and runs". When it is time for Iran (Persia) to invade Israel (Ezekiel 38) they will more than likely take a short cut through Iraq, instead of being polite & going the long way round.
Posted by: Angel in the Whirlwind   2007-02-12 05:16  

#2  Obama is a Copperhead Democrat. And he invokes the spirit of Lincoln.

Sometimes I despair about the future of our world.
Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever)   2007-02-12 01:42  

#1  John Howard, as I ponder about this, doesn't really have a 'dog in this fight' as goes Iraq. As long as he keeps his shoreline tight as 'Dick's Hat Band' and of course strictly monitor the flights in and out, he doesn't have a worry in the world...unless an ICBM or a Nuke lands on Sydney, Ohhhh, that would be the NORKs or China...I stand corrected!
Posted by: smn   2007-02-12 01:39  

00:00