Australia and Iraq

[capt_starlight]

Iraq pledge by Australia PM-elect

 

Australia's prime minister-elect says the country's 550 combat troops will leave Iraq by the middle of 2008.

 

Kevin Rudd, who beat incumbent John Howard in last weekend's election, had previously promised a gradual withdrawal of Australian troops.

 

He made the pledge in an Australian radio interview, but said there had been no discussions yet with the US.

 

Under Mr Howard, Australia was a keen supporter of the US-led invasion and made an early troop commitment.

 

Most of Australia's troops are based in the south of Iraq, focusing on security and the training of Iraqi forces.

 

Confirmation of an election pledge.

 

Diplomatic detail to remain.

 

Troops may be redeployed to Afghanistan.

[Bluelight]

I find it hard to fault them; after all, the US really doesn't want to be in Iraq either.

 

 

If our Aussie friends redeploy X troops to Afghanistan, and we redeploy X troops from Afghanistan to Iraq, does it really matter in the end?

Edited November 30, 2007 by Bluelight

[Archie Pellagio]

I find it hard to fault them; after all, the US really doesn't want to be in Iraq either.

If our Aussie friends redeploy X troops to Afghanistan, and we redeploy X troops from Afghanistan to Iraq, does it really matter in the end?

 

To be honest, these days, its not that surprising, everyone knows its a lost cause if the US could realistically pull out they wouldn't be their either...

 

But Afghanistan is somehow more righteous of a war therefore its okay, as opposed to chimpymcbushitler's war for oil...

[Bearded-Dragon]

Damn good decision. We where led into the war with lies, the threat which was claimed, did not exist. Afghanistan, is a more just war, the Taliban were harbouring Osama ben Laden and supporting al Qaeda. The US decision to pull troops out of Afghanistan in favour of invading Iraq was a mistake. Our doing likewise, was equally as foolish. Hopefully putting more troops into there will save the currently detoriating situation.

[Red Ant]

Is the situation in Afghanistan actually really deteriorating? As far as I can remember, the situation has been

'deteriorating' pretty much ever since American troops entered the country. Now considering the situation was already pretty bad before the invasion, you'd think things can only deteriorate so much before they reach absolute zero.

Edited December 1, 2007 by Red Ant

[sunday]

Damn good decision. We where led into the war with lies, the threat which was claimed, did not exist. Afghanistan, is a more just war, the Taliban were harbouring Osama ben Laden and supporting al Qaeda. The US decision to pull troops out of Afghanistan in favour of invading Iraq was a mistake. Our doing likewise, was equally as foolish. Hopefully putting more troops into there will save the currently detoriating situation.

 

Come on!

[harryRIEDL]

Is the situation in Afghanistan actually really deteriorating? As far as I can remember, the situation has been

'deteriorating' pretty much ever since American troops entered the country. Now considering the situation was already pretty bad before the invasion, you'd think things can only deteriorate so much before they reach absolute zero.

well thats what ive been thinking because of the media realiment from iraq to A-stan means that there more likely to pick up the stuff which would have been ignored during the last cople of years and things arn't that bad and are infact improving. especialy as Iraq has done a very rapid turn around in the last cople of months alone

[Sardaukar]

AFAIK, situation in Afghanistan is far from deteriorating.

[Bearded-Dragon]

The situation is according to all the commentators, detoriating. We have suffered 2 casualties there in the last month, compared to the entire period we have been deployed there earlier. The spring/summer offensive by the Taleban has been appreciably harder on the Coalition forces than in previous years.

[Doug Kibbey]

Meanwhile, in other news...the sky is falling.

[capt_starlight]

Actually, one of Howard's justifications for staying in Iraq was the very reason that we were there in the first place. "If one of the "original allies" disappeared that would be a victory for our enemies in Iraq and the Arab world" - my paraphrase.

 

I wonder what would the propaganda effect of the withdrawal?

[Archie Pellagio]

Is the situation in Afghanistan actually really deteriorating? As far as I can remember, the situation has been

'deteriorating' pretty much ever since American troops entered the country. Now considering the situation was already pretty bad before the invasion, you'd think things can only deteriorate so much before they reach absolute zero.

 

 

Yes, there has been a marked deterioration since Spring 2006, and a massive jump again this year.

Afghanistan is definately worse, and getting worse.

 

The sad irony is it could be reasonably sucessful if it werent for the world going cheap in '02, '03, '04 and '05

 

I wonder what would the propaganda effect of the withdrawal?

 

Now? bugger all.

 

Two years ago? Massive.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Luke_Yaxley

[Simon Tan]

It will never get much better until they can go after the infrastructure in Pakistan. Otherwise it's ebb and flow. Johnny will always run away to fight another day.

 

Kabul will never really be able to exert the sort of pressure needed to defeat AQ/Taliban in detail. It has never been able to project power like that into the countryside.

 

They will always be able to find recruits given the large number of young men and the relative lack of economic activity and opportunity inherent to the area.

 

Simon

[Junior FO]

...

Edited September 19, 2024 by Junior FO

[Jim Martin]

How exactly do you propose gaining control over the NWP?

 

One of our members who's actually visited the NWP has opined that the region could be much improved with the use of neutron bombs.

[Archie Pellagio]

It will never get much better until they can go after the infrastructure in Pakistan. Otherwise it's ebb and flow. Johnny will always run away to fight another day.

 

Kabul will never really be able to exert the sort of pressure needed to defeat AQ/Taliban in detail. It has never been able to project power like that into the countryside.

 

They will always be able to find recruits given the large number of young men and the relative lack of economic activity and opportunity inherent to the area.

 

Simon

 

Like I keep saying.

 

We need to throw money into the afghan side of pashtunistan. The majority of fighters are simple farmers who are fighting simply because holding an AK is a better paying form of manual labor than holding a hoe.

The tribal elements etc are secondary.

 

Going into Pakistan is unlikely to both a) happen and b ) be terribly successful.

If friendly guys like Jengiz Khan couldn't pacify them, what hope do a bunch of wishy-washy water-walking westerners?

 

Theres only one way to win.

 

Make them want to be on our side.

 

Theres only three ways to achieve that.

1) Make them like us - Whether its their desire for democracy or simply refigerators, a white pickett fence and a car in the garage - This is not likely to happen.

 

2) Bribe them - pay them off to be on our side. Thats what the pakistani's have been doing in NWFP's Tribal mandates, and what the british did before them. Anyone ever read Kim?

 

3) Convince them at bayonet-point.

 

its not that complicated...

[harryRIEDL]

Like I keep saying.

 

We need to throw money into the afghan side of pashtunistan. The majority of fighters are simple farmers who are fighting simply because holding an AK is a better paying form of manual labor than holding a hoe.

The tribal elements etc are secondary.

 

Going into Pakistan is unlikely to both a) happen and b ) be terribly successful.

If friendly guys like Jengiz Khan couldn't pacify them, what hope do a bunch of wishy-washy water-walking westerners?

 

Theres only one way to win.

 

Make them want to be on our side.

 

Theres only three ways to achieve that.

1) Make them like us - Whether its their desire for democracy or simply refigerators, a white pickett fence and a car in the garage - This is not likely to happen.

 

2) Bribe them - pay them off to be on our side. Thats what the pakistani's have been doing in NWFP's Tribal mandates, and what the british did before them. Anyone ever read Kim?

 

3) Convince them at bayonet-point.

 

its not that complicated...

since you been there do you think you could copy the Iraqi's Concerned Locals System which has been very successful iraq

[Archie Pellagio]

since you been there do you think you could copy the Iraqi's Concerned Locals System which has been very successful iraq

 

Apples and oranges.

While I may be mistaken, but my understanding of the "Concerned locals" scheme was basically locals getting fed up with predominantely foreign "al qaeda linked" terrorist elements and the locals going from a bunch of Anti-American insurgents to a bunch of anti-al qaeda terrorists because the FAQE's supplanted the Americans as their primary annoyance.

 

Simply put - They ended up pissing off the locals more than we did, so they did what was in their best interests, but from all i've heard they have every intention of switching back to blowing up Coalition forces in the future...

 

Afghanistan is a bit different.

 

The majority of the population is generally on our side, or at least against them and neutral to us.

With the exception of terrorist (As opposed to insurgent) activity in most provinces, the problem of the insurgency is within pashtun areas. And it is primarily a local problem.

 

In the pashtun areas, the vast bulk of "The Taliban" are simply pashtun peasants who're getting paid to do another form of manual labor. And to someone who's yearly income is probably what you've got in your wallet right now, $20 a day is quite literally cash from heaven.

If we paid them off you're realistically talking 75% of them will melt away.

Afghan warfare is and always has been primarily mercinary. The Taliban had hazaras fighting for it against the NA because they paid more, all the while they were kiling their folk back home.

 

There will still be the die hards.

There will still be the (few) foreign elements.

There will still be a lot of support coming across from the border.

 

But it'll be better than now...

[Mobius]

They should just drop their weapons and run for the border. Stopping to beg forgiveness from each local for 4 years of rape, murder and oppression.

[Archie Pellagio]

They should just drop their weapons and run for the border. Stopping to beg forgiveness from each local for 4 years of rape, murder and oppression.

 

I am assuming you mean the taliban not the australian troops right?

[capt_starlight]

Some more news - from the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

 

US 'respects' Rudd's stance on Iraq

 

A senior US official says the Rudd Government's commitment to withdraw combat troops from Iraq will not damage the American-Australian alliance.

 

The US Undersecretary for Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, has been meeting senior ministers in Canberra.

 

Mr Burns has told ABC TV's Lateline he has been very impressed with the new Federal Government.

 

"We've gotten off to a great start over the last two days in the conversations that [American Ambassador to Australia Robert]McCallum and I have had - we're looking forward to further conversations," he said.

 

"Allies should treat each other in a friendly and respectful way, particularly when a new government comes in, so there's a lot of goodwill in Washington towards Prime Minister [Kevin] Rudd and towards his fellow members of the Australian Cabinet."

 

Mr Burns says the US administration understands the Labor Government's stance on Iraq.

 

"What all those Australian men and women have done in the Iraq effort, as well as Australia is doing in Afghanistan, we're grateful for it," he said.

 

"But we understand that Australia has a right to make its own decisions, we respect that.

 

"I think what we want to do now is find a way to work with Australia to see how we can both, with a lot of other countries, help to stabilise Iraq politically."

 

Apart from places like this forum I wonder if this is getting any "air time" or "print inches" in the US media. Seems like nil from what I can find....

[Archie Pellagio]

Some more news - from the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

 

US 'respects' Rudd's stance on Iraq

Apart from places like this forum I wonder if this is getting any "air time" or "print inches" in the US media. Seems like nil from what I can find....

 

 

The only way an australian pull-out would get air time in the US is if we were pulling out of Paris Hilton...

[World_In_Conflict]

The only way an australian pull-out would get air time in the US is if we were pulling out of Paris Hilton...

The funny thing is thats true. Australia sure doesn't get the media coverage they deserve.

[Bearded-Dragon]

The funny thing is thats true. Australia sure doesn't get the media coverage they deserve.

 

Which raises the question in my mind, "Are we as appreciated as perhaps we should be?"

 

There might have developed more support for the war in Iraq if the US Government and nation had shown a great deal more appreciation for the effort we made. Unfortunately, and because of the perception that our government and the US/UK Governments lied about the reasons why they were declaring war on Iraq, Iraq is, downunder at least, the war that dare not speak its name. It gets very little mention even in our media.

[Rocky Davis]

Here we go again. I asked you (before) to prove your assertion that the leaders of the US, UK, Australia a(nd others in the OIF Coalition) knowingly and willingly "lied" and you avoided doing so.

 

1. We where led into the war with lies, the threat which was claimed, did not exist.

 

1. So, you have the "smoking gun," eh? Source please - hard facts wanted. Opinions wild-assed guesses, circumstantial evidence, conspiracy theories or anything else that would be thrown out of court as not qualifying as "evidence" is NOT wanted. Nothing relating to organizations with a political cause is NOT wanted (stopthewarnow.org and the like).

 

Surely, there must be some Buddhist saying regarding "mindlessly repeating an unproven accusation." Is there not?

 

2. Which raises the question in my mind, "Are we as appreciated as perhaps we should be?" There might have developed more support for the war in Iraq if the US Government and nation had shown a great deal more appreciation for the effort we made.

 

3. Unfortunately, and because of the perception that our government and the US/UK Governments lied about the reasons why they were declaring war on Iraq, Iraq is, downunder at least, the war that dare not speak its name. It gets very little mention even in our media.

 

2. So, what is the "US appreciation you DID get" and how does that compare with the "US appreciation you wanted, but didn't get?" Please be specific.

 

3. So, above you say (outright) that the war was started based upon lies. Here, you say there is only the perception of lies. That's probably because (once again) you have no proof other than the proof that exists in your own mind - which means nothing at all to anybody else.

 

If the US and UK leaders knowingly and willingly lied, then the leaders of all of the Coaltion also lied. Here is a list of the "liars" (as you refer to them):

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20030326-7.html