The Aussies

Posted By Blackfive

John Howard was re-elected in Australia by a much wider margin than just about every single analyst in the world believed. In fact, it looks like his party is going to gain ground, not lose it. Many see this as a referendum on the invasion of Iraq. That's hogwash.

Australia, one of (if not) "the" toughest countries in the world, has an outstanding military. Their Special Air Service soldiers are top-knotch professionals - among the best in the world. But they aren't really in Iraq. Australia has less than one thousand troops in Iraq, none of which have combat or patrolling duties, and none of those have been wounded, let alone killed. And, it must be said, that while they are not fighting in Iraq, they ARE fighting in a lot of other spots.

I'm not suggesting John Kerry's model for Iraq support by asking other country's troops to get killed instead of Americans. That's up to them, not us (Thank you Brits, Poles, El Sals, Italians, etc.).

The point is that, if everyone wants to believe that Howard's re-election for a fourth term is tied to acceptance of the War on Terror (including Iraq), fine by me. The Australians have a lot at stake with the largest Muslim population in the world not far away from their shores. We need everyone that we can get to help fight terror. Hopefully, this election was just the beginning.

Howard, Bush, Blair!...and let's not forget Karzai!

[You should take a spin around the Aussie-sphere by visiting Tim Blair and Arthur Chrenkoff for starters]

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2819/1217864

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Aussies:

» John Howard Wins In Australia from Diggers Realm
John Howard won a 4th term in Australia. This is great news for the coalition and for any rational minded peoples of the world. Unlike Spain and the Philippines, Australia has shown that a true friend doesn't fold like a... [Read More]

Comments

[Michael]

It certainly wasn't a referendum on Iraq, but security is a major concern for Australians, and the Howard haters have used every oppotunity to tie Howards handling of security to what they call the "disastrous mistake of Iraq". (including the media coverage of the Iraq Study Group report which focused only on the "no WMD" angle) If the majority of us believed that it really was a worthless mistake, Howard would never have been reelected.

[Teresa]

I have always said that if, for some reason, I had to leave the US and live elsewhere - Australia would be my first choice! I cringe every time Kerry starts spouting about our lack of allies in the war on terror. Could he insult these countries any more if he tried? I am very glad to hear that Howard was re-elected. I'm off to Tim Blair's now to read up on the rest. :-)

[Gary and the Samoyeds]

If Labour HAD one, every media outlet in the world would have proclaimed it a "defeat" for George Bush. At least they're denied THAT talking-point.

[Gary and the Samoyeds]

For "one," read "won." It's not enough use Preview; you have to actually read the words to see if they make sense.

[Tom the Friendly Ghost]

I'm hearing Howard won because of a good economy. But it's nice to see that the Australians didn't let the Jakarta bombing lead them to electing Latham. So right now, the terrorists are 1 for 2 in influencing elections.

One question. Will Howard hold Diana Kerry's attempted interference in his re-election campaign against the U.S. if Kerry is elected in November?

[SFC Dave Hokanson, USA, Ret.]

Time to start mentioning the Koreans. Theyre now the 3rd biggest group in Iraq.

[Harry Tuttle]

I think it is worth noting that, whilst the Australians in Iraq now do not have a combat role, SASR were amongst the first into Iraq, Australian F/A-18s were flying combat sorties during the war, RAN clearance divers were clearing mines during the war, HMAS ANZAC provided 5 inch gunfire support to the Royal Marines and a number of other Australian units were in involved.

It was made very clear at the time that Australian combat units were on 'short term loan' to the operation, as they would be needed back in Australias immediate region.

[davod]

Please do not fall into the habit of equating soldiers in action as equalling participation in the coalition. Any country in Iraq helping the US and Iraqis, regardless of mission, is part of the coalition.

Each government helping is paying a price in the world, and possibly with their own population. You should not doubt that the election in Australia was a referendum on the war in Iraq.
If Labor had won, the world would have declared the coalition dead.

Facts don't matter -it's what the media says and does that the average person sees.

The enemy does one thing right, anything, and it is all over the news. Our triumphs have to be so big that they transcend the political and media spin. Howard in Australia is something that can be ignored by the media but it cannot be spun negatively.

[Dave]

Tom, we'll be with America whether George Bush wins or John Kerry. We're America's ally not Bush's.

Although I have to admit, I think Howard probably feels appreciated a lot more by Bush than he ever was by Clinton.

Probably the biggest win for Bush is the demonstration that having every news service and every celebrity against you doesn't mean you have no chance of winning.

[PureData]

"Please do not fall into the habit of equating soldiers in action as equalling participation in the coalition."

Two nations should also be mentioned and supported -

The Japanese have been very supportive to the tune of 9 billion dollars AND they sent troops to Iraq as well. ( Japan provided a LOC so Centcom could stay solvent during Desert Storm. )

Jordan let us stage SOF, SAR, and C4I. Al-Qaeda tried to decapitate Jordan in the Spring. ( With Iraq's economy booming, Jordan is growing fast. )

Does Kerry think that Japan and Jordan don't count?

An interesting side note - our Chinese contractors I talk to would be in favor of sending Chinese troops - but China is not a democracy, yet.

[Ozwitch]

Davod,

The Labor (opposition) Party here in Australia tried very hard to scare Australians by smearing John Howard and the Libs over the GWOT. Ultimately it was proved that either Australians didn't factor in the GWOT as their primary reason for voting conservative, or enough of them agreed with our stance in Iraq that Labor couldn't win the point.

I believe the former. The last fortnight of the campaign was all about econimic management and interest rates, not security. I agree that if Labor had won, the world would have pointed and said see, Australians have done a Spain. But that would have also been inaccurate, although, of course, accuracy is not a criteria for the MSM. It simply wasn't THE major issue which the Left hoped it would be.

Labor lost as much as the Liberal Party won, and the fact that their leader was inexperienced and inclined to seek sound bites and what seemed at times desperate grabs for votes instead of in-depth policies and a vision for the future helped hand the majority to the Libs. The Libs won because a) economy is strong and b) the Opposition is not.