Reply #3: Just wondering... [View All]

[angrychair]

If the mission in Iraq is so important to Australia (reference John Howard's recent comments) and the UK (half their troops now leaving the country)than WHY are they reducing their troop levels? If its so important to them, then they need to just move those troops from Basra to Baghdad and help out. Its not as if the help is not needed. If John Howard has so much fire in his belly for victory in Iraq then why not throw a couple more shrimp on the barbie and help a good friend out. All these people talk about how important this whole thing is but the United States is the one bellying up to the bar with 98% of the manpower (99% of the deaths)and 99.8% of the money. Why is that? Howard doesn't like Barack Obama's ideas for Iraq then he needs to either pony up 10,000 more troops or shut his mouth. Blair talks about being a "partner" and "friend" with the U.S. but decides to pick up his toys and go home for dinner. I look at it like this. Picture yourself in a bar with a couple of loud mouth friends. All together your talking crap and telling stories and before you know it a fight starts. Your friends Brit and Den and Bruno finish up with their one guy and then stand around watch 3 guys kicking the tar out of you then get bored and slip out the back door. Before you know it, your bloody and broke because someone still had to pay the tab.
In short, I just don't understand how anyone in the * administration can look out to a group of reporters or into a camera and keep a straight face while telling them that the UK withdraw is "sign of our success in Iraq". What a load of crap!!!!