Atman
You don't think a leader who takes a country to war under false pretences is a threat to its people?

The greatest threats to democracy and safety is not only terrorism but hidden and dishonest diplomatic/economic agendas which put us all at risk.

Better international relations and reducing economic disparity would make better attempts at world peace than the motives of any vested interest group.

pelican

You have obviously fallen for the lefty media scam about Howard lying to take us to war for some personal reward or gain. You must also believe that Bush, Howard, and Blair in addition to the other 30 OR SO nations involved in the Iraq war were all conspirators and or liars or maybe just plain stupid.

Leaders acted on the best information they had at the time and Saddam Hussein had already killed a million people with WMDs.

People who believed Howard was some kind of warmonger were subsequently easily taken in by Kevin Rudd who proved one our most disturbed and bizarre PMs ever. Those who voted for Rudd were thoroughly conned - a fact they continue to gloss over.

In the press, Conservative leaders are panned mercilessly while the behaviour of people on the Left is easily excused, no matter how bizarre.

David Hicks trained with the Taliban to kill westerners. So he got off on a technicality. How does that make John Howard bad?

And, by the way, the 'disparity' you talk about is not caused by the rich nations as much as the corruption of the leaders of the poor ones.

Not for a personal reward or gain Atman, but a pretence of WMDs to be able to legitimise support to an ally on dubious grounds. Very dangerous stuff IMO.

"And, by the way, the 'disparity' you talk about is not caused by the rich nations as much as the corruption of the leaders of the poor ones."

Yes, many of them propped up by Western democracies when there is an economic advantage.

Don't mistake me for a Hicks sympathiser, only a supporter of a judicial system and a democracy for which we are forever arguing is what we are fighting for. Do you prefer the 'talk the talk' and not 'walk the walk' alternative.

I agree Rudd was a dud but at least his own party, fed up with totalitarian leadership, managed to oust him under the Westminster system of Government. If that had not happened I guess the electorate would have got the chance at a later date but given the offerings we may still have ended up with the dud.

We have waited a long time for those who armed, trained and financed the Taliban to be put on trial. Whatever the Taliban did when fighting the Russians was okay but when they fought the Americans it is another story.
The same goes for Saddam Hussein. When he gassed the Iranians and Kurds it was okay to supply the chemicals to produce poison gas, when he did not do as he was told then the gassing became a crime for which he was executed. When will his suppliers be tried?

ARJAY
There is one glaring problem with your 9/11 American conspiracy theory. Osama Bin Laden boasted all over the world through Arab television sources that he was responsible for the bombing of the twin towers.

As for David Hicks;- If you fly with the crows you get shot down with the crows. He boasted to his mother in one of his letters how he and the Taliban brought a village,Cashmere in India if my memory serves me right under Muslim rule, There were quite a lot of people killed in that little escapade.

The man is a traitor. If he had been given a trial it is likely that he would have(or should have faced a firing squad). Howard saved him from this by gauging public opinion(wrong though that opinion was)and deciding to let it go quietly.

Pelican
"Not for a personal reward or gain Atman, but a pretence of WMDs to be able to legitimise support to an ally on dubious grounds."

Nonsense. You are just saying that leaders of 30 + countries including Australia pretended Saddam had WMDs so they could invade Iraq for no reason?? This logic is commonly spouted and is nonsensical in final analysis.

"Yes, many of them propped up by Western democracies when there is an economic advantage."

So Obama and Julia Gillard, for example, are deliberately keeping poor nations poor?? Evidence please. You could start by naming present day leaders and which nations are being kept poor. You won't be able to of course but you will still believe what you said was correct.