paul, why should Howard apologize, you need to get over it .. he has nothing to apologize for. The support of the US in the Vietnam war was based on a fear of the spread of communism, you were probably too young and silly to remember what the world was like back then. Do you remember the Malaysia emergency?

What unit was I in, none of your business .. okay. Please do not try to identify people on line .. there are a few lately on this site who pursue angry little vendettas with people they disagree with, don't become one of them. It's an opinion site, you have yours and I have mine, you can start with the insults the way you insult Howard, but it doesn't do anything except expose your personal problems with life.

I don't agree with people who spray PM John (MOS) Howard the way they do and will defend him because, overall, he is a good man. You can cherry pick things to hate, but that's your problem, not mine or his.

His government made mistakes, probably the worst was the AWB thing, and people should have gone to jail for that.

Ultimately Australia is a better place for his stewardship, I cannot say the same about the current government who are intent on class war and being in power for the sake of it, not because they have any plan to better Australia.

I'm guessing you can forgive the current government, because "Howard was worse", which is a pretty poor effort at dealing with reality, maybe I'm wrong, but do you maintain the rage, to compensate for the current government's disastrous incompetence?

I've never been one to go along with the notion of left and right in politics / life. Rather I tend to think of people as being either conservative, those that want to maintain the status quo, including existing Institutions like the monarchy, continually resisting change. One the other hand there are those who I would call radical, in favour of change. No one is entirety conservative or radical, We all tend to be a bit of both. An example of what I'm saying is the political leadership of China, 60 years ago they, the communists, were radical, wanting to change the social order, tear down the existing institutions, a new beginning. Today the very same group are conservative wanting to maintain the status quo etc.
In Australia its difficult to identify much radicalism on the political spectrum, on many issues you would find people like Howard, Gillard, Rudd, Hawke and others named here as being very conservative. It's very much where you sit as to how you perceive others, was there not some mad bloke in American who thought Ronald Reagan was a communist, its all perception.

rpg You said "you were probably too young and silly to remember what the world was like back then. Do you remember the Malaysia emergency?"
rpg you should read my post aged about 60, some simple maths will tell you how old I was in 1970, then you wont have to use the word probably . Insults I'm young and silly, "What unit were you in" a rhetorical question as you said WE were in Vietnam, I didn't think you were even born in 1970 little alone remember it or be in any unit, you show your age by referring to the 'Malaysia emergency' it was in fact the MALAYA emergency, The unification of Malaya and Singapore to form Malaysia had not taken place, hence there never was a Malaysia emergency, if you are going to refer to the past please use the correct terminology. The only insult I've posted about Howard was I said "he looked like Kermit the frog in his baggy green tracsuit, some insult (to kermit) if facts are an insult then I have insulted Howard.

Paul1405,

There was a sort of Malaysia emergency circa 1962-66, but we knew it as the Indonesian Confrontation - when the Brits gave British North Borneo its independence, and it chose to become part of Malaysia (along with Sarawak), and adopted the name Sabah. As Indonesia held the larger part of the island of Borneo, and Indonesia being the sort of regime that it was and continues to be, they wanted the lot. Brits posted Gurkhas on the border, and we provided Engineers (RAE) extending the road from Keningau inland towards Sapulut and the border. It was classified as a conflict zone, and those of us who participated are classified as returned servicemen. This campaign pales into insignificance in comparison with the campaign in Vietnam, which was rattling along in this same timeframe. Sabah continues to thrive as part of Malaysia, and is quite the tourist destination.

Vietnam surely could have been handled better, but since China was funding and supplying the North, if the West had not intervened there may well have been a very different outcome for this neighbour of ours. We cannot know. It remains nonetheless a pain in our conscience, but the bulk of the fault for the direction of the campaign must lie with LBJ and his backroom. Alongside the infamy behind "Well may we say 'God save the Queen', but nothing will save the Governor General" by Gough Whitlam in '75, will sit "All the way with LBJ" from Harold Holt in '66.

John Howard led the diplomacy through which East Timor gained its independence. The man stood tall in this endeavour, and if for no other reason (and I think there are many others) he should rightly be revered. (I think the East Timorese would agree.)

Saltpetre I will give Howard his due over East Timor, thumbs up, but it was the Whitlem Labor government that failed the East Timorese. In part Australia's failure to act more decisively led to the Indonesian invasion and the atrocities that followed. Today we still don't do enough for East Timor, overall we can't be proud of what Australia has achieved for the East Timorese people.
Indonesia has always had a policy of 'no divided islands' be it Borneo, Timor or New Guinea. Australia should be doing more for the forgotten people of West Papua and their treatment by Indonesia as they fight for independence.

Paul1405,

I agree that there have been, and will undoubtedly continue to be diplomatic failures by ours and other governments regarding Indonesia, not the least being our failures regarding West Papua - which appears to be suffering similar atrocities from Indonesia to those suffered in East Timor, and our government and the world should not sit still until this unacceptable situation is resolved in favour of the indigenous peoples (as also applies regarding China in Tibet).

However, I don't see our current Fed gov doing anything in this regard, or of being likely to. Lack of moral fibre perhaps? Or, just too busy trying to shore up possibilities for the next Fed election, and so not willing to rock any boats (asylum seekers included, given the quiescence of our gov regarding Indo's failure to stop boats at point of origin, and having related open borders to Islamic 'refugees').

I'm not sure East Timor is doing all that badly post independence, though, and Aus is still helping to improve things, including regarding Gas reserves in the Timor Sea. It is certain however that they are faring a whole lot better than they were under Indonesian occupation.

Indonesia is a slippery and somewhat untrustworthy regime, with too much control resting with the military (and with a lack of humanitarian conscience all round, it would seem). Unfortunately that means one must hasten slowly in related diplomatic endeavours, sadly so for the people of West Papua (as well as some other minorities held against their will under this opportunistic and comparatively ruthless regime).

As a predominently Muslim nation of 200 million odd, not far off our shores, Indonesia warrants a certain degree of caution and a respect borne of unattractive possibilities.