Does Howard still trust his favourite overseas mate after this?

Iraq War now turned Turtle?

A war now needing philosophers much more than Generals or politicians.

We who have followed the war so close, now have visions of a Saddam sardonically smiling in his coffin, and of a fully alive bin-Laden joyously chuckling in his beard.

All because George Bush has now set his sights on Iran, believing those Shias whom he had shown sympathy to for so long for having lost hundreds of thousands of their peoples to a murderous Saddam, now Bush has his generals casting them aside.

Aside right now because those same Iraqi born Shias are related to Iran - thus for Bush and Cheney and quite possibly our Johnny Howard, just so much more fodder for the shock and awe diplomatic missile massage, and indeed possibly nuclear fodder for the coming war against America’s real enemy, Iran, the far bigger Iraqi nation that had made fools of the Americans so much since the end of WW2.

Certainly many of us had clapped our hands when the Iranians had held the US Embassy captive for over a year, and again when after eight years on from 1981, the Shia Iranians had defeated Saddam’s not so gallant Sunni Iraqis, even after Donald Rumsfeld had been advising them for years.

All looking like America’s own fault, because at the time the public was not sure whether the US was fighting a Cold War battle, or just the same old Anglophilic imperial one for hegemon and contraband - now so much about oil.

Fact is, that none of us liked Saddam and even far less like bin Laden, but now we are truly shocked with a madcap report from the New York Times about American troops near Baghdad calling in helicopter gunships preventing Iraqi government Shiite soldiers from rounding up Sunni insurgents, formerly called Saddam's front-line troops.

Wonder now if Howard would know which sides which, or what plans he has with his American ally?

Hi Curaezipirid.

I note your interesting comment:

>>Reconciling self-interest with public-interest is really easy actually. Just try a decent dose of shame.<<

And there is the problem.

As long as we have self interest dictating our political choice, 'shame' is quite relative.

For example, Kevin Reynolds in WA considers it a shame that Rudd has 'abandoned labor values' kind of thing.. He feels it is a shame NOT to be clawing more and more money and privilege out of the 'boss class' and redistributing it to the 'worker class'......

I presume the Coalition would regard anything which reduces 'private' enterprise as a 'shame'....

This is why I made the point about Jesus. He never lived or spoke with his own carnal interest in mind, but with the interest of the salvation of humanity.
Yes.. he did mention his unique relationship to the Father, which is quite appropriate considering its reality.

But His primary goal and objective, was the reconciliation of humanity to the Almighty. It follows logically, that if mankind is properly reconciled, forgiven, renewed, then we will seek the common good rather than selfish well being at the deliberate and unust expense of others.

Sometimes so much damage has been done by one group to another (European vs Indigenous) that no amount of hand wringing or verbal gesture can ever restore things to how they were. The only thing left is for both groups to reach out to each other and genuinely seek racial and historical reconciliation with the best interests of all parties in mind.

Those interests as I see it are 'Food, Shelter, Security, dignified relationships, acceptance' each of which then translate into many other specifics.

Your mention of the Davinci Code like theories :) was a bit of a laugh this early in the morning, after all..that author conceded it was an invention of his own mind.

SPIN. Swan says "Under Howard interest rates reached 22%" "Costello says "They were never higher than 13%" and they are both right. This tells us something eh :)

What’s Howard’s Future now in the Middle East?

Iraq War turned Turtle?

A war now needing philosophers more than Generals or politicians.

We who have followed the war so close, now have visions of a Saddam sardonically smiling in his coffin, and of a fully alive bin-Laden joyously chuckling in his beard.

All because George Bush has now set his sights on Iran, believing those Shias whom he had shown sympathy to for so long for having lost hundreds of thousands of their peoples to a murderous Saddam, now Bush has his generals casting them aside.

Aside right now because those same Iraqi born Shias are related to Iran - thus for Bush and Cheney and quite possibly our Johnny Howard, just so much more fodder for the shock and awe diplomatic missile massage, and indeed possibly nuclear fodder for the coming war against America’s real enemy, Iran, the far bigger Iraqi nation that had made real fools of the Americans more than once since the end of WW2.

Certainly many of us had clapped our hands when the Iranians had held the US Embassy captive for over a year, and again when after eight years on from 1981, the Shia Iranians had defeated Saddam’s not so gallant Sunni Iraqis, even after Donald Rumsfeld had been advising them for years. All looking like America’s own fault, because at the time the public was not sure whether the US was fighting a Cold War battle, or just the same old Anglophilic imperial one for hegemon and contraband - now so much about oil.

Fact is, that none of us liked Saddam and even far less like bin Laden, but now we are truly shocked with a madcap report from the New York Times about American troops near Baghdad calling in helicopter gunships preventing Iraqi government Shiite soldiers from rounding up Sunni insurgents, very likely remnants of Saddam’s front-line troops.

Wonder now in Iraq which sides which, and reckon it might be a good time for Rudd to ask Howard what plans he has now there with his best pal American mate?