Australia’s war

Written By: - Date published: 12:52 pm, February 25th, 2017 - 5 comments
Categories: australian politics, us politics, war - Tags: , , ,

This should come as a surprise to no one:

The Secret Iraq Dossier

Exclusive: Inside Australia’s flawed war

A newly declassified report obtained by Fairfax Media reveals Australia’s role in the 2003 invasion of Iraq was undertaken solely to enhance our alliance with the US. David Wroe investigates.
…
[discusses] a 572-page, declassified internal report on the Iraq War obtained by Fairfax Media under freedom of information laws. Written between 2008 and 2011 by Dr Albert Palazzo from Defence’s Directorate of Army Research and Analysis, it is by far the most comprehensive assessment of our involvement in the war. Originally classified “Secret”, it was finally released last week after more than 500 redactions.

The report concludes that Howard joined US president George W. Bush in invading Iraq solely to strengthen Australia’s alliance with the US. Howard’s – and later Kevin Rudd’s – claims of enforcing UN resolutions, stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction and global terrorism, even rebuilding Iraq after the invasion, are dismissed as “mandatory rhetoric”.

“Mandatory rhetoric” is a charming turn of phrase that we would all do well to remember. Ancient history you say? No longer relevant? Maybe not:

Its release comes as Australia once again ponders the US alliance in the era of Donald Trump, with Australian troops back in Iraq, and with the Pentagon poised to release a new game plan to defeat the Islamic State terror group that could involve asking for more help from Canberra.

It is well worth reading this long an interesting article, and keeping it in mind in light of current events. Thank goodness that Helen Clark and her government were wise enough to keep us out of the shameful Iraq war.

5 comments on “Australia’s war ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. red-blooded 1
    25 February 2017 at 2:29 pm

    Clark and co were under a lot of pressure too, but kept NZ on a more independent path. Of course, it helped that ANZUS had fallen over because of the previous Labour government’s no-nukes policy.

    How different things would have been under a National government! Something for those who argue that there’s little difference between the Nats and Labour to ponder.

  2. Morrissey 2
    25 February 2017 at 3:45 pm

    That’s why we call Australia the Lackey Country.

    • Heather Grimwood 2.1
      26 February 2017 at 7:46 pm

      To Morrissey at 2: Indeed NZ in early 1993 ( think January) NZ must also have been so, as in Auckland, a smallish group mostly women peacefully picketting the US Embassy against the imminent Gulf war were photographed individually close-up front on and in profile. When mildly challenged the answer was that they were “for the Rodney Times”. Who would believe such twaddle!..and who ordered it?
      And that was before the advent of the sophisticated surveillance we are under now.

      • Morrissey 2.1.1
        27 February 2017 at 9:19 am

        Thanks for that Heather. Yes, I agree that we are not much better than the Australians—but at least we had the courage to ban nuclear ships from our harbours, while the ever-compliant Australians rolled over obediently.

        • Heather Grimwood 2.1.1.1
          27 February 2017 at 10:04 am

          Yes, that antinuclear stance was superb. You and readers will know the incident I referred to was NOT under a Labour government.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.