It would seem that the US isn’t the only country whose primary leader plays sleight of hand when it comes to debate: Australia’s Howard is using Obama’s candidate announcement speech to deflect discussion away from climate change to the Iraqi conflict.
If I were the people of Australia, I would balance 1400 soldiers in Iraq against the fact that it is completely surrounded by water when making a decision about what is of most critical importance to the people of that country. Unless Howard would prefer that Iraq remain a lightning rod for Islamic discontent, rather than have such shift focus to, say, Indonesia.
This kind of political rhetoric isn’t surprising: it seems to be representative of anyone associated with Bush. What is surprising, though, is how anyone can possibly think there is any question of ‘win’ or ‘loose’ regarding Iraq. Frankly, I would question the intelligence of any person who uses such terms in regards to this conflict. But, we have enough problems with our own fearless leader, who now seems to want to make bad matters worse by trying to trigger a war with Iran. Howard is Australia’s concern, not ours.
