As the debate about the Iraq War, the reasons for going into it in the first place and whether the US should withdraw [not "cut and run" as Bush, Blair and Howard keep on asserting] continues in America an op-ed piece by NYT columnist Bob Herbert ["Worse than Pointless"] in the IHT, undoubtedly reflects considerable opinion in the USA. The article is only available as a subscriber, but the piece concludes thus
"America needs to cut its losses in Iraq. The folly of the Bush crowd and its apologists is now plain for all to see. Murtha is right: The war is not sustainable. Even Republicans in Congress are starting to bail out on this impossible mission. They're worried - not about the welfare of the troops, but about their chances in the 2006 elections.
To continue sending people to their deaths under these circumstances is worse than pointless, worse than irresponsible. It's a crime of the most grievous kind"
What is "interesting" to reflect on - most likely a consequence of the media not questioning Howard, Downer and Hill - is that not even the slightest debate about what is an increasing debacle in Iraq, has arisen in Australia.
"America needs to cut its losses in Iraq. The folly of the Bush crowd and its apologists is now plain for all to see. Murtha is right: The war is not sustainable. Even Republicans in Congress are starting to bail out on this impossible mission. They're worried - not about the welfare of the troops, but about their chances in the 2006 elections.
To continue sending people to their deaths under these circumstances is worse than pointless, worse than irresponsible. It's a crime of the most grievous kind"
What is "interesting" to reflect on - most likely a consequence of the media not questioning Howard, Downer and Hill - is that not even the slightest debate about what is an increasing debacle in Iraq, has arisen in Australia.
Comments