In the middle of the catfight between US presidential contender Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, the "hypocrite" word has been bandied around.
But we're kind of puzzled at the irony involved. Howard criticizes Obama for promising to pull troops out of Iraq. Obama fights back by inviting Australia to send more troops into Iraq...
Err...does Obama want troops in, or out, of Iraq?


Obama is on marked time. The second he poses even the remotest thread to Hilary's campaign, he'll wake to find a large knife buried deep into his back.
Posted by: Spirit Of 76 | February 13, 2007 at 01:39 PM
I think the comment was in reference to the fact that a country with an investment of 2000 odd troops should not be telling a country with an investment of 100,000+ troops that it should stay and fight. Perhaps the subtlety is a little lost on you. or perhaps you could actually include his entire line
I would also note that we have close to 140,000 troops in Iraq and my understanding is Mr Howard has deployed 1400.
So if he is to fight the good fight in Iraq I would suggest that he calls up another 20,000 Australians and sends them to Iraq - otherwise it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric."
Posted by: s | February 13, 2007 at 01:46 PM
Based on relative populations Australia by Obama's challenge - should send in another 7,000 odd. But who says anyway that allies - showing support - have to have the same ratio as the people that started the war? Would Obama support the view that a rich man - paying more tax than a poor man - ought to have more say (more votes) on how that money is spent? I very much doubt it. Obama shows his nature by resort to this form of fallacious argument.
Posted by: Peter Tashkoff | February 13, 2007 at 01:56 PM
Well, for those that feel strongly about it here from the safety of NZ, its easy: Ship leaves from over there, pick up your rifle on the way.
Posted by: s | February 13, 2007 at 02:56 PM
Its not so hard. He simply said to Howard that he could replace the US guys with Diggers if John wanted to persist with the war. I think, subject always to public opinion affecting his thoughts like it does, he wants the US troops out.
Posted by: John Boy | February 13, 2007 at 03:22 PM
Simply the sort of straight talking put down that left Howard looking like a bag full of empty bluster -neatly summed up by Michelle Grattan this morning
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/blunder-followed-by-bluster-with-a-dash-of-hubris/2007/02/12/1171128898889.html
Posted by: The Shrub | February 13, 2007 at 04:14 PM