Page 1 of 2
Statistics on Australia and a War on Iraq
Posted: 2003-02-08 11:18pm
by weemadando
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/National/story_45079.asp wrote:Only six per cent of Australians are prepared to send Australian troops to war against Iraq without United Nations backing, a poll published in Fairfax papers revealed.
The AC Nielsen survey showed 62 per cent of respondents believed Australia should be involved in a conflict only if approved by the UN.
And one in three believed war against Iraq was not acceptable under any circumstances.
This one is on an Australian news website.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/poll1/vote/total.htm
Posted: 2003-02-09 12:48am
by jaeger115
and... what is your point?
Posted: 2003-02-09 12:53am
by weemadando
jaeger115 wrote:and... what is your point?
Its showing just how pissed off people are with the Federal gov't who sent troops to the Gulf without even consulting parliament.
Its also showing just why Little John can't afford to have a double dissolution at the moment due to the massive public opinion against him and is delaying discussion and voting on the issue for as long as possible.
Posted: 2003-02-09 12:54am
by Wicked Pilot
I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:00am
by Darth Fanboy
The government should do what is in the best interest of its people, but only when they've been authorized to do so. Technically, outlawing potato chips and beer would be in the best interests of the people but they would never be elected again after being thrown out of office.
(i love chips)
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:02am
by weemadando
Wicked Pilot wrote:I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
How is starting a war in a nation that poses NO threat to Australia in the best interests of our people?
Starting a war that has already inflamed public opinion and will likely inflame the region. Which incase you haven't noticed contains several of the worlds most populous muslim nations who already dislike us.
And isn't the government meant to represent the interests of the people?
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:06am
by Stuart Mackey
Wicked Pilot wrote:I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
Lol, a government, esp in anglo-saxon parlimentry democracys, act in the interests of the governmnet and party, the people seldom have much to do with it.
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:13am
by Sea Skimmer
weemadando wrote:Wicked Pilot wrote:I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
How is starting a war in a nation that poses NO threat to Australia in the best interests of our people?
Starting a war that has already inflamed public opinion and will likely inflame the region. Which incase you haven't noticed contains several of the worlds most populous muslim nations who already dislike us.
And isn't the government meant to represent the interests of the people?
Yes. But what the public wants and what's in its best interest are not always the same. That's part of the reason why power is vested in a government, because sometimes unpopular things have to be done. Which is the case for Australia is not something I wish to debate. But the issue basically is the quality of current and future relations with America and some other nations, weighed against war with Iraq and the risks involved with that.
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:19am
by Stuart Mackey
Sea Skimmer wrote:weemadando wrote:Wicked Pilot wrote:I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
How is starting a war in a nation that poses NO threat to Australia in the best interests of our people?
Starting a war that has already inflamed public opinion and will likely inflame the region. Which incase you haven't noticed contains several of the worlds most populous muslim nations who already dislike us.
And isn't the government meant to represent the interests of the people?
Yes. But what the public wants and what's in its best interest are not always the same. That's part of the reason why power is vested in a government, because sometimes unpopular things have to be done. Which is the case for Australia is not something I wish to debate. But the issue basically is the quality of current and future relations with America and some other nations, weighed against war with Iraq and the risks involved with that.
Unfortunatly such an attitude will get littl Jonny Howard voted out and government with different veiws put in. From what I have seen a lot of Aussies are sick of Howard fighting with Blair for the privlidge of being the first under Bush's desk in the morning.
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:33am
by weemadando
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Unfortunatly such an attitude will get littl Jonny Howard voted out and government with different veiws put in. From what I have seen a lot of Aussies are sick of Howard fighting with Blair for the privlidge of being the first under Bush's desk in the morning.
Congratulations, have a cookie.
Posted: 2003-02-09 02:03am
by Stuart Mackey
weemadando wrote:Stuart Mackey wrote:
Unfortunatly such an attitude will get littl Jonny Howard voted out and government with different veiws put in. From what I have seen a lot of Aussies are sick of Howard fighting with Blair for the privlidge of being the first under Bush's desk in the morning.
Congratulations, have a cookie.
Thank you, dont mind if I do.
Posted: 2003-02-09 04:25am
by Archaic`
Us being sick of it is kind of beside the point though. Without this, we don't get our Free Trade pact with the US, not to mention that they'd likely tear up what's left of ANZUS. Regardless of if this war is ethical, or even legal, Australia has rather little choice in the matter, does it?
Posted: 2003-02-09 04:40am
by Stuart Mackey
Archaic` wrote:Us being sick of it is kind of beside the point though. Without this, we don't get our Free Trade pact with the US, not to mention that they'd likely tear up what's left of ANZUS. Regardless of if this war is ethical, or even legal, Australia has rather little choice in the matter, does it?
You have every choice on the matter, the question is, what are your principles?
Posted: 2003-02-09 04:43am
by Darth Wong
Our government has thrown its hat pretty solidly in the ring with the Yanks. And public opinion here is not much different than it is in the US on that matter.
This means we'll send 8 guys, a tent, and a portable BBQ to Iraq, which represents a significant portion of our military
Posted: 2003-02-09 05:01am
by Stuart Mackey
Darth Wong wrote:Our government has thrown its hat pretty solidly in the ring with the Yanks. And public opinion here is not much different than it is in the US on that matter.
This means we'll send 8 guys, a tent, and a portable BBQ to Iraq, which represents a significant portion of our military
If NZ were to become involved this also represents our level of commitment.
However as our budget does not allow for credible BBQ's expect your's to be stolen.
Posted: 2003-02-09 05:09am
by beyond hope
That reminds me of my reaction to watching the news after September 11 and seeing Canadian destroyers helping patrol our waters: "Holy shit, Canada has a navy!"
Saddam's little 3 card monte game with the weapons inspectors has been dragging on for years now. Just the empty chemical warheads alone are troublesome enough to me that I feel something should be done about it.
Posted: 2003-02-09 05:14am
by Stuart Mackey
beyond hope wrote:That reminds me of my reaction to watching the news after September 11 and seeing Canadian destroyers helping patrol our waters: "Holy shit, Canada has a navy!"
Saddam's little 3 card monte game with the weapons inspectors has been dragging on for years now. Just the empty chemical warheads alone are troublesome enough to me that I feel something should be done about it.
Well naturally something neds to be done about Saddam, as something must be done about Mugabe. The thing is doing it right and doing it so you do not cause problems for yourself later on.
Posted: 2003-02-09 06:51am
by Crazy_Vasey
It's not much different in the UK but we're still going to be there with the US. Come hell or high water Blair is going to side with Bush, he always does.
Australia more Pro-War than America.
Posted: 2003-02-09 07:16am
by The Duchess of Zeon
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/story_45589.asp
Welcome on board, Aussies, we're glad to have you.
Posted: 2003-02-09 11:33am
by Wicked Pilot
weemadando wrote:Wicked Pilot wrote:I don't see the point of this.
I can't say this about most nations, but I'm sure the Australian government will do what is in the best interest of it's people.
How is starting a war in a nation that poses NO threat to Australia in the best interests of our people?
What indication do you have that he will launch an attack without UN approval first?
Posted: 2003-02-09 01:30pm
by phongn
Darth Wong wrote:Our government has thrown its hat pretty solidly in the ring with the Yanks. And public opinion here is not much different than it is in the US on that matter.
This means we'll send 8 guys, a tent, and a portable BBQ to Iraq, which represents a significant portion of our military
As long as you bring teh crates of beer
Posted: 2003-02-09 02:09pm
by meNNis
bah... we dont need the canucks or the aussies. as a matter of fact, we dont even need our troops.....
*commence Base Delta Zero...* er wait i mean *commence Primary Nuclear Launch...*
is there a difference?
Edit: Not that we would ever have the balls to do something so politically incorrect
Posted: 2003-02-09 04:57pm
by RedImperator
meNNis wrote:bah... we dont need the canucks or the aussies. as a matter of fact, we dont even need our troops.....
*commence Base Delta Zero...* er wait i mean *commence Primary Nuclear Launch...*
is there a difference?
Edit: Not that we would ever have the balls to do something so politically incorrect
If by "politically correct", you mean "genocidal", "completely unwarranted", and "evil", then yes, we don't have the balls to do something that politically incorrect.
Fuck, I don't know what's worse. Stupid leftist pacifists who'd like us to smile when they shoot us, or stupid rightist warmongers who think lighting babies on fire is just dandy.
Re: Australia more Pro-War than America.
Posted: 2003-02-09 05:24pm
by weemadando
That link above wrote:The Gallup International survey, released on Tuesday, found 68 per cent of Australians backed some sort of military action against Iraq.
However, 56 per cent were in favour only if the United Nations supported it, while just 12 per cent of Australians supported unilateral action by the United States and its allies.
Some 27 per cent of Australian respondents said they would not support war under any circumstances - five per cent didn't know.
In Australia, levels of support for war outstripped even the US, where the poll showed 67 per cent supported some type of military action.
However, 33 per cent of Americans supported unilateral action, and 34 per cent backing action if it was UN-sanctioned.
So we support a UN-sanctioned war and don't have that many problems with accepting UN authority.
Statistics can be so misleading if you know how to use them.
Posted: 2003-02-09 05:29pm
by HemlockGrey
Why is the UN so damned important? At this point, 'UN approved' essentially means Europe is no longer bitching about. Why does no one care if Uruguay sanctions it or not? I mean, if Uruguay doesn't approve, then it's obviously not UN sanctioned!