PM John Howard on Preemptive strikes by Australia and changing the UN charter
"REPORTER: Now, you've been arguing for a new approach to pre-emptive defence, you want the UN to change its charter, I think. Does that mean that you ... if you knew that, say, JI people in another neighbouring country were planning an attack on Australia that you would be prepared to act?

"HOWARD: Oh yes, I think any Australian Prime Minister would. I mean, it stands to reason that if you believed that somebody was going to launch an attack against your country, either of a conventional kind or of a terrorist kind, and you had a capacity to stop it and there was no alternative other than to use that capacity then of course you would have to use it."

John Howard is a clown who can hardly be taken seriously. Presumably this statement, along with so much else of his appalling racist, nationalist and militarist posturing, in intended only for domestic consumption. The option of "preemptive military strikes" belongs either to military superpowers who do not fear retaliation or madmen who wish to start wars. Which of these, pray tell Mr Howard, is Australia?

The suggestion floated by Howard and Defence Minister Hill of altering the UN charter to allow preemptive strikes also defies credulity. For an arrogant hyperpower like the US such an idea makes some sense. Everybody else, including Australia, would be expected to support the concept of collective security and national sovereignty as embodied in the UN charter. Possibly Mr Howard and Mr Hill, deluded by their relationship with the US and the UK, echo these ideas with some seriousness, but reality must set in sooner rather than later.

Howard's approach in general to terrorism and international affairs demonstrates how much a white colonial subject he really is and how real the need is for Australia to definitively cut the apron strings with the UK and the US and connect with our own region. Abolishing the monarchy, withdrawing from the ANZUS treaty, closing American bases, banning nuclear weapons in the region and seeking security by working with our Asian neighbours under the umbrella of the the UN charter instead of relying on sheer US military dominance are the decisive steps.

Australia could be working with its Oceanic and ASEAN neighbours to develop a South East Asian/Oceanic union on the model of the European community. A few decades ago the Europeans were at each other's throats in the most vicious wars in human history. Now they are at peace and united. How much vision does it really take to see that as the future instead of the unreconstructed racism, imperialism, militarism, neo-colonialism and hegemonism as effectively practiced by the US, the UK and Australia? John Howard: barbed wire, concentration camps, racism, SAS troops, and "preemptive strikes".

PM John Howard on Preemptive strikes by Australia and changing the UN charter
"REPORTER: Now, you've been arguing for a new approach to pre-emptive defence, you want the UN to change its charter, I think. Does that mean that you ... if you knew that, say, JI people in another neighbouring country were planning an attack on Australia that you would be prepared to act?

"HOWARD: Oh yes, I think any Australian Prime Minister would. I mean, it stands to reason that if you believed that somebody was going to launch an attack against your country, either of a conventional kind or of a terrorist kind, and you had a capacity to stop it and there was no alternative other than to use that capacity then of course you would have to use it."

John Howard is a clown who can hardly be taken seriously. Presumably this statement, along with so much else of his appalling racist, nationalist and militarist posturing, in intended only for domestic consumption. The option of "preemptive military strikes" belongs either to military superpowers who do not fear retaliation or madmen who wish to start wars. Which of these, pray tell Mr Howard, is Australia?

The suggestion floated by Howard and Defence Minister Hill of altering the UN charter to allow preemptive strikes also defies credulity. For an arrogant hyperpower like the US such an idea makes some sense. Everybody else, including Australia, would be expected to support the concept of collective security and national sovereignty as embodied in the UN charter. Possibly Mr Howard and Mr Hill, deluded by their relationship with the US and the UK, echo these ideas with some seriousness, but reality must set in sooner rather than later.

Howard's approach in general to terrorism and international affairs demonstrates how much a white colonial subject he really is and how real the need is for Australia to definitively cut the apron strings with the UK and the US and connect with our own region. Abolishing the monarchy, withdrawing from the ANZUS treaty, closing American bases, banning nuclear weapons in the region and seeking security by working with our Asian neighbours under the umbrella of the the UN charter instead of relying on sheer US military dominance are the decisive steps.

Australia could be working with its Oceanic and ASEAN neighbours to develop a South East Asian/Oceanic union on the model of the European community. A few decades ago the Europeans were at each other's throats in the most vicious wars in human history. Now they are at peace and united. How much vision does it really take to see that as the future instead of the unreconstructed racism, imperialism, militarism, neo-colonialism and hegemonism as effectively practiced by the US, the UK and Australia? John Howard: barbed wire, concentration camps, racism, SAS troops, and "preemptive strikes".