1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Finally the truth!

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Matabele, Jul 6, 2007.

  1. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +516 /14
    The government has admitted the need to secure oil supplies is a factor in Australia's continued military involvement in Iraq.

    Defence Minister Brendan Nelson said today oil was a factor in Australia's contribution to the unpopular war, as "energy security" and stability in the Middle East would be crucial to the nation's future.

    Speaking ahead of a key foreign policy speech today by Prime Minister John Howard, Dr Nelson said defence was about protecting the economy as well as physical security, and it was important to support the "prestige" of the US and UK.

    "The defence update we're releasing today sets out many priorities for Australia's defence and security, and resource security is one of them," he told ABC radio.

    "The entire (Middle East) region is an important supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world.

    "Australians and all of us need to think well what would happen if there were a premature withdrawal from Iraq?"

    Dr Nelson said the primary reason for Australian troops remaining in Iraq was to prevent violence between the Sunni and Shia population, and to bring stability to the region.

    "We're also there to support our key ally - that's the United States of America - and we're there to ensure that we don't have terrorism driven from Iraq which would destabilise our own region," he said.

    "For all of those reasons, one of which is energy security, it's extremely important that Australia take the view that it's in our interests ... to make sure we leave the Middle East and leave Iraq in particular in a position of sustainable security."

    Isolationism would not make Australia safer, he said.

    When Australia joined the US-led invasion force of Iraq in 2003, the government said it was primarily because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could pose a threat to the US and its allies.
  2. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +516 /14
    Brendan: Is that an elephant?

    John: What?

    Brendan: That large grey thing in the corner of the room?

    John: Oh that... Just pretend it isn't there.

    Brendan: The elephant?

    John: What elephant?

    Brendan: Maybe its an Al Qaeda elephant - quick where's the fridge magnet?

    John: It's not a terrorist elephant!

    Brendan: Maybe if we shoot it and boil it up we can extract the essential oil....

    :clap: :clap:
  3. Utility Player

    Utility Player Well-Known Member

    +514 /6
    Have heard bit of "How green was my cactus" lately (did not realise it was still going) still a great listen.
  4. weneedacement

    weneedacement Member

    +0 /0
    I would of have thought the destabilisation of the region was the USA's ultimate goal.
  5. The Gronk

    The Gronk Well-Known Member

    +37 /0
    And given that the price of oil in $US as more than doubled since the invasion in March 2003, even this shameful reason for a war hasn't been successful. Put it on the pile with all the other ridiculous reasons!![br][img=700x440]../../AE_files/public/1183722233_858_FT163168_crude_oil.gif[/img]
  6. Canteen Worker

    Canteen Worker Well-Known Member

    +215 /5
    Funny to see the news last night and see Nelson, Costello and co all suddenly agree that the war is not about oil!!!!!

    Don't be honest if you want to stay a minister Brendan!!!!
  7. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +516 /14
    He hasn't read the codes of Ministerial Responsibility recently obviously.

Share This Page