Shouts from the desert

With confirmation today that New South Wales Leader of the Opposition Peter Debnam's attack on the New South Wales Attorney-General Bob Debus was inspired by an unreliable source referred to him by Senator Bill Heffernan, we have a striking demonstration that the proposed alternative Premier has appallingly poor judgement. Bill Heffernan's credibility was destroyed after his unjustified attack on High Court Justice Michael Kirby, and to rely on anything sourced through him is the act of a fool. The problem for the Liberal Party in New South Wales is that with only four months until the election they may not have enough time to replace him with somebody else who can build up enough profile to move their position further forward - yet they may still need to get rid of Peter Debnam to stop him from moving them further backward.

Speaking of appalling judgement, the Prime Minister has made it clear he will always continue to deny his mistakes. Not content to deny that the invasion of Iraq was a disaster, he is now insisting that getting involved in the Vietnam war was a pretty good idea. While involvement in the Vietnam war was arguably legal - unlike involvement in invasion of Iraq - to suggest it was a good idea stretches credibility to breaking point. He followed that up with this gem:

I supported the reasons for Australia's involvement and nothing has altered my view that at the time, on the assessments that were made, then I took that view, and I took that view properly... I don't intend to indulge this preoccupation that many have in recanting everything that they supported when they were in positions of authority... In public life you take a position, and I think particularly of the positions I've taken in the time I've been Prime Minister. I have to live with the consequences of those both now and into the future

It's bad enough that he tries to paint a refusal to admit to his mistakes as a virtue, but it is to ludicrous to suggest he has to live with the consequences, since he is not experiencing any. The 600,000 dead Iraqis are living with the consequences - or rather not living at all as a consequence - of the decision of the Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq, a decision which was in no small part attributable to the failure of the Prime Minister to counsel appropriate caution to Bush and Blair. While many believe that Australia has no influence on the world stage, our ability to affect the behaviour of both the UK and the United States by advising them privately as a trusted friend and ally when they are making mistakes has been used to great effect in the past, yet the Prime Minister has not only failed to do this, he has blindly backed Bush and Blair to the hilt, reinforcing their mistaken view of the appropriateness of this course of action.

If the Prime Minister were living with the consequences he would have been put on trial for war crimes and would be in prison. The judgement in the Nuremberg trial of the major war criminals made it crystal clear that starting a war in circumstances that are not justified in international law is the greatest international crime, and even if every fact asserted by the Prime Minister and his accomplices prior to the invasion were true it is also crystal clear except to people who do not understand international law that the invasion of Iraq was not justified in international law.

I have to live with the consequences of those both now and into the future

The fact is the chances of John Howard suffering the consequences that the law demands are next to zero. If he were living with the consequences, he would be in prison for the rest of his natural life.