Is John Howard Australias worst PM ever ?

Remove this Banner Ad

Illegally invaded a sovereign nation for no clear purpose resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children.

You're welcome.

You don't know what the word illegal means either probably.

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who gassed his own people and financially supported terrorism.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

You don't know what the word illegal means either probably.

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who gassed his own people and financially supported terrorism.
Been rather a lot of them.

interesting that out of all of them we picked just this particular one for regime change.

Oil be buggered if i know why though?
 
You don't know what the word illegal means either probably.
I love the way you attempt heavy-handed put-downs of other peoples' knowledge and only end up displaying your own ignorance to the whole wide world.

The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated in September 2004 that: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal", explicitly declaring that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.

Political leaders of the US and UK have claimed that the war was legal; however, legal experts, including John Chilcot, who, acting as chairman for the British public inquiry into Iraq, also known as the Iraq Inquiry, led an investigation with hearings from 24 November 2009 to 2 February 2011, concluded that the process of identifying the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq was unsatisfactory.

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who gassed his own people and financially supported terrorism.
No argument there, but no excuse to destroy an entire country.

And of course terrorism has completely receded worldwide since then, hasn't it?
 
Made life worse for New Zealanders. Harder to get permanent residency and thus citizenship so they're ****ed when they need healthcare or are unemployed.
 
Last edited:
Lets add aged care to his list of utter failures


Ever since the Howard government reformed the sector in 1996 it has become a magnet for big business and standards and conditions have deteriorated.

Howard introduced the Aged Care Act, 1997, slashed $1 billion from the aged care budget, reduced government monitoring and removed requirements for a set proportion of government subsidies to be spent on patient care while also reducing the requirement for a set number of qualified staff.

Since then US-based corporations, private equity firms, new foreign investors, and property real estate investment trusts entered the residential aged care market attracted by substantial government subsidies.

 
Howard introduced the Aged Care Act, 1997, slashed $1 billion from the aged care budget, reduced government monitoring and removed requirements for a set proportion of government subsidies to be spent on patient care while also reducing the requirement for a set number of qualified staff.

Since then US-based corporations, private equity firms, new foreign investors, and property real estate investment trusts entered the residential aged care market attracted by substantial government subsidies.

Deregulate everything and palm it off to private industry to police themselves.

What could possibly go wrong?
 
Ef7JrQxU0AEzm8w


But hey, he looked great walking round Sydney Harbour in a Wallabies tracksuit.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We've had slimier pr*cks, like Scummo. We've had worse economic vandals, like Abbott. But what set Howard apart was being so slimy and so prone to economic vandalism for so long. The net effect was far worse than any other PM because he carried on this crap for more than a decade.
 
I thought there were multiple Bali bombings?

I agree that the quote is a bit misleading, though.

Clearly he was talking about the 2005 one as mentioned in the article.

RWNJs like medusala: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEe
 
We've had slimier pr*cks, like Scummo. We've had worse economic vandals, like Abbott. But what set Howard apart was being so slimy and so prone to economic vandalism for so long. The net effect was far worse than any other PM because he carried on this crap for more than a decade.

Howard for the most part kind of illustrates the issues with modern conservatism.

Looking to preserve the status quo if at all possible even though societal needs change constantly, leading to government being behind the times and thus unable to tackle contemporary challenges, which causes slow societal decay because current societal needs are neglected. Long-term neglect stunts and eventually kills.


Clearly he was talking about the 2005 one as mentioned in the article.

RWNJs like medusala: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEe

Thought as much, though most people associate Bali with 2002.
 

Clearly he was talking about the 2005 one as mentioned in the article.

RWNJs like medusala: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEe

Wilkie is a moron if he actually said this. The idea that Islamic terrorists only started hating the West after the Iraq war is just plain stupid.
 
Wilkie is a moron if he actually said this. The idea that Islamic terrorists only started hating the West after the Iraq war is just plain stupid.
No, but in relation to Australia there is a higher chance of that. Islamic terrorists have always hated the USA, Australia is a little nothing but as soon as we join in with the US we become a target.
 
Howard is the father of all the *******s that followed so I guess to a degree he is. Comes down to do you judge him on his cancerous legacy or by his actual on the job ability. By that I of course am referring to his ability to bullshit his way through the job. If it's the second measure he laps the Liberal field because his offspring were useless and only carried by a piss weak media. He could stand in front of microphone and bore people to death stammering through very boring lies. Scomo is basically trump without the childish insults.
 
No, but in relation to Australia there is a higher chance of that. Islamic terrorists have always hated the USA, Australia is a little nothing but as soon as we join in with the US we become a target.

Indonesians terrorists dont hate us because we ally with the US. They hate us because we are not Muslims and are on their border and want religious freedoms and being allowed to be gay or female.
 
Indonesians terrorists dont hate us because we ally with the US. They hate us because we are not Muslims and are on their border and want religious freedoms and being allowed to be gay or female.
This should be in the what were the Obamas doing in Indonesia when Suharto took over thread
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top