I am in general a little absent from the internet, so I was under the impression that John Kerry was storming through on the inside track of the US Presidential race. Perhaps I should spend less time reading the BBC website when I do manage to check on the affairs of states. To my surprise, I learnt that Bush was still ahead according to poll averages .
Another surprise, but not an unexpected one if you follow my drift, was that John Howard had won the elections of Oz. Talking to an Aussie soldier who was on leave from Iraq, I found him well satisfied by that outcome. In fact, I have found several Iraq soldiers who have given better reasons for their actions in Iraq than you generally hear in the media.
This article from John O'Sullivan really illuminates the significance of victory down under.
As for Iraq, undoubtedly (contra BBC) a factor in the Aussie election, Michael Barone has an analysis of the Duelfer report and how it supported the action taken by the coalition. I always return to one word, 'composite', when I reflect on the case for the Iraq war. So far as I could tell people who were anti the war had only one word, 'immoral', which spawned the one refrain, 'wrong, wrong, wrong', whereas I had a word which meant composed of many parts- which Duelfer's report and Barone's argument illustrate.
For extra analysis of one component for that argument, the UN, Con Coughlin is on hand at the DT.
Finally, what little scan of the useful media would be complete without Mark Steyn. I just love the, er, chutzpah in his address to Irish readers:
'readers of this column may have gained the impression that George W Bush will win the Presidential election on November 2nd. If he doesn’t, I shall trouble readers of this newspaper no further.'
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Posted by ed thomas at 9:27 AM