English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

16 answers

Saddam made a death threat against the smart George Bush. Thats obviously Sr. And because he didn't finish the job, his son George Bush, the not smart at all one, decided to finish the job. Bush (not so smart one) decided to invade Iraq even before he entered into office. But here's an even better question. If Bush (not so smart one) wanted to rid itself of threats to the U.S. why didn't he go after North Korea? In Oct of 2000 the N. Korean govt said, "if the U.S. intends to interfere with our Nuclear Energy program, we will respond militarily". It's clear to everyone as to why we are fighting a warrantless war.

2006-06-13 09:56:26 · answer #1 · answered by cvdoj 1 · 3 0

In answer to Matteos response: Rumsfeld DID offer his resignation twice over Abu Graib, so the question is a valid one. Your comment about him emphatically refusing is therefore incorrect. Check Larry King and Rumsfeld offers resignation on any search engine and you will find the relevant offers to resign, along with Bush's refusal (CNN, February 4, 2005)
Secondly, corroborating evidence was given by several commanders who have stated that Rumsfeld's insistence to go in with less troops than Army doctrine suggested was a major reason why we can't control the insurgents. Bush himself suggested several mistakes were made, as did Condolezza Rice, who said on 11/28/05 that she was sure " many things could have been done better".
For a better example read the book COBRA II. You will find a mountain of corroborating evidence.
We are patriots too. We just demand that, as a true democracy, the government obey the will of the majority. This isn't a dictatorship, this is America.

2006-06-13 17:24:31 · answer #2 · answered by teddi 2 · 0 0

When the majority of the American people feel that their government and military leaders have failed, then it is time for change. That this war has depleted the national treasury is a fact, one which the Bush adminstration doesn't like to talk about. And for the record, that there have been no terrorist attacks here has NOTHING to do with Iraq, as Osama is a Saudi and living in Afghanistan. IF we had limited our efforts to that country, we probably would have killed him by now. But that's what you get when you have morons running the military. By the way, each and every soldier and their families. along with the rest of us, owes about 35000 dollars, because that's how much the govenment has calculate the cost of the war.

2006-06-13 16:59:49 · answer #3 · answered by NightShade 3 · 0 0

I think you are asking should Bush force Rumsfeld to resign, since the Secretary has not tendered his resignation and has emphatically indicated that he will not.

Since your assumption that the war is messed up is not given with any corroborating evidence, we can assume that it is an ad hominem attack on the President. In such case, the answer to your questions would be: "No!" and "Who says it is messed up?"

2006-06-13 16:51:35 · answer #4 · answered by Matteo85 2 · 0 0

Bush should let Rumsfeld resign because he does a poor performance too.

2006-06-13 16:42:41 · answer #5 · answered by POWER 5 · 0 0

Don't know. The whole administration is an icecap
( literally ) to a political machine. Since when is war 'tidy' and whoever said this war was anything other than messed up?

Never let the papers or the media do your talking for you. That's what Hollywood does.

2006-06-13 16:43:40 · answer #6 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0 0

Please send your resume discussing how you will win all wars. WE have achieved all major objectives (eliminating Saddam and Ba'ath rulership, killing his sons, bringing Saddam to trial, killing the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq- Zarqawi). As for Bin Laden, he is on the run 24 hours a day and is no longer the tactical (battle) commander of al Qaeda. The only decision he makes is what cave to sleep in that night.

Quit being so cynical, war is difficult. Remember that we have had no attacks on American soil since 9/11. I am volunteering to go back to Iraq because I have seen the good we are doing there.

2006-06-13 16:45:52 · answer #7 · answered by Richard M 3 · 0 0

He can not stop him, but I see no reason to encourage a resignation. He has a thankless job - Clinton got us into Somalia & it took 400 Rangers for rescue, Cheney was youngest to Ford.
Well you got the point - he is no different than every other Secretary of Defense. Stuck making the hard calls.

2006-06-13 17:23:27 · answer #8 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0 0

"let" him resign?
Heck, if Bush was half the President he claimed to be, he would have kicked this blundering fool out of office a year after the invasion.

"How did this war get so messed up?"?
The short answer: over-confident Secretary of War who would NOT listen to seasoned veterans (i.e., Colin Powell, for example).

2006-06-13 16:45:09 · answer #9 · answered by Bakerman55 3 · 0 0

Rumsfeld is here to stay so get used to it.

2006-06-13 16:43:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers