are the weak kneed liberals hampering our presidents war on terror?

Question

our president seems hesitant in striking against these countries that he named in his axis of evil speech is this a result of the bleating of the liberal lobby , and will we live to regret it

Answer 1

I don't know, as I haven't read the book of fiction upon which your question is founded. War on terror? If you are referencing Iraq, you are stupid. But no matter. The war is good for the country in the long run. Sends stupid angry white men, the backbone of the Republican party, to early retirement from voting. Supporting the war is treasonous, knowing what we now know. Shame on the spineless and soulless misanthropes in charge of our affairs

Answer 2

If you are talking about Iran and N Korea, attacking them would be the dumbest thing since Iraq!!

It has nothing to do with being weak kneed. I was in Vietnam, were you?

If any solutions to Iran and N Korea are to be had they are not ours to take. I quess you learned nothing from Iraq!!! This needs to be done by the UN.

Ever ask the South Koreans what they thought because a lot of their people are going to be killed? You know what the winters are like over there?

I was in Korea twice in the 1960's for 29 months. North Korea has always been a thorn in our side since the cease-fire. The issue between North and South Korea has not been settled.

Axis of Evil? Are we one of them?

You guts control everything from the White House to the Congress, what do you care about the "bleating of the Liberal lobby", many of which are combat veterans, unlike ANYONE in the White House. Actually none of them even served!

If you could use your brain you might think of this.

A unilateral attack on Iraq or North Korea WILL NOT be supported by the American people!

A unilateral attack will get Russia and especially China involved if we ever attacked North Korea. You really want to go there?

We don't have the troops and both are not winnable unless we used a Nuke! You really want to go there?

Your own Republican Congress would not authorize it!

Where are you gong to get the money?

None of them have committed a terrorist act and N. Korea is largely held in check by China!

We haven't gone thru the U.N., or are we just going to ignore all the international laws again?

The Axis of Evil Speech? Are you that big of a lemming? I guess you don’t remember the presidents SOU address telling us about Nuke weapons, tons of saran gas, aircraft bombing the US with gas, and WMD's which Iraq had? All were non -existent by the way.

War on Terrorist??

What a JOKE!

"And what the hell is terrorism, anyway? It's not a thing; it's not a place; it's not a person. It is a political and military strategy, that's all. Having a 'War On Terrorism' is as ridiculous as having a 'War on Flanking Maneuvers'. You'll end terrorism when there's no longer anything for anybody to get pissed off about."

Col Hackworth US Army

Answer 3

It's not always about war - but it's not always about peace either. We didn't ask for 9/11, but we got it. Bin Laden isn't after us - he wants a nation in the middle east - that he controls. Saddam was a threat. Bin Laden is still a threat. Giving up in Iraq now is wrong. Starting something with Iran and N. Korea isn't a good idea - for now.

FYI - latest documents found in Iraq confirm that Al Qaeda's strategy is focused on wearing down Americans over here, regarding Iraq. Hell, we have cut and run, as they say, so many times since WWII he believes he can beat us - thanks to the bleeding heart cowards in this country.

Dividing and conquering us through our political banter and polarized views is exactly what that a**hole wants. If he succeeds - he will get the nation he has been looking for in the middle east - Iraq (though Saudi was first on his list). It seems they should send you all a sign up sheet. You could be the latest Al Qaeda recruits!

To dear Oracle - I never mentioned the troops numb nuts - why are you yelling at me. By the way - Bin Laden called - he needs your application pronto.

Answer 4

Its not the liberals who are weak. Its the voters who bought a bill of goods from Dubya and when it comes to accepting the fact that he is only marginally competent to even run a gas station, they have been just as stubborn and recalcitrant as Bush about acknowledging their mistake and correcting it. Bush will not strike any country which has nukes. That is why some countries want them. Note that the hunt for Bin Laden basically stopped at Pakistan's door.

"Weak kneed" liberals never attacked honorable soldiers and their service records, nor did they hypocritically cast anyone who disagreed with the politicians as unpatriotic and unsupportive of our troops. Its never been the troops I did not support, its the treasonous scoundrels who put loyal red blooded American troops in harms way in order to carry out a willful personal agenda, deliberately misleading and misinforming legislators and officials whose support made the war possible.

Weak kneed is certainly not a fair or reasonable description of those who had the courage to call the administration out on this reprehensible folly long before the tide of majority opinion against the war finally came in. It is fair to use to describe the mindless Republican loyalists who were willing to follow an incompetent President into war on nothing more than blind faith, venting their justifiable anger over 9/11 behind a President who was bound and determined to blow up *something* in response, even if underserved. We needed a finely crafted, intelligent, and focused response to the attack, not a war on a country that had nothing to do with it. But Bush would rather lead the country into an exercise which amounted to kicking the dog in anger.

No wonder the Dubya administration and its its supporters were so defensive and intolerat of any criticism of the war. They blew the hunt for Bin Laden it like rank amateurs and then had to let him go when he headed for Pakistan.That was weak all right.... weak minded. We needed people in charge who were bright enough to understand that Iraq would immediately descend into civil war if Hussein were removed. We needed someone with half a brain to tell them not to disband all the Iraqi armed and security forces, causing both their manpower and their weapons to vanish into the night.

We needed surgical precision and cool heads, and when a brawling cowboy led the country into a needless war, weakened our economy, trashed our reputation, compromised our military strength worldwide, and placed a trillion dollar albatross around our children's necks instead, the country weakly followed on blind faith.

So the answer to the question is no, liberals have nothing to do with it but weakness has everything to do with it. The weak minded political opportunists who made the Iraq war possible have been hampering the real war on terror right from the beginning with their mindless knee jerk reactions and downright dishonest manipulation of intelligence information. Meantime the most important changes necessary to actully protect our country languish in legislative committees. Maybe twenty years after 9/11, they will finally get around to scanning airline passenger luggage and incoming cargo containers.

Misguided response, boneheaded stubborness, and failure to implement the most needed defenses.... how can it get any weaker than that?

MM

Answer 5

The president is confused between terrorist and dictators. He created his problems by attacking a country which has nothing to do with 9/11, al-qaeda and wmd's. So no, the president is hampering the the coutries was against terror.

Answer 6

So you want us to start 2 more wars, against Iran and North Korea? That way we'll have 3 wars going at the same time? If we strike Iran, gas will go up to $25 a gallon and then you can walk to your job at Der Weenie.

If we strike North Korea, they might send a couple of nukes our way (wouldn't you if you were their leader and had nukes?), and besides they are allies of China, so we would have to fight them.

Are you so war/death hungry that you want to cost this country all of its money, it military resources, and cause a nuclear strike against us????? Besides, Bush didn't finish his service in the National Guard, and this war is still dragging on years after he said Mission Accomplilshed, so he probably would F-up you little scheme.

Answer 7

To you and Lisafiddr-

My family is liberal. My brother went to Berkeley, studied English and Philosophy and then decided to join the Army in Aviation. He wants to learn fixed wing aircraft and avionics, and also wanted to do some good for his country.

Right now he is over there, hanging out with both liberal and conservative soldiers in his unit. How dare you shame him and all our liberal minded soldiers who fight, are wounded, and die?? How dare you spit on liberals, when we make up a huge part of the armed forces.

YOU people make me sick, yet you talk about us not supporting the troops. I DO, I send packages to him that he shares with his buddies. IT IS YOU who do not support the troops. Or maybe you think you can divide them by ONLY supporting the conservative troops?

Answer 8

blame liberals now,,,, they have no real power,,, no say in George Bush's Iraq war,,, or his axis of evil (borrowed from FDR) speech,,, bleating liberals,,, will not be responsible for the failings of this blowhard team of conservative good ole boys run rampant

Answer 9

As a former Cav scout, **** the damn war. I want my brothers back here and I want them alive. I've been in the army and so has one of my sisters, and I've 2 very good friends and countless former school mates in various branches. This war is turning into a 'Nam reinactment.

Answer 10

I wouldn't say hampering as much as desperately rooting for the other side....I really think they would be happy if another terrorist attack happened in the US...because it would make them appear right, and help them politically....which is all they are concerned with.