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

Well apart from not getting the boys back home, he's done a great job pissing people off. Fact is, Kim Jong Il isn't power hungry, but we could question why Bush has been in Iraq for so long(?) It's been made clear, N. Korea wants to test missiles, and as if the U.S hasnt been doing that itself? well if that's the case, bush will initiate some stupid action, which he will deem "neccessary" sending in more lives. If it becomes hostile Russia and China will step in and we'll set ourselves into WWIII because people elected Bush twice. think about it america

2006-07-05 19:35:19 · 20 answers · asked by BK-Love 2 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

20 answers

He sucks and should have been impeached long ago for deliberately misleading the country into war with Iraq, illegal wiretapping, and many other things that crapped all over our Constitution. He has basically been using the Constitution as toilet paper. It will take a lot to get that imbecile out as president because so many people are afraid of him. Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisonsin initiated a motion to censure Bush, but no one voted with him (probably out of fear - I mean Bush has been illegally wiretapping everyone, why not senators and congressman). I would put blackmailing people past him or his administration. We'll see what happens. I will be elated when he is sent back to Crawford.

2006-07-05 19:43:07 · answer #1 · answered by kcsilverlining77 4 · 0 0

First Bush cannot start a war without permission from the House and Senate.

Secondly as for getting the boys back home he is attempting to finish a job so that we arn't sending them back in another 5 or 10 years.

Third you may not like him but there are people who are satisfied with his actions as President.

Forth as to if Kim Jong is powerhungry or not isn't the issue. He is testing weapons that could possibly reach U.S.A. and it is the job of the President to defend the country. This is being considered a threat. No President makes decisions totally on their own. They are advised by (in this case) the military leadership who get to be in that position by proving themselves. The leaders of the military are not total idiots.

Fifth as for how long we have been in Iraq, look to my second point. They are being kept there to finish a job.

Sixth yes N. Korea wants to test missiles. Does a desire make something right? Look to the Nazis, they had a desire to exterminate the Jews. Were we wrong to have stopped them too?

Seventh the U.S. testing hasn't been for a major offensive system on that level for years. Agreements with Russia and China have pretty well put a stop to it.

Eighth Bush isn't the one initiating a stupid action. The N. Koreans are. And if it is necissary to send in troops it will only be with permission of the House and Senate.

Nineth as to what Russia and China will do will remain to be seen. They may step in and "deal" with N. Korea themselves. They don't want this to wind up in a fight any more than we do.

Tenth as to making this the fault of those who elected Bush is outrageous. It is no more their fault than Clinton's sexual acts being the fault of those who elected him.

Sounds like you need to think about it.

2006-07-05 20:13:57 · answer #2 · answered by billybetters2 5 · 0 0

Russia could not step in if they wanted to, China kind of doesn't really care either because they are a different kind of Communism, and Kim Jong II makes Stalin look like a kinder gardener when it comes to power hungry.

And Bush doesn't decide if we go to war, Congress does. Stop blaming Icons and Puppets of the government and start blaming the real sources.

2006-07-05 19:43:57 · answer #3 · answered by careercollegestudent69 4 · 0 0

Where have you got your head stuck? Idiot!!!! President Bush is not testing missles and pissing everybody off; moron Kim Jong whatever is doing that. I don't think the US will have to do anything as the way the North Koreans are screwing around the Chinese and Japanese and South Koreans may settle North Korea's hash just to get a little peace and quiety.

2006-07-12 10:53:59 · answer #4 · answered by acmeraven 7 · 0 0

I don't think Bush will do much. He has no Army that isn't already involved in a conflict and you are right, Bush better know that China will not allow the US to attack N Korea without intervening.

If anyone doesn't think so, look at what stopped combat in Korea. It was hordes of Chinese who the front lines had weapons, and those behind would pick them up when those in front were hit!

2006-07-05 19:46:52 · answer #5 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0 0

I actually think he may restrain himself, simply because we are about 16 weeks from the elections.

He's not doing so well in the polls and a big reason is the war in Iraq. If he starts another one before then, America will respond at the polls.

Right now, N. Korea is looking pretty lame, because their missile failed. The only way we will fight them in the near future is if they start a war first. In that case, we will have no choice but to fight back.

2006-07-05 19:41:32 · answer #6 · answered by Truth 5 · 0 0

I could go into a long argument with you but I won't. I will just say a couple of sentences. What causes World Wars? Nations allowing other nations to build up their military arsenals, also known as militarism. What are we allowing North Korea to do? Build up their military arsenals, also known as militarism. Now let us put two and two together. I guess if you had your way we would give North Korea the nuclear missiles right? How about giving them to Iran while we are at it.

2006-07-05 19:41:23 · answer #7 · answered by Entrepreneur 3 · 0 0

John Wilkes Booth
Charles J. Guiteau
Leon F. Czolgosz
Lee Harvey Oswald

2006-07-05 19:41:44 · answer #8 · answered by millionknives174 2 · 0 0

The congress has the power to impeach at all times, but the Republicans control congress and all issues that come to the floor, and they will not allow a vote on the subject of impeachment.
It is interesting that politicians control the issue of impeachment of the President.

2006-07-05 19:46:45 · answer #9 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 0 0

In terms of "impeach"....If I remember Sr. Government correctly, I believe that means simply to bring charges upon an authoriative figure. Right??? So what would the charge be against him? I thought the president by law had the right to start a war....Ahaha, however, there are checks and balances.....

2006-07-05 19:40:54 · answer #10 · answered by Traci S. 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers