I havn't heard that at all. I think we have no business in Iraq and I believe it is high time we told Isreal to chill. We don't have to turn our backs on Isreal but we don't have to be put in the position of defending those freakin nut jobs either.
2006-07-14 15:42:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Who cares 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Trying to understand a lib, would stupefy even Einstein. They are full of paradox and twisted logic, because to them the end justify the means. The only end they are concerned with is beating Bush (even if he can't run again) so whatever Bush does is wrong.
Going into Iraq was the right thing to do, but in their eyes Bush was wrong for not waiting for the world to give us permission.
Now with North Korea we are trying a different approach and letting others in the world help deal with this, and Bush is wrong for not doing this unilaterally.
With Israel we simply are not getting involved, Bush is wrong because we should get involved.
Maybe Bush should try coming out and saying there should be more money for education and social security and welfare and less money for defense. Do the libs hate him more then they love money?
2006-07-14 22:45:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by tm_tech32 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'll drink to your statement...
Bush was criticized for not stopping 9-11, but when he made the decision (which was supported by Congress) to invade Iraq, people bailed when it started to get hard...hello, he is trying to prevent more 9-11's...and so far has succeeded in doing that, plus liberating many in Iraq and Afghanistan...I wish people would stop the hating for one minute to realize how conflicting their views are.
2006-07-14 22:44:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by loubean 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Amen Brother! PREACH! I agree! If we are in Iraq for the oil then why are we paying almost $3/gallon. Only a moron would believe that lie. We are in Iraq so that we can fight terrorist/terrorism on their turf and not to fight it here in the USA.
2006-07-14 22:45:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Homer 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
okayokayokayokayokay...........i want you to read your q again....what did bush say we were going to iraq to do? i quote him here "iraq has WMD's. theyre planning on using them to harm the USA." what did you just say, i repeat, JUST SAY the point of the iraq war was? to bring order back to iraq and to help the IRAQI people!!!!!!!! if thats not double-talk, ive got no idea what double talk is. and we are doing something in the middle east right now, fueling the israeli army as it goes after civilian targets and getting our own soldiers and innocent iraqi civilians killed. if were bringing order to iraq right now, id HATE to see what would happen if it were chaotic.
2006-07-14 22:43:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by The Frontrunner 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
In my opinion they criticize the US stance against terrorism because that is the easist thing for them to do. To do anything else would require they actually think for themselves and come up with ideas to improve the situation. It is much easier to point the finger of blame than it is to come up with a constructive solution.
2006-07-14 22:43:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by Bella 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you. If this war was simply for oil, it sure hasn't help reduce our prices.
2006-07-14 23:14:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by sittin tight 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
you started the situation, you should finish it. you can't just go in and help a little bit. you have to complete the work.
ditto to kevin R's whole answer!!!!!
2006-07-14 22:46:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by itsjustmecc 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They're called the "Blame America First" crowd...you give me hope.
2006-07-14 22:42:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by R J 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Too many questions.
1) yes
2) drop the big one
3) yes they do
2006-07-14 22:42:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by BigDaddy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋