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

Is he the 'chosen one' to bring peace to earth through his crusade to spread democracy?

2006-07-16 13:46:10 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

How can it not be an agenda? It's the very premise of his defense of his decision.

2006-07-16 14:39:05 · update #1

13 answers

The world was free and safer before he took office now look at everything. In my opinion we didn't have to go to war in the first place and all our young men and women's life wouldn't have been lost. Fee and safer world, don't you mean a more scary and unsafe world.

2006-07-16 13:52:38 · answer #1 · answered by Zeta 5 · 0 0

Actually, yes, he does put people in harms way to promote his agenda for a free and safer world. Those who sit around waiting for issues to resolve themselves usually find themselves waiting a long time. It would be nice if we could send Ahhnold to solve the world's problems in 90 minutes with no loss of life and a great box office take, but that's not how it works in the real world.

No, I don't think he is the "chosen one".

"In my opinion we didn't have to go to war in the first place and all our young men and women's life wouldn't have been lost. "

I'm sure those who lost their lives on 9/11 would disagree with you. Sadly, because of the appeasement policies of past administrations, they are no longer here to do so.....

2006-07-16 13:58:21 · answer #2 · answered by ccppc 2 · 0 0

I dont think he has an agenda other than to follow through with the plan originally accepted by the US and the UN in iraq.

People in this country who fight abroad are part of the army by CHOICE. Our armed forces fight for the sake of protecting and defending freedom and the liberties of innocent people, regardless of what country they are in.

I have yet to meet an army person who isnt fully commited to that promise. I know quite a few personally.

2006-07-16 13:55:10 · answer #3 · answered by amosunknown 7 · 0 0

that's only too complicated to definitively say "sure" or "no". the international is safer from a Al-Quaeda question as a results of fact their contributions have dropped critically from international stress... straight away and in a roundabout way from defense force operations. of direction, we've greater enemies in that region now than all of us started.... time will tell if this develops into some thing greater for the destiny. it may be naive to no longer be conscious of this. the international markets are additionally booming; countries like incredibly populated China and India are in a economic golden age, as properly as Russia. Prosperity constantly will enhance peace. on the turn component, the yank economic gadget is tanking and each of the indications are that we are no longer accepting this misfortune gracefully. Our ethical authority has fallen in status and now the international isn't as probable to hold onto ethics as plenty as a results of fact the greenback... earnings pushed societies without a ethical code does no longer look good for peace. Even the US must be accused of going to the way of an oligarchy with firms' influencing coverage greater effective than the human beings. i think of the international is greater secure yet that protection is plenty greater precarious from the previous.... i think of peace is built on a powder keg at present, no longer on lasting international kin because it replaced into achieved in the previous Bush got here in capability... afterall, with the main well known u . s . over-extending its defense force and borrowing godawful quantities to help its defense force complicated and upward push up the government it won't take a economic or a defense force professional to work out that we are in hassle. A apprehensive peace isn't loads of a peace. each and every week in the past who could have theory that Russia could pass on a u . s . that American advisers have progressed a high priced defense force education software for? Putin made a ambitious and calculated pass and he knew it replaced into in defiance to American pursuits. he's destroying our investment. He does no longer have achieved this 8 years in the past... he did it as a results of fact he has an enhanced economic gadget and he knows that the yank miltary is weakened.

2016-12-10 08:24:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Isn't he putting American servicemen and servicewomen in harms way to bring democratic socialism to Iraq?

You could be right.

But the timing was waaaay wrong. He forgot about Osama bin Laden. He was our immediate priority. The President's priorities are very, very misplaced.

....and he's wasted trillions and trillions of US taxpayer dollars as a result, leaving the world less safe, meaning more costly in the future.

What the %$^# was he thinking????

2006-07-16 14:22:30 · answer #5 · answered by ideogenetic 7 · 0 0

Yes, thanks to his one-sided policies at the expense of others. On the second count of Bush being the so-called "chosen one," the answer is no!

2006-07-16 13:59:47 · answer #6 · answered by brian 2010 7 · 0 0

I think we're already in harms way. He's trying to find the best way out.

2006-07-16 13:53:50 · answer #7 · answered by Greg 3 · 0 0

You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs

2006-07-16 13:49:19 · answer #8 · answered by Bill 6 · 0 0

yes, get a head count of dead bodies as Bush would so its about 30,000 give or take a few

2006-07-16 13:53:33 · answer #9 · answered by Lorraine W 3 · 0 0

No, I don't. Next foolish question.

2006-07-16 13:48:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers