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

During the attacks of 911 Bush appointed Cheney to be in charge of our Military. Is this scary?

2006-08-01 13:04:46 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Civic Participation

25 answers

Very scary .Cheney is the one that's the most frightening.
Hes old and very wealthy,why not play war with real live men and not tin or plastic toy men and machines. I wish President Bush a long life in office,that way Cheney cant take over totally. If he had ran the military during 9/11 like
he ran Hallaburton,maybe the planes would never have reached the twin towers. Our fighter jets would have been scrambled sooner and sent in the right direction. And just maybe a few less lives lost.
Our military men and women are better than Bush or Cheney will ever be .My husband was a proud military man in the Army for 20 years

2006-08-01 14:32:29 · answer #1 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 1 1

read the book "Against all Enemies" by Richard Clarke. He was in charge of the situation room while Bush, Cheney and rice hide in the bunkers. Rice told him to take charge, she admit ed she was not up to the task.
BTW, Bush and Cheney are both draft dodgers. We learned in Viet Nam that we should let the military run wars not politicians. Or did we learn anything from the 58,000 lost.?
BTW, only a real idiot would think a terrorist would face any Marine in a fight, they will not, they do the dirty work behind our back, Just like in Nam. Guerrilla warfare can not be won.
Of the 300,000 to 500,000 dead civilians in Iraq no one knows how many were "terrorist", no one. The civil war their is not Terrorist fighting our service men, The civil war is Iraqis fighting Iraqis for control of the oil and the wealth.

2006-08-01 20:42:32 · answer #2 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 0 0

No Cheney is the VP, we have a head of Armed forces, we have Pentagon and Generals that run the military.

Currently we are only as good as the lawyers sueing soldiers and bringing charges against them for killing the enemies.
We have weakened fighting a war to a point where we can never win a war against a terrorist group or another force not fighting by rules.

2006-08-01 20:10:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Realistically, in some ways yes and others no. The president chooses where to place them. It's the independant views of the soldiers that will change how our military is viewed locally. If all the soldiers raped and killed in Iraq... our military would look much worse. If they had done the opposite then our military would look better. It's not fair, though, that our president's choice of where to put them changes the first view of them.

2006-08-01 20:10:33 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

well cheney of course is not in sharge of our military, constitutionally. to the degree that bush prefers cheney run our country who can really say, but bush is responsible whether he has put the VP in charge of the joint chiefs of staff or not. our military is state of the art and state of professionalism. it has never had a better chance of reaching its goals ever before in our history. i agree with you that when political leadership fails, our soldiers suffer for that limitation. mostly you are right, our soldiers deserve a better president.

2006-08-01 20:20:01 · answer #5 · answered by emptiedfull 3 · 0 0

i just want everyone to know that Bush was never and Airforce anything but a dropout What an f'n loser, couldnt even serve his country but he can sure try his best to drive it to ruin.
Our armed forces will always be better than any man, not because of what it fights for but because of the people fighting, no where on earth where you find a more dedicated assembly of men and women.
They have the strenght to fight for all the right reasons, as well as the intelligence and the technical knowhow to survive that fight.
Unfortunately questions as silly as this one pop up because of the questionable actions of leaders like bush and cheney.
I only wonder how any the members of our armed forces would react to this question.

And in addition, it is my belief that ISAAC* is the product of the propaganda war that this administration is conducting, though he makes a good point about our service men, i can smell the fear dripping from him and it makes me sick, it is exactly what the "terrorists" want us to think and feel and i will have no part in it, let them come and face Americans head on and they will have thier day of reckoning, but instead they fight from the shadows like cowards, feeding on the fears from people like ISAAC*
GROW SOME BALLS and quit cowering behind the great deeds of our military, they DO NOT fight this war or give their lives so that Americans can quiver in the dark.....

2006-08-01 20:36:40 · answer #6 · answered by sdo4tnr 2 · 0 0

I think to a lagre degree it is.
Look at the military culture in Russia,the Generals lie through their teeth to tell the President what he wants to hear.
I am worried about the same thing happening in this country.
Can the president take honest answers from his military professionals?
Or will he appoint yes men like Keitel and Jodl

2006-08-01 20:18:17 · answer #7 · answered by LightningSlow 7 · 0 0

Am I the only one that remembers that Bush said we are going over there to weaken terrorism in the Middle East so as to immobilize it where it originates to weaken the chance of them being able to strike the U.S like they did on 9/11?

Am I the only one that realizes that we haven’t been attacked since 9/11?

Am I the only one that sees the terrorists in action every day in Iraq????
Helloooooo!!!!!!! You think that may be why we are there?????????

Am I the only one that sees that terrorism most definantly originates in the Middle East?

Am I the only one that sees that terrorists are all over the Middle East not just Afghanistan???

SO THEN I ASK YOU FINALLY, AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT SEES THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STABILIZING THE MIDDLE EAST SO AS TO NIP IT IN THE BUD BEFORE IT REACHES ALL TIME HIGHS HERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
Every time Al-Qaeda claims an attack in Iraq they validate what Bush said "We have to crush the terrorists where they originate, so as to make American citizens safer."

And its not we shouldn’t be messing with them, its they shouldn’t have messed with us!!!!!!!!!!!!
And remember, it’s our soldiers putting they’re lives on the line everyday that you even have the right to whine about the war. Why don’t you thank Bush for another day that this war has brought you a step closer to long term safety and stability. Ensuring that you can go to Starbucks during your brunch everyday and whine about it for years and years to come without being interrupted by suicide bombers that claim to be peaceful right before press a button on there suicide vest.

2006-08-01 20:11:11 · answer #8 · answered by isaac a 3 · 0 0

No. Both Dick Cheney and George Bush are intelligent men. They also have excellent and masterful military advisors that enable them to make high quality decisions.

2006-08-01 20:11:53 · answer #9 · answered by LL 4 · 0 0

With Clinton as president, I know many people who held on to retire from after he left office - so they wouldn't get the retirement letter from him.

The lowest ranking NCO was a million times better then Clinton - Clinton knew no honor, and showed his venom towards the military by gutting it's resources, and puss*footing around in Somalia and Bosnia.

2006-08-01 20:11:45 · answer #10 · answered by B C 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers