when they had the same information and so many other countries that looked at that same info and said saddam was a major threat and needed to be removed.
2006-08-04 14:53:15 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
nahimana... you still didn't answer my question, doesn't matter whether they are majority or not, they have a responsibility, and they can't just blame others when they vote for things they supposedly shouldn't.
2006-08-04 15:01:07 · update #1
Because at the time they thought it was the right thing to do. As soon as the first soldier was killed, they now want to cut and run.
2006-08-04 15:03:12 · answer #1 · answered by jpxc99 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Tell you what, name one Democrat that is not sitting on his hands bickering to the Republicans about how there party stinks. Not one. Both political parties are taking advantage of the people who vote for them by not doing ANYTHING to come up with solutions to any problems. Take illegal immigration for example. They go, they stay, whatever the decision at least we have the chance to get over it but they need to start making decisions NOW before the rift between Americans gets so wide that we all reach our boiling points. I agree it is time for a change but if you vote Dem or Rep you will just get another shell of a human that is only out for his own, or the parties gain. If you disagree feel free to write me.
2006-08-04 16:03:23 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the two. The President's intelligence grew to become into undesirable, worse than we theory till now. The hyperlink between Saddam and Osama isnt as obtrusive as we theory. grew to become into Saddam nevertheless undesirable? specific. ought to he have and grew to become into he prepared to apply terrorists to harm the US? specific. The war isn't a quagmire, yet. So, the two the Dems and the Pres could desire to rock n roll-enhance troop ranges or regardless of this is mandatory to be achieved to end it off. they could desire to fund the educational of an Iraqi militia, and get out of there, there are larger issues, like Iran. regardless of if, 9/11 is the fault of the terrorists, not Bush or Clinton.
2016-11-03 22:11:17 · answer #3 · answered by harib 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why do people keep asking this? It has become obvious that the intellegence the Bush admin used to justify the war was flawed. That was the only intellegence congress and the american public had to go by. Even Bush said he got bad intellegnce and would get to the bottom of it. (of course he gave the guy a medal)..
2006-08-04 15:04:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Republican is the majority and even if the Democrats voted against it they would still go through with it.
2006-08-04 14:59:46 · answer #5 · answered by ₦âħí»€G 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well it pissed me off either way.. But the intelligence was clearly altered to make the case. If you can still not see that, then I don't know about you. They still should have voted against that crap, so it's still a bad excuse.
2006-08-04 15:05:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, if they are like John Kerry they voted for it and then voted against it.
2006-08-04 15:19:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
*Whispers* Shh, no they didn't. Never happened. Nope.
Oh hell, yeah it did but but but but but but ...
Eh, it's Bush's fault! Neocon!
LOL.
On a serious note, agreed. Makes one wonder, doesn't it?
2006-08-04 15:02:37 · answer #8 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps because, for a little while, they had some sense.
2006-08-04 15:04:38 · answer #9 · answered by ccrider 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋