2006-08-10 13:16:52 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
reminds me all the congress chickenhawks who voted for the war didnt send their own kids
2006-08-10 13:17:37 · update #1
The bush twins are just like the other Neo-Cowards on this board. They blindly support bush and the war, as long as they don't have to get their hands dirty. Not unlike georgie himself!
2006-08-10 14:13:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We don't know if they hate their daddy or not. We have a very good idea why they aren't in Iraq, they'd get kidnapped and Bush would have to choose whether he wanted them beheaded or to make concessions. Since we know how generous he is with other peoples children we just know , he'd shed a few tears (real this time) and say , "Off with their heads!" For God and country, forever and ever Amen!
Besides, most rich kids don't go over there. It's low income groups who need the bucks or a career jump start, many of them have only GEDs and the recruiters have promised them educational grants , if they make it home!
2006-08-10 13:45:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the position's Chelsea? Yeah, theory so. besides, a) because they're no longer necessary. in case you knew something about the military, you'll recognize that no longer all and distinctive receives to bypass to Iraq. truly, in straightforward words about 15% of our total military stress is at present in Iraq and of those, about 1/2 is army and Air stress who're no longer actual contained in the country. b) they're ladies and there are very, very, very few ladies struggling with in this warfare. There replaced into once more effective, yet no longer a lot the case now. c) it truly is a volunteer military and at the same time as i imagine the military could get exhilaration from their provide, what use could they really do. d) Why are not the DNC contributors sending their little ones to wrestle for Al Quada. Seeing as how each thing they look doing is undermining our military, calling them liars, murders and Nazis (Yep, this replaced into your congress. under no circumstances theory i could see the day.) and pushing for our renounce, the in straightforward words end i am going to draw is they help our enemies. So, to apply your common sense, why are not they sending their little ones over their to wrestle for the area that they help? you're acceptable that could prepare actual dedication for his or her reason. And it will be more effective problem-free than the underhanded undermining that they have been practising ever because THEY VOTED for this warfare.
2016-11-24 19:19:08 · answer #3 · answered by omparsad 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We have a volunteer force. Do you think it would be wise to put the daughters in the middle of a conflict with all the secret service around? Grow up. This is the dumbest question that I have seen. It shows the immaturity of the asker every time it gets asked.
2006-08-10 13:23:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Anger, jealousy and rumors are the byproduct of a weak mind.
We can have an intelligent discussion about Iraq. We can engage in a respectful dialogue if we leave name calling on the playground.
The situation in the Middle East is complicated enough. Just stick to the issues, bro.
2006-08-10 13:23:11 · answer #5 · answered by Sage 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
As far as I know, they aren't in the White House. Second, it's a volunteer military. Third, is Chelsea fighting? How about Kerry's kids? In fact, find me any kid who's fighting who's Congressional parent voted for the war.
2006-08-10 13:23:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I agree at least one of them should be doing something for the war effort. Since they don't send women to battle areas, one or both could at least do some support function in the military. Sure, they're not required to do anything, but it could be part of an effort to support the troops, and get new recruits.
2006-08-10 13:24:02 · answer #7 · answered by TxSup 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
first,girls and females r not allowd to battle in war ..second:whos theyr father..bush?did he join the army while americans send theyr sons to viettnam?no..bin laden s a scum but at least hes fighting with americans in front ov hes men and dont hyde himself in a big white house like blair and bush
2006-08-10 13:31:12 · answer #8 · answered by last spiritual man 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's not mandatory that any politicians child serve in the armed services. And how do you know how the twins feel about the war. They may be totally against it, but out of respect for their father, keep it to themselves.
2006-08-10 13:21:44 · answer #9 · answered by mocha5isfree 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The military is for volunteers. When are idiots like you going to see that? I don't see your pathetic butt over in Iraq either. I don't think you would have the guts to do it in the first place.
2006-08-10 13:20:43 · answer #10 · answered by Luekas 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋