sadly they have not made it clear. it is a lose lose question.
sort of like if your brother breaks a window and then the window owner asks you what you would do. all you can do is fix the window, you cannot unbreak it. so liberals have to clean up the mess that the neo-cons made and it will be ugly. so they rather the neo-cons take the consequences and fix the window and then they will stop throwing rocks the way the neo-cons were doing so no more windows get broke. this is not going to happen because they are still throwing rocks at other windows. you have to take the rocks away and lock them in their room until they learn to be civilized.
2006-08-18 17:51:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Bush has no plan for Iraq other than stay the course,,, which has gone from bad to worse,,,,,,,,,pull out 50%f our troops, redeploy 25% to Afghanistan, remaining 25% troops to guard oil refinery's, the Iraq president Malici will have to run his own country,,, US troops can guard the borders to make sure Iran doesn't get in, and the 50 % of troops coming home should get a hero's welcome,,,, if need be the Sunnis and the Shiites and the Kurds can be given equal percentages of oil revenues, and give them a chance to live in peace,,, if they kill each other and the government can't control them,, they can ramp up their police,,
with a minimum of US troops, I think the insurgents would calm down dramatically,,,,, they must start to rebuild their country, the US should help with aid and training builders, etc. access the needs per area. In Afghanistan the remnants of al Qaeda should be unarmed, and if needed guard the borders with Pakistan and have undercover forces to try to locate Osama bin laden,, the President should name Colin Powell to talk to Ahmadinejad of Iran, to include South Korea ,Km Jong il, an agreement with UN support to stop all the braggadocio,,,, and lets all work together for the citizens of this great and wonderful world.
2006-08-18 19:24:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Liberals are flip floppers .As john Kerry was voting for the WAR in iraq and trying to Slam bush in 2004.they do not speak about another policy because they have none.
If Bush quits they will accuse of trying Iraq to the dogs.
If he does not quit even then he is damned
2006-08-18 17:49:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by rhinogirl 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I can't speak for liberals, but how about this.
Look at it from a cost-benefit analysis. How much money (tens of millions) and how many lives (dozens) did it cost to depose Saddam. How much money (tens of billions) and how many lives (thousands) have been lost staying after "Mission Accomplished" while the Iraqis try to establish a new government.
It would be far more cost-effective and would cost far fewer lives to just pull out, and let the Iraqis form whatever government they want. And if we don't like it, we just go in, topple it, and tell them to try again. We could do that ten times, and still only spend 1% of what we've spent so far.
2006-08-18 17:49:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Definiton of the word liberal:
# broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
# having political or social views favoring reform and progress
# tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
# a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
# big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
# a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
# free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"
2006-08-18 17:47:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Liberals caused these problems by ignoring terrorist for about thirty years.....Covering up terrorist attacks, scandals, selling tech secrets to the Chinese, Iran, boikin "Monica the mouth," etc-etc....No, they don't have a clue, but they sure run their mouths alot. They'd try and make friends with the enemy until our enemies actually parked landing crafts on our shores, then they might decide they wanted to get tough, but by then it would be too late.
2006-08-18 17:55:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mr. US of A, Baby! 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Their policy is Surrender Dorothy!
2006-08-19 12:44:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by John16 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, their policy is to reduce defense spending & bring the troops home now -- without any regard for the war on terror or Iraq's state of democracy or self defense against the militias.
2006-08-18 17:52:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by sexygyrl 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
it's the cut and run policy
2006-08-18 17:46:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by Stand 4 somthing Please! 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Cause we are for the people, not the man.
2006-08-18 17:47:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by danac210 5
·
1⤊
2⤋