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

With the "say anthing" to get elected climate do you think the anti-war stance of the democratic pary will ultimately leave the United States vulnerable? Is it only power they want or are they looking out for the real interest of the U.S.

2006-08-19 08:21:49 · 18 answers · asked by Burghster is here 1 in Politics & Government Politics

18 answers

I believe it's been too late for no war for a while.

All of our international ties, our power, and our collective ignorance make us vulnerable.

We still have tons of soft power and hard power. Soft power = culture. Hard power = military. With power comes inevitable problems.

The "say anything" tactics have been around for a while because society doesn't always care what politicians are talking about. Often, we just want to "feel better". Of course we'll be vulnerable, regardless of the democrats and republicans.

We need war right now, but we just shouldn't want it so bad, democratic or republican.

2006-08-19 08:39:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't think that the anti-war stance will leave America vulnerable, because the Dems will never win another election on their current platform of radical counterculturalism.
Most of suburban America is red, it is only a few states and some major cities that are majority Democratic. Most of America still supports the war, despite all of the super-spinning CNN polls which are not in the least scientific.
Wow, 10 callers responded, and 6 of them don't support our war. Therefor, 60% of America hates Bush!
Gimme a break.
The Democrats only want power, and they are willing to do or say anything to get it. They will make any policy, no matter how destructive, if they think it will keep the DNC on their side. They aren't looking out for the best interest of the US, Democrats hate the US.

2006-08-19 08:35:16 · answer #2 · answered by hckychmp91 1 · 0 2

It sounds like you are describing all politicians. Democrats are not anti war but rather see the uselessness in what the current administration has created. Like Vietnam you have to know when to call it a day. Your boy Nixon sure did. The current administration was really looking out for our interests in the aftermath of hurricaine Katrina, now werent they? They need to realize that the 2 hardest things to handle are failure and success. Goal are dreams with deadlines. Are we safer now than we were before the war? Tact should have been employed and not a bullrush. Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy.

2006-08-19 08:44:34 · answer #3 · answered by diaryofamadblackman 4 · 0 0

Their wasteful social courses have ballooned the cost of government. Their techniques on protection make usa susceptible and an undemanding aim. Their plans to overtax the prosperous whilst on the comparable time taxing agencies to dying creates a concern the place it extremely is greater value-effective for the wealth and jobs to bypass foreign places. The undesirable are undesirable and not something will replace that. there has been a 40 5 3 hundred and sixty 5 days conflict on poverty which wasted Trillions of greenbacks yet 30% remains the proportion that are at poverty point.those are basically off the perfect of my head. i could desire to actual fill some pages.

2016-12-17 13:42:48 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

So sorry to disappoint, but it's Republicans that have made us vulnerable...the Democrats are anti-war, they're just anti-stupid war. Democrats supported and still support the war in Afghanistan--because there we had an enemy who clearer intended us harm, and was or was a tool of a major international terrorist group. Republicans are the ones that have made us vulnerable by hurting our relationship with our allies (withdrawl from Kyoto Protocol), inflamed much of the populations of Middle Eastern countries against us (Iraq war), and fail to actively manage true threats to us and our allies (North Korea).

2006-08-19 08:29:46 · answer #5 · answered by Qwyrx 6 · 2 1

Is the GOP vested in the enrichment of the military/industrial complex?
Seriously, dude, we have had plenty of Democratic Congresses and Democratic presidents. Some good. Some bad.
The bottom line is that you should vite for the best leaders rather than slavishly following some "party politics" herd instinct.
Personally, I plan to vote for my sitting congressman (a Republican) and whichever candidate for president is NOT a moron, if any.
We've done six-and-a-half years of "Leadership by the Stupid" and it has not been terribly fun for the majority of Americans, now, has it?

2006-08-19 08:29:51 · answer #6 · answered by Grendle 6 · 1 1

Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
Wasn't it Bush who said he was not a "Nation Builder"?
Here is what Bush said:
"Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place."
Maybe he was just lying and just saying that to get elected?

Fast forward to the present. Details have begun emerging in recent days about the Bush administration's vision for postwar Iraq, and clearly the White House has abandoned its aversion to nation building, as it plans for what appears to be the biggest American-led, rebuilding project since the Marshall Plan in the early 1950s.

2006-08-19 09:00:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What does the What So Proudly We Halliburton war have to do with America? Why don't you be honest and write "the defeat of us" instead of "U.S"?

Besides, by calling abortion murder, you're saying that the U.S. is worse than Nazi Germany. So quit calling your side American. When you Bushwhackoffs wrap yourselves in the flag, I call that crossdressing.

2006-08-19 08:39:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

democrats want our military fight who it should be, managing it as intelligently, effectively, quickly and cheaply as possible, with the best defensive technology and training to protect our troops, fighting only when it absolutely needs to, and with the minimum of destruction and harm to civilians and infrastructure, if Dem's hard been in charge after 9\11 we'd be fighting a very diffrent war in very diffrent locations and with the support of as much of the world possible, remember that whole Pre-emptive war thing, and how it's been managed so stupidly, ineffectively, slowly, expensively and with poorly equiped and trained the troops have been, the mindset that lead to that is what Dem's are fighting against not the country itself.

2006-08-19 08:38:44 · answer #9 · answered by Stan S 1 · 0 0

Democrats don't care who gets hurt so long as they regain the power they once had. They had the reigns for too many years and got used to it, now that the Republicans are in charge they're acting like a bunch of children denied a favorite toy.

Just my humble opinion, of course.

2006-08-19 08:28:08 · answer #10 · answered by Mr Smarty Pants 3 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers