We did not attack Iraq,we responded to them attacking us,or maybe we should just let every tom dick and harry attack us and even take over!
Personally i dont know of anyone at this time that can do any better than Bush!
2006-08-30 12:13:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think we need a Democratic president, but do not have a viable candidate in the field. Even if we did, they would find a way to steal the election again. See Neil Rogers show, scroll down until you see a picture of a balding man with blue eyes & click on that video. It shows how easy it is to rig the voting machines without a paper trail...........Iraq is another Viet Nam. I said that when it first started.
2006-08-30 12:06:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by shermynewstart 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
What do you mean the "situation in Iran and Syria"? I see no problem in Iran and Syria. Are you talking about them funding Hezbollah? They have every right to do that, seeing as it is a legitimate resistance movement fighting to end the illegal Israeli occupation of Shebaa Farms (not to mention the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the 10,000 Arabs who were kidnapped and illegally imprisoned by Israel). Or are you talked about Iran's nuclear programme? Iran has, so far, broken no laws regarding the enrichment of uranium -- it is a process which is allowed under the NPT. And even if Iran were indeed pursuing nuclear weapons, they are only doing so as defense against an imminent US invasion of Iran. We invaded Iraq for petrol, and Iran has a lot more, so they're feeling scared, especially given the "Axis of Evil" speech.
2006-08-30 12:03:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Great president?
What's that?
Somebody who inflates the national debt, and when he goes, expects the next one to pay it down?
Guess who does the paying?
The corporations found ways to go offshore and use phony tax shelters to save on taxes due.
That leaves the gullible voting public to pay up.
With less and less good job prospects, in two years I expect the national debt to be around ten trillion dollars.
I also expect the next president to give us a long, solemn look and say..."Well folks, the party's over, time for you to pay up".
"Yes, more new taxes!".
And that could be a president from any party and any gender giving us the grim news.
Be ready, it's coming, and who will be capable of paying down this huge national debt Bushy boy made for us?
(I have to find a nice island somewhere where the natives are all happy and cheerful and nothing matters.)
2006-08-30 13:08:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think there will be a strong enough candidate to lead our nation. I don't think Bush will get us out of Iraq, completely. I think a democrat will get us out of there, but a republican might keep us there for awhile.
2006-08-30 12:03:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Paul 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of the contenders, the only one I would trust would be Hillary. She will keep the forces there because it is the right thing to do, while trying to get a multi-national force to ease our presence. While she does not like the war, she will do everything with an eye towards her place in the history books, so will not do anything crazy like Edwards or Kerry would do.
2006-08-30 12:04:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by psycmikev 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The republican agenda is to further the interests of corporations and the wealthy elite who control them, and to do so at the expense of all else: the common people, world peace, the environment, etc. I will vote for for whoever wins the democratic nomination.
2006-08-30 12:02:34
·
answer #7
·
answered by Phil S 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Joe Biden
2006-08-30 12:36:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by sassyk 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes. me.
the parties are ruining the country asap. we need to publically fund elections so that people can run instead of the usual businessmen, billionaires and trustfund babies. and then we will see a democracy again. until that happens, you are right to fear the candidates on the field.
2006-08-30 12:02:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by uncle osbert 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
We'll have large troop numbers in Iraq until at least 2014. It doesn't matter who we have in office.
2006-08-30 12:01:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋