I believe, a bazooka pointed at his nose, and a towel head with a black kinky beard holding it into his shoulder just might do the trick.
2006-09-09 03:28:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by briang731/ bvincent 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
Most Liberals supported the war on terror in Afghanistan and were hardly "down with terrorists attacking us"
Liberals won't follow blindly when all evidence points to the contrary.
Saddam may have had involvements with terrorists but not with Al Qaeda as the 9/11 commision report made quite clear. Why do people still think the two were related? Is it impossible there is more than one terrorist group in the world?
So if you expect liberals to just toss all their support behind a war based on no connections to 9/11 and no WMDs keep praying.
2006-09-09 10:08:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kevin 3
·
4⤊
2⤋
Ummm...you know that Republicans in Congress fought Clinton over the use of military force, don't you?
You know that (Democrat) Gen. Wesley Clark has streets named after him in Kosovo, due to the miltary work of the U.S.A?
Liberals supported the war in Afghanistan, as a legitimate response to 9/11.. So 9/11 did convince liberals to use military force.
What other military action do you think is justified by 9/11?
2006-09-09 14:03:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Zhimbo 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
It can't be done; at least not for the two most common types of Liberals.....
Type 1- The "Sweet, Little White Girl" (of whatever age, race, or gender). This type is for all intents and purposes a pacifist . Although they usually have enough intellectual self-respect to deny they're actual pacifists, in fact if you take the time to explore their opinions and beliefs, you will find there is effectively no circumstances under which they will support a military response to anything. They are almost as unsupportive of police responses to any kind of internal crime.
Type 2- The "America Hater". This type is not at all pacifistic but they are profoundly prejudiced against some combination of males, Christians, Whites, America, and Western Civilization and approach all issues and events from the point-of-view of their prejudice. They will inject the issue of "racism" into practically any discussion of anything, yet are completely in denial that their own level of prejudice against Christians, America, etc is itself of a racist intensity, and even at times of a specifically racist charactor....
2006-09-10 02:28:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
What would it take to show a conservative that starting a war by lying to the people that put you in office is murder, not to mention bad for your country? 9/11 was done by Osama bin Laden, not Iraqis. If you idiots continue to use the WMD argument, then we should have also attacked N. Korea and Iran. Why haven't the conservatives and W decided to attack them?
2006-09-09 10:30:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by commonsense 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The truth. Not trumped up reasons like Bush used for going to war in Iraq. No WMD's, no al-Qaeda link, no 9/11 link....I had no problem with going into Afghanistan to bring bin Laden to justice. Military force is a VERY serious issue, people die and we need to make damned sure of what we're doing when we use it.
2006-09-09 10:14:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by carpediem 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
So I imagine most who think that Iraq is an unjust war also believe we should of let Hitler do his thing without any recourse??WMD's werent located,but that doesnt mean they dont exist anyway,and what about the makings of chemical warfare they did find,is that not a form of destruction?Sadaam is a terrorist in his own rite,would you want to live under such a tyrant?I support my President,even more at wartime when he needs our support most,afterall he is our troops boss,so you disrespect him you disrespect our troops,and our country as well..Sadaam is to blame for the war not Bush..we are there to fight terror cells in that country,not Iraqi civilians..USA rocks!
2006-09-09 10:24:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by *toona* 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, putting 1/2 cent per pound tax on tea for one.
That is why Liberals started America.
2006-09-09 10:16:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
The "enemy" would have to have broken into the Libs home, raped and killed the wife and children, nailed the Libs balls to the floor, and then set the house on fire. THEN, the Lib would only use force to try to get the nail out of the floor. IF he succeeded, he would then go out and find the perp and ask him what he (the Lib) had done wrong to bring about such behavior.
2006-09-09 10:04:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Spirit Walker 5
·
3⤊
3⤋
I've got it, I know what it takes to get them to use force.....
Tell the truth about Clinton.
and has anyone else noticed that DanceHappyAtoms seems to be obsessed.
2006-09-09 18:31:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
If they are Liberal Jews which most are..then as soon as Israel is attacked again they'll switch from Yellow Iraq Doves to Yellow Hawks spilling blood of the stupid Goyam who think they're Gods chosen...wanting America's sons to defend a confederate Jerusalem.
Yep we'll defend their country with every drop of OUR Heartlands "Christian" sons.
The absolute lowest Enlistment rate for Officers and /or NCOs of any socio-ethnic group in America is held by the Jews, with one/eight of one percent being Jews in the combined military Branches!
Speaks volumes doesn't it!
2006-09-09 10:06:08
·
answer #11
·
answered by B'klyn Barracuda 3
·
0⤊
5⤋