Should the leader of our nation be stomping his feet like a little brat??
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 16, 2006; Page A01
"President Bush warned defiant Republican senators yesterday that he will close down a CIA interrogation program that he credited with thwarting terrorist attacks if they pass a proposal regulating detention of enemy combatants, escalating a politically charged battle that has exposed divisions within his party."
So basically what he is saying that the congress will be blamed once he discontinues the program for "allowing" terrorists to attack us simply because they refuse to "alter" the Geneva Conventions to his liking. Bratty Bush??
2006-09-16 05:07:31 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
HI bia bia
good point.. thanks..
I too have noticed this white house inabilities to follow the will of the people and the constitution and they get angry when reminded or taken to task.And then threaten the entire Nation.
I,m sick of it.
2006-09-16 05:09:42 · answer #1 · answered by dstr 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
what a pointless question. In other words people like you would rather see terrorist run free and wild!! It was the damnocrats that stopped the NSA program, and cried because the terrorist were being treated bad, Are the damnocrats needing votes so bad that they will recruit the terrorist that seek to destroy our country. The only brats I see are the flip flopping damnocrats who constantly cry and whine while making up lies and conspiracy theories. Now that is what a real brat is!!!
2006-09-16 12:24:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I listened to him yesterday on NPR. I couldn't help thinking that he sounded like my 4 year old when he doesn't get his way. Now there's a scary thought! Perhaps he should listen to the thoughts of others and consider them seriously instead of just stubbornly insisting on his way.
The thought of altering the Geneva Conventions is scary. After all, if we can change it to our liking, what's to prevent other countries to change it to suit their purposes as well? When the US has set the precedent, what recourse would we have?
2006-09-16 12:15:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well first, your lack of knowledge is really shining through today.
Geneva applies to uniformed combatants. The terrorists dress like civilians. Furthermore, I don't call strapping a bomb to walk into a pizza parlor or using a car bomb complying to Geneva, do you?
2006-09-16 12:24:11 · answer #4 · answered by John 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Most of our problems with the Muslim world stem from our own greed. In 1953 Iran wanted to nationalize the oil industry but the Brits had a company there called the Anglo Iranian oil co. that had interests in the oil. They were offered money for their interests but turned it down. Truman did not interfere but when Eisenhower got in they were able to convince him that Iran was in danger of allying with the Russians so with the aid of British and American intelligence they brought the shah to full power. The shah eventually became a brutal dictator but the people revolted and replaced him. This also led to the invasion by students of our embassy there. My point in telling you this is that in many ways we are responsible for the hate against us.
Reagan did nothing to try to sooth relations and in fact encouraged Saddam Hussein in his war with Iran. So you can blame who you wish, but to me it seems we got ourselves into this quandary and the best course of action would be to admit past mistakes and try for better relations. I really don't buy the fact that most Muslim nations really don't want peace with us. They know they would be annihilated if they were to seriously damage this country say with a nuclear or biological attack.
2006-09-16 12:09:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think those Frat Boys back at the Skull&Bones molested Dub'ya.
Now he want to Torture people and watch them squirm.
Go big Red Go
2006-09-16 12:24:48 · answer #6 · answered by 43 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
And why not!
If we cant define a combat en then why should we continue to interrogate prisoners. Why not give the terrorist free reign over this country. will you be happy with that?
2006-09-16 12:21:52 · answer #7 · answered by Doug B 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Maybe the CIA program would be a waste of money if the bill doesn't pass.
2006-09-16 12:10:24 · answer #8 · answered by Bill 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Bush is trying to prevent what is happening. I do not agree that he should threaten his way, but then again, I think torture to get info. is perfectly fine, and justified, when they do worse.
Sword-neck-dead
Camera-Parents-permanetly messed up.
2006-09-16 12:12:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Let your question burn in your mind when we get hit harder then on 9/11. I'm sure you will be one of the first to cry the loudest.
2006-09-16 12:21:12 · answer #10 · answered by coco 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋