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

1. Plans for Iraq...Besides "just get the troops out"
2. Change any laws - Patriot Act?
3. Military action - how would you protect the USA?
4. Firm Rhetoric or Spineless...

2006-09-26 09:10:44 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

You did not answer my question crazy JIM. I thought you were the original Jim W, and now you have gone and confused your lib friends with the name change. Not good.

2006-09-26 09:16:57 · update #1

JIM - I mean NOT NORMAL

2006-09-26 09:19:13 · update #2

hichefheidi...I'm conservative and don't have a problem with what we are doing! That is and would be MY PLAN.
I hope we find Osama too - would you have us invade Pakistan to do it?

2006-09-26 09:21:32 · update #3

I WOULD secure our borders more than they are now! AND, I would remove most of the ILLEGALS too.

2006-09-26 13:20:52 · update #4

14 answers

I say, lets let someone else take over Iraq for awhile, we aren't going anywhere with it. So, (and it's nice of you guys to admit that we need a plan for Iraq, and it won't come from this administration) we will need to repair our GLOBAL relations, in order to win this GLOBAL war. Next, we stop any FURTHER attacks on our constitution by not using fear to get illegal legislation passed, no matter how bad we need it. Number 3. Protect USA? Easy. the troops are home, and they are securing our borders. As far as #4, I don't understand the question. Now, your turn! I expect an answer, BTW...

OH YEAH! Number 5. FIND OSAMA!

Tut tut, R L P, you are going to have to tell me WHAT the plan is in Iraq. Spell it out, so everyone sees this 'clear path to victory'. Now, I thought part of the plan for finding Osama was to treat ALL countries, etc...who harbor terrorists the same way we treat terrorists. So according to YOUR leader, you should have been in Pakistan months ago. You still aren't off the hook...
you did know that Bush has called off the search for Osama, right? Would you also secure our borders the same way this administration has?

2006-09-26 09:18:33 · answer #1 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2 0

I am far left of liberal and I am neutral in the war on terror. I do not believe in it, like I don't believe in churches or the 'free market'. These are fantasies, distractions, myths, make-believe, fairy tales, distractions...manipulations to keep the rabble out of real-politik.

The basic reasoning for this is that you can't fight a war on an idea, especially by primarily using the same idea. We are trying to stop terror by terrorizing the terrorists. It is the height of absurdity.

As far as Iraq, the United States needs it's credibility back before anything else we do will work. That means apologizing for what the Bush regime did, misleading people and believing hype.

After that, we should do some fair and symbiotic things to show we mean it. Divide iraq into three countries, three sphere's of influence. The united states works with the kurds, china and iran work with the shia's, and the russians and europeans work with the sunni's. Split the oil profits equally between iraqis and foreign investors, protect the pipelines, ensure democracy with minimal influence from outside powers. Set time tables for military withdrawals, provide economic incentives for periods of no bombings. Treat the death squads like any other mafia.

As far as the domestic 'front' is concerned, it has been overwhelmingly proven that the 9-11 terrorists could have been captured before the attack with laws already on the books. The prewritten patriot act and all of the laws about warrantless surveillance should be immediately withdrawn. All phone calls should not be stored, all internet activity should not be stored, the NSA should not have a line to every phone center in the country. These things are all very unamerican. Everything with domestic security must take into account the three branches of government, must acknowledge that we have a system of checks and balances. Terrorists are not foreign armies, they are criminals. The f.b.i. can deal with them. Having the CIA and military working inside the united states muddies the waters.

At this point, there is no rhetoric, spineless or otherwise, that is going to solve our problems. Only fair and well-concieved action can do that. No secret plans, no fantasies of super-power, no world orders.

America needs to show the world that we can be trusted and that we can solve simple problems efficiently.

And that we can admit when we are wrong.

Bush is going down in history as the worst president ever, no one can stop that, it's only a matter of how soon we as a nation can admit it.

Stop believing these illusions, stop getting news from the TV, think for yourself.

America is about independence, fairness, and opportunity, and it's about time that we start living up to this, our dream.

2006-09-26 09:28:45 · answer #2 · answered by Jeremy 2 · 3 0

How about we bring the fight to the terrorist instead of Iraq?
How about we protect the constitution from those that attack it?

For Iraq, since we messed up and went in, we divide the country into it's 3 religious sections. We investigate the companies that have stolen billions from them and we hold the mercs we have put in with our troops. If any of them are found to have broken the law we allow them to be tried. (Right now they are not subject to the UCMJ or Iraqi law) We start to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis not through fear but through working with them. We get their infrastructure rebuilt ASAP. Just a few ideas.

2006-09-26 09:19:21 · answer #3 · answered by a4140145 4 · 1 0

Now let's think here for one minute. Do you think all terrorists are standing in Iraq. That's why we have to be there so we can kill them all. Right!

Being able to spy on everybody including American citizens is fighting terrorism. Torturing prisoners against the wishes of the UN is fighting terrorism. So what if it makes us no better than the people we;re fighting against. Right!

So the billions of dollars we're spending in Iraq is doing more to fight terrorism than if it was being spent on the borders and streets of the U.S. Right!

I don't think so. None of this makes any sense. Hopefully, our next administration doesn't think so either.

2006-09-26 09:32:00 · answer #4 · answered by Matrix 3 · 1 1

information flash! there is not any way any us of a can win a "conflict on terror." Terrorism has existed for hundreds of years, performed by skill of distinctive cultures and races for fairly some motives. attempting to quell terror by skill of going to conflict won't artwork the two. in case you desire evidence, in simple terms seem on the Iraq conflict. greater Muslims have join the terrorist pass than ever until now simply by fact they see the U.S. as occupiers of Iraq and combatants of Islam (simply by our alliance with Israel). we can't go away Iraq the two simply by fact then it is going to truthfully replace right into a terrorist haven. by skill of how, our concentration on Iraq allowed authentic threats like Iran and North Korea to enhance their military features. they only good technique for Iraq is to partition the country among Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds. yet, the Bush administration so a procedures refuses to evaluate it. As for a plan for the conflict on terror, enable's in simple terms wait and notice what the Democrats arise with simply by fact the Republican plan has been atrocious.

2016-12-12 15:38:17 · answer #5 · answered by zabel 4 · 0 0

why did Republicans invade Iraq to get a dictator... but don't want to invade Pakistan, which also has a dictator and Osama?

yes... ask most Americans and I think that they would say going after Osama would be a better idea than going into Iraq...

I mean both places would CLEARLY be destabilized by an attack with a threat of getting another ruthless dictator... the only difference I see is YOUR GOING AFTER OSAMA IN ONE...

I mean you have 3,000 U.S. deaths as motivation to attack Pakistan... you have "WMD" made post gulf-war that we still haven't found as motivation for Iraq?

2006-09-26 09:36:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

What are you doing to fight terror? Christian terrorism isn't considered fighting terror but actually being a part of terrorism.

Liberals will always bring peace to the table, like Liberals always have and Conservatives always haven't. There will be less war and more peace. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

2006-09-26 09:14:54 · answer #7 · answered by p2prox 4 · 4 3

1.Publicly apologize to the world and humbly ask for their assistance and ideas, because we need it. Slowly pull troops out forcing Iraqis to step up to the plate.Have constant water and electricty throughout the country, get it back to pre Saddam conditions, make that a serious priority.That would be a start with some of the problems. Apologize!! Seriously freaking apologize to countries we have harmed.
2.Completely get rid of the Patriot Act.We dont need it. Dont argue, we dont need it and it slowly erodes our civil liberties.
3.If you dont **** with someones ****, you dont need protecting.
Stop sending aid to Israel and the muslims will stop hating you, its not hard to figure out, when did our problem with muslims start?
4.STOP GIVING AID TO ISRAEL!!! I can not stress this enough, this is the cause of alot of problems with the arab world.

2006-09-26 09:16:16 · answer #8 · answered by stephaniemariewalksonwater 5 · 4 3

Heck RLP-I'm doing my part - trying to keep you busy asking these ridiculous questions- How many terrorist can a person be expected to deal with at one time??!!

2006-09-26 12:13:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

try talking to them, then when they figure out that wont work, run for the hills, and wait for the real Americans to bail them out.

2006-09-26 12:27:55 · answer #10 · answered by ssgtusmc3013 6 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers