with USA being victorious in defending freedom and liberty
2006-10-01 15:52:55 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I believe that if there were no "sympathizers" like the ACLU and their type, the war would have been over long ago....
Our brave and heroic troops would have been able to what they were trained to do, which is fight a war, not molly coddle terrorists and read them their rights, and wait around to get shot a couple times before firing back cuz ya have ta make sure you are actually being fired upon....crap.....
Yeah, our military would have kicked butt long ago...
No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
George S. Patton
2006-10-01 16:01:07 · answer #1 · answered by CrazyCatLady 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
What liberal sympathizers are you talking about? The entire federal government is run by the GOP.
Please have your mom, dad, or the babysitter read your question to see if it makes sense before you submit it.
As an added note, does anyone remember the Mission Accomplished sign that hung on the aircraft carrier where Bush declared major combat operations to be over? That was the war with Iraq that we won. We are now occupying Iraq, but they don't want us there. For some reason Iraq is becoming more and more unstable.
Saudi Arabia is so unsure about the stability of Iraq that it's building a 550 mile fence along it's border because the crisis in Iraq is so dangerous that it must be physically shut out. And we have 140,000 of our troops there.
In regard to Saudi Arabia, it's an absolute monarchy. The people there have no freedom and no liberty whatsoever. Osama bin Laden came from there as did most of the 9/11 hijackers. Why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia?
2006-10-01 23:05:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I can't believe I'm actually going to answer this incredibly retarded question.
Defending our freedom and liberty? From whom? Iraq didn't attack us. The 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. Why didn't we attack Saudi Arabia?
This war will never be over until the US leaves Iraq. The people of Iraq view us as a foreign occupying army and will resist us forever. The vast majority of Iraqis want us out of their country immediately.
Remember why we're there? WMD's. Oops, I mean we're there to remove Saddam. Oops, I mean we're there to promote democracy. Oops, we're there because Saddam was behind 9/11 (a lie even Bush had to finally give up). Bush has changed his tune more times than a jukebox on speed.
For those of you still uninformed enough to believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11, invading Iraq to avenge 9/11 makes as much sense as invading Switzerland to avenge Pearl Harbor.
Rumsfeld told us the insurgency was "in its last throes" over a year ago. Another lie.
The Bush Administration said the war would be paid for by Iraqi oil exports. Another lie. Then they said no more than 50 billion dollars. Still another lie. So far there's over 400 billion down the crapper with no end in sight.
2700 dead. 20,000 seriously wounded. So far. All in the service of a lie.
Bin Laden still alive, because the Bush Administration sent our troops into Iraq to invade a country that had attacked no one.
But you conservative Bozos think it's improper for us Liberals to actually USE our constitutionally protected right to free speech to criticize a war based on lies, a war started by a fool who is clearly the worst "President" in our long history.
Christ, stop listening to idiots like Limbaugh and stop watching Faux (sorry, Fox) "News" and try a little reality for a change.
2006-10-01 23:36:06 · answer #3 · answered by marianddoc 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course. Liberals only care about themselves. They would rather throw the war in order to gain back their power in the election. They are trying to give the terrorists every edge they can, from civil liberties, lawyers, The Qurans, pastries, La-Z-Boys, and medical care. But when it comes to the tools that our soldiers need to fight, they want to remove those. They are even going to let terrorist sleeper cells vote without an ID. They leek secrets every chance they get to make the administration look bad and don't consider that it emboldens the enemy.
2006-10-01 23:05:20 · answer #4 · answered by MorgantonNC 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The liberals are certainly giving the terrorist hope for victory as the liberals want to tie law enforcements hands at ever turn, want terrorist to have the same rights as any legal US citizen, and have done everything in their power to go against this President and help the terrorist. Yes, this war would be much easier and we would have less dead if the liberals would quit feeding the terrorist hope that they can win.
2006-10-01 22:58:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Hahahahahaha.
Bush's war. Bush's lies. Bush's incompetent Secretary of defense, Republican congress and you want to blame the failure on the left!
Hahahahahahah.
Sorry, it's all coming home to roost on Nov. 7th!
2006-10-01 23:15:18 · answer #6 · answered by Dastardly 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We could probably make quicker progress. Now, the war planners and fighters have to second guess everything they do for fear of liberals causing a huge controversy.
2006-10-01 23:09:23 · answer #7 · answered by Eric H 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
There is absolutely no damn reason to be in a war with Iraq,in the 1st damn place,neo-nazi-idiot-cons!
2006-10-01 23:06:25 · answer #8 · answered by Putt 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Do you think without hegemonic, war mongering, money hungry reboobs this war would already be over?
2006-10-01 23:01:40 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
no, the liberals at home have little to do with the military battle plan.
First, they should have massively invaded Afganistan, and got Al Queda before they ran. But nope, bush was too busy planning to attack Iraq. And what a success that is.
2006-10-01 22:56:02 · answer #10 · answered by Villain 6 · 4⤊ 5⤋