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

That's kind of the picture Bush portrayed when he landed on that carrier.

2006-10-09 10:42:22 · 14 answers · asked by sparks 7 in Politics & Government Government

14 answers

I don`t think they thought that far ahead or even cared for that matter. I voted for this pair twice to my dying regret. I think they are determined to line the pockets of the major cororations that they represent. I beleive very strongly that all of our lives are fodder for their arrogance. The failure in Iraq , and the civil war erupting there was easily predictable. How many times can they send our poor worn out, underpaid troops, with worn out weapons and equipment, in such a short time, how many deployments must a young man endure in this folly. We need to bolster our armed forces ! My GOD, we are being so poorly led !

2006-10-09 10:54:29 · answer #1 · answered by r j 2 · 0 0

By reading several books about the military side of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars I have come to the conclusion that they were mistaken about what would happen in Iraq once we took down Saddam. They thought that the desire to be free after all these years would give the Iraqis the same kind of spine that Americans have. Unfortunately that has not happened and we are now stuck.

The Tommy Franks book was the best one that I have read. It very clearly explains a lot about Rumsfeld and how he was bound to get into it with many of the military brass. It is very predictable that Rumsfeld has become unpopular with some of the military brass.

2006-10-09 17:56:52 · answer #2 · answered by united9198 7 · 0 0

No, they lied to the American people.

The Senate Select Intelligence Committee just recently issued its findings, according to US intelligence, that 1) the administration knew that there were no WMD, and 2) that there was no connection between Al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein.

Several 4- and 5- star generals warned this administration not to invade, unless there were an "exit strategy".

What "Cookie Dog" says above is true -- the war was practically won, and then Bremer was brought in -- perhaps to help with more $$$ for Halliburton???

2006-10-09 17:48:32 · answer #3 · answered by Joya 5 · 0 0

As military actions are concerned, that WAS a cakewalk. The invasion took a couple days to take the country and remove Saddam. That part was very successful. The insurgency afterwards was NOT part of the plan.

2006-10-09 17:48:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Actually, the invasion went better than planned. It has been the occupation that has been a pain in the butt. Bremer kicking out and disallowing all Baath party folks and disbanding the military was the biggest mistake of all. If not for that, our guys would be home and Iraq would be at peace.

2006-10-09 17:45:05 · answer #5 · answered by Schutzstaffel 4 · 1 0

They were lying then and knew it wouldn't be a cakewalk. It was all about drumming up support for his republican agenda to fund the rich defence companies that had him elected. Haliburton is more powerful than BUSH! It all about perception and not reality. George SR got out of Iraq because he knew he could not win. Look it up it is in his book. It was is and continues to be a total shame.

2006-10-09 17:50:37 · answer #6 · answered by Brian M 4 · 0 0

Here's the problem. Saddam wasnt cooperating on showing or not showing the WMD. Ok so there's no WMD, its a good thing that POS was caught, he did awful things to a lot of people.
The invasion was a cakewalk its maintaining order over there thats complete HELL for our soldiers.

2006-10-09 17:56:02 · answer #7 · answered by Jennifer W 3 · 0 0

Absolutely not. Remember "W" said, this war on terror will be a long war. Set up for the war machine, just like Vietnam and Korea. Stupid mistake on the carrier (MISSION ACCOMPLISHED, yea right.

2006-10-09 17:46:49 · answer #8 · answered by edubya 5 · 1 0

No they thought it would be very profittable for them and they were right. Have you seen how gas prices went up?? That means more money for the oil companies that support them and more importantly for Bush,Cheney,etc, it means more financial campaign contributions from the wealthy oil companies.

2006-10-09 17:45:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

He's good at photo op's, isn't he. I think we have three very egotistical, stubborn men who think they can do no wrong and won't ever admit they were wrong. Now they call us Unamerican for not wanting more killing and torture. I really doubt if they know what the hell to do at this point.

2006-10-09 17:51:14 · answer #10 · answered by beez 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers