Instead, they seem to think that everything will just go away if they get elected and they cut-and-run.
2006-10-24 08:22:40 · 33 answers · asked by AMERICA #1 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Democrats would rather play politics with our freedom than defend America. Give them a religious fascist to fight and the liberals wave the white flag!
2006-10-24 08:23:43 · update #1
What lie?
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
2006-10-24 08:25:27 · update #2
We're in Iraq fighting Iran, yet liberals delusion themselves just because they hate Bush?
2006-10-24 08:26:13 · update #3
You have obviously bought the lie that our current dictator is selling
2006-10-24 08:24:32 · answer #1 · answered by martin 4 · 6⤊ 6⤋
You really have no idea what you are talking about. The idea that terrorists threaten the USA is another Republican concept aimed at keeping us in line by establishing a permanent war time footing a la "Big Brother".
If we did not fight in Viet Nam, all of Southeast Asia would go Communist. Wrong!
If the Russians attacked we would lose everything including our way of life. Nobody mentioned the fact that the Russian Army was useless and no threat at all in reality.
Why don't those who support the neo-Con right take the government's invasive attacks on the Bill of Rights seriously?
More Americans were killed by alcohol and tobacco than by the WTC attacks by a factor of 10 to 1. Handguns are a greater real threat to our day to day lives. Yet we went into Iraq on a lie and stay there out of some misguided sense of machoism. Please think logically!
2006-10-24 08:33:14 · answer #2 · answered by Joe M 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
We understand what is on the line. So far the only people that have benefitted is defense contractors. Everyone else is losing.
When we get away from the Iraq war, we can start fighting the war on terror again.
2006-10-24 08:39:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
First of all, Iraq is not a front in the WOT. Iraq is the scapegoat. Saddam didn't help Al Qaeda beyond saying "Good luck," didn't have nuclear, chemical or biological weapons aside from whatever number of crap Scud missiles were in his arsenal and didn't let Al Qaeda members hide in his country---they came there after we invaded. You have been eating up Bush's lies. If anything, he's waging a War on Whoever He Damn Well Wants to.
While John Kerry wanted to stay in Iraq a little longer, other Democrats want out for sure (not just politicians). Voters have the power. If a Democrat doesn't aim to withdraw from Iraq, I won't vote for them. If they do, I will. It's that simple.
2006-10-24 08:38:25 · answer #4 · answered by docextremeways 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because Democrats are smart enough to know that Iraq diverted us from the war on terror, and thus was not in our best interest. Iraq COULD have sat on the back burner while we took care of the REAL threats.
2006-10-24 08:53:31 · answer #5 · answered by tom l 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The "terrorists" did not exist in Iraq until after we invaded.
They are nothing more than the people fighting against our invading and occupying forces.
Why don't we just invade yet another random country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and check how long it takes for them to start a resistance movement. That way you will have an excuse to call them terrorists as well.
2006-10-24 08:40:17 · answer #6 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
It's the Democrats that DO understand the war on terrorism. We are all wondering what the hell we're doing in Iraq. Aside from having our soldiers picked off one by one, leaving some military families to file bankruptcy - a shame. Terrorism is world wide, that's what everyone needs to understand. The GOP, has failed. It is time to for a change.
2006-10-24 08:38:40 · answer #7 · answered by T S 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Greetings!
Hey, why don't you whiners, stop and tell us just what we don't understand about the war.
We must look dumb, that Saddam was able to control this country and the Republicans with the biggest baddest army in the world can't get to square one.
Then of course we were to stupid when invading that country to disarm it.
Yet the Republicans have the answer, If a country (Iraq) kills off about a hundred of their countrymen each day, How long does the war last?
So in the year 2072 the Republicans can claim victory.
Grow up and be a man.
Good Luck
You need it
2006-10-24 08:32:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
I am all for the war on terror as a police and intelligence action. That is why it is imperative to end the distraction from it that is the Iraq war.
2006-10-24 08:38:41 · answer #9 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You're right. Every negative liberal on here seems to avoid the fact that Congress voted unanimously to go to war. Even the Democrats.
I admit that Donald Rumsfeld isn't the one who should be leading the military. He's horrible and I wish Bush would have chosen a smarter, more honest Secretary of Defense.
The fact of the matter is, these radicals want us dead. We can fight them, we can sit back and watch them destroy the Middle East - whatever. They will still try to kill us. Every leader in the Middle East agrees with this. The scholars all agree with this.
The Muslim extremists want you dead. We either take them out or they take us out. We're beating them back and using up a lot of their resources. We're fighting them over there so they don't come over here.
I can't believe anyone is so ignorant as to think otherwise. The Democrats today would have just let Hitler take over given the chance.
2006-10-24 08:39:48 · answer #10 · answered by RAR24 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Why is Bush denying now that he ever say "stay the course" now he wants to pull out? Isn't he also playing politics because he nows only 30% support Iraq war and is midterm elections? They are all playing politics and that is what they do, they're politicians! To expect a politician to do good without any hidden motive is ridiculous because they will support anything if it's political expedient even conservatives.
2006-10-24 08:32:20 · answer #11 · answered by cynical 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋