http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061113/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq
what kind of idiot president would change wartime policy according to election results?....if he truely believed his strategy was THE solution and would lead to victory, why would he allow an election to sway this strategy?.....
who voted for this fool?
and more importantly,,,,,,,who could possibly support him now.
2006-11-12 14:35:44 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes Saddam was an evil **** who ate babies. That doesn't make a realpolitik invasion fuelled by hysterical paranoia masquerading as a war of liberation any less ****** up in comparison.
We must plan for freedom, and not only for security, if for no other reason than that only freedom can make security secure.
2006-11-12 14:42:30 · answer #1 · answered by big-brother 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Wow, you are really twisting the plain words in the news article that you linked.
There's not one word in there about changing policy. All the article says is that Bush is receptive to any ideas that Democrats, or others, have about Iraq. That's all.
The strategies and approaches may change -- they always do, in every war -- but the POLICY is the same. The goal is the same -- victory over terrorism.
.
2006-11-12 22:39:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think the republican party just found some fool named bush, pulled his strings for six years and have now left him... It's called "plausible deniability", it will take some of the heat off the republican party in two years to just get rid of bush and a few members of the house and senate... You can bet that the republican agenda will continue and that a lot of people will blindly follow it.
2006-11-12 23:07:19 · answer #3 · answered by david n 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Uh not to be a pain or anything but asking why he would change his policy regarding iraq, implies he ever had a policy regarding iraq, beyond invade and pray.
2006-11-12 22:43:44 · answer #4 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are out there!
Not much policy left to change other we have gone from fighting terrorist to fighting Iraqi's in a civil war which is out-of-control. You can thank Bush and Rumsfeld for a policy of disaster!
I bet the Republicans try and pin the war on the Democrats!
Well the problem Julie is we aren't fighting terrorist! We are fighting Iraqi's who didn't have a damn thing to do with 9/11!!! Eighty percent of our troops who were KIA in October were killed in a civil war, not a War on Terror, which is a misnomer as there is no such thing!
How many dead today?
2006-11-12 22:41:13 · answer #5 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I think he is a waffleing John Kerry want to be. He has seen the light and will declare himself a democrat before his term is up. Yeah, like that is going to happen.
2006-11-12 23:03:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I suspect that Bush will cave in and pander to liberals. Watch for conservatives to riot.
2006-11-12 23:05:22 · answer #7 · answered by GOPneedsarealconservative 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
heres a new twist from bush,he might involve iran and syria with reguards to iraqi security.
2006-11-12 22:59:22 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He has always asked for the demos to come forward with their ideas, but all they can do is criticize, nothing has really changed, the demos know they can't abandon Iraq.
2006-11-12 22:53:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
He heard the voice of the people
2006-11-12 22:41:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋