for helping arm Saddam in the 80's, and then leaving him in power at the end of Desert Storm?
or is it not ok to blame a previous president unless he's a democrat?
2006-11-21 09:53:15 · 8 answers · asked by fireburn 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush would have loved to finish the job. The U.N. would not allow it. That is when we should have left the U.N.
2006-11-21 09:56:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
It's not OK to blame previous president no matter what party, as most did what was necessary for the time.
Beside long term politicians that seem to want to control all aspects of American life, no one has the right to pass judgment since it's the will of the American people.
Even if the guy or gal elected isn't your particular choice, it's still the will of the people and you'll have to wait until the next election.
I think the United States citizen needs to get over themselves, by holding grudge and vilifying the next politician (unless long term) we are just making a bad situation worse and teaching the next generation that it's not OK to lose an election and we should be mad and spew rhetoric and not get involved.
But, the long term politicians need to go, they harm the basic premise.
2006-11-21 10:04:40 · answer #2 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Bush financial rules that promptly bring about the financial colapse, would be felt for an prolonged time. Blaming our President, is like blaming chemotherapy for the main cancers. a company in my community purely employed 3000 human beings for a stimulus activity. The Bush administration bailed out the financial establishments. And if President Obama hadn't bailed out the automakers, you would be complaining approximately those lost jobs. some human beings will by no ability approve of something he does. I surely have a feeling if he walked as much as their doorways with a verify for a million money, they might grab it, and then ***** that he did no longer call till now he got here around.
2016-10-17 08:39:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he can blame the U.N. who only wanted Saddam and his troops booted from Kuwait.
If I am not mistaken, Democrats advocate working closely with the U.N. and heeding their call, right or wrong. All in the name of international "diplomacy," of course.
2006-11-21 09:58:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Clinton saved bin Laden's life 8 times while president.
He thought they could be friends.
(Besides Clinton was too busy staining the Oval Office to be bothered with terrorists.)
2006-11-21 09:58:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Can he blame him for the recession he inherited? Or can only Bush do that...
2006-11-21 10:07:23 · answer #6 · answered by omgykkenny 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I can blame them all for the debt!
2006-11-21 09:56:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes you LIBS can, I DO.
2006-11-21 09:57:17 · answer #8 · answered by daydoom 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋