Wonder what the Green Party of Nader response to Iraq and 9/11 would have been?

Question

How would these have responded to Al-Quida? Wave a tulip at them?

The problem with GREEN and other 3d party candidates is that they have a narrow focus, are concerned with single issues only, and would be unable to respond to the needs of a dynamic and dangerous world. Agree?

Answer 1

"let us check their topperware. We must know if they are made "green friendly"

Answer 2

The military industrial complex will thrive regardless of who controls the Executive Branch.

Waving a tulip at Al Quida makes more sense than waging war with Iraq.

Al Quida hasn't attacked the US since 9/11. Why is that? Because we decapitated Hussein or because Al Quida is not the threat that Bush Co. says it is?

Answer 3

My passion is the interdiction efforts in the Andean Region, a position the Green Party is sympathetic with, but that does not mean that there is a void where knowledge on other issues would exist.
A professional politician is a professional politician, understanding a multitude of issues is their "raison d'etre". I am of the opinion that other than Iraq, the response to 9/11 would have been similar regardless of who wins in 2000. The passions of the public demanded it.

Answer 4

Most of us who disagree with the war feel this way because much evidence of dishonesty has been brought out into the light.

If we felt the trusted with the truth, perhaps we could trust the administration with the war.

Answer 5

appeasement. They would have tried to make concessions to make the terrorists happy. Nader and those like him see many of the worlds problems as a result of our policies, therefore we are at fault. Which is stupid.

But Nader and people in the green party can not see beyond their own ideology.

Answer 6

Same as the democrats, cut, run, and hide from real threats!!!