President Bush ends every question about Iraq with, we will be here until our mission is accomplished, we are not pulling our troops out. Will his stubborn refusal to listen to anyone, even with Mr. Gates saying we are not winning in Iraq, cause Congress to feel impeachment may be in order?
2006-12-06 13:01:20 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's about 6 years late. I certainly hope he is not only impeached but removed from office. All his cronies should be removed as well. It would be great if the Republicans did it themselves, instead of relying on the Democrats to do it in January. Or blaming them for the mess they have caused, and must be responsible for.
2006-12-06 14:18:52 · answer #1 · answered by Schona 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you have a solution to the Iraq problem that leaves the local people better off than when we went in?
I've tried to get Pelosi to use her influence with the terrorists 5th column (the US press & the liberals) to challenge the individuals in IRAQ to get past the end of the movie Lawrence of Arabia & work together for peace. IF they had peace for about a year & a half the coallition would be back home. The 1st year of peace the coalition would be avaluating if the local government have the area under control. Then it would take about 6 months for the troops to get home. If the locals still felt a civil war was in their best interest they could distroy their country just like Lebanon & Yugoslavia did.
Personally I don't think the terrorist have enough faith in their cause to allow the locals to make the choice to have peace with their neighbors.
2006-12-06 13:18:38 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would anybody think that we are winning this damn war? We aren't even fighting a war, in the traditional sense. We send out patrols each day, which makes our troops completely vulnerable to IED's, snipers, roadside bombs, suicide bombers. This is dumb @ss duty the Iraqi army should be performing.
We should be cutting to the chase and go after the son of a bit ch that's behind all this crap, Ahmadinejad! Kill that squirmy little bastard and this whole thing will quiet down, STAT!
Then, we could have a ticker tape parade, instead of impeachment, for GWB for showing that he has the brains and not just the stones to get the job done.
2006-12-06 13:13:44 · answer #3 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say he is. Almost all presidents make the mistake of thinking because we get attacked here we are going to destroy over there. It just does not make any sense to seek revenge when it just does not make things any better than they were before all of this got started. Impeachment might be good for Bush since he is the second one in office. THey need to take a break with the bush's and let someone else come in for the moment that does not have a personal vendetta against Iranians.
2006-12-06 13:06:42 · answer #4 · answered by Sworn By Life 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
President Bush does not want to be a failure in Iraq and he was persistent on this matter up to the extent that he is misunderstood to be setting himself for an impeachment.
2006-12-06 13:14:36 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Congress has absolutely no grounds on which to propose an impeachment. If all Presidents that entered a war were impeached, then Nazis would still be in power, Iraq would control Kuwait, and Hussein would still be in power in Iraq killing thousands of his own people.
2006-12-06 13:05:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Read the Constitution (I realize that this might get you expelled from the Liberals club). Being stubborn is not grounds for impeachment.
2006-12-06 13:33:45 · answer #7 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read The Constitution! The President much commit a High Crime or misdemeanor to be impeached. His statements don't meet that criteria
2006-12-06 13:05:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Impeachment is a tool used to remove a person from office when they abuse the power of their office. It is not used when people disagree with the policies of the president so based on what you wrote he could not be impeached. If it is proven he violated the law he could be impeached but this would not be advised because Cheney would take over, if that happens our country will suffer
2006-12-06 13:05:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
that's overdue interior the interest to question a "lame duck". we would desire to consistently concentration our interest and components on finding out on a successor per subject concerns pertinent to a progressive society. to objective an impeachment at this factor might divert our concentration and he's very very nearly long gone. shall all of us determine it does not take place back.
2016-10-14 04:26:31 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋