And if my memory serves me correctly congress can declare war and it doesn't matter if the president doesn't think it's a great idea and vise versa, so if Bush did want to go to war, and congress felt it was not needed then they would be able to stop him from declaring war!
2006-12-09 18:41:17 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Yeah, he might get all the media, but there is a chain of command to follow-thus team work, which you idiots should know means it's voted on and agreed by a group, not solo!
2006-12-09 18:42:45 · update #1
Hate will do that every time and those who do not want to admit to the fact that it was CONGRESS that gave the president the power to declare war sound like Mr. Kerry when he said I voted for the war but I really didn't vote for the war.
2006-12-09 18:50:52 · answer #1 · answered by fatboysdaddy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush fed the country a passel of lies and congress, silly folk that they are, actually believed him! Some voices were raised, Senator Byrd gave a great speech on the Senate floor condemning the war but he was called a traitor and a coward by the well orchestrated right wing. Here's part of Senator Byrd's speech given January 29, 2003:
"Unfortunately, the President's State of the Union speech did little to allay the worries of the American people or the international community. The President signaled to the world that America is ready for war with Iraq, but he did not explain why Iraq suddenly presents such "a serious and mounting threat" to our country, our friends, and our allies that war is the only option. How is it that the threat from Iraq is more serious than the threat from North Korea? How is that the threat from Iraq appears to have eclipsed the threat from al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations?
Nor did he attempt to prepare the American people for the possible consequences of war with Iraq - the terrible toll on the lives on innocent Iraqis, the potential for hundreds or thousands of battlefield casualties of American servicemen and women, the sharply increased threat of terrorist attacks on America and its allies. The President promised that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would liberate the people of Iraq, but he made no mention of what they could expect from a post-war Iraq. He made no mention of the burden that the United States would have to bear to ensure that a post-war Iraq did not devolve into chaos. "
Any one can see Senator Byrd was dead on the mark. Read the entire speech at the link below.
2006-12-10 03:30:55 · answer #2 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
And they probably WOULD have stopped him if Bush hadn't lied to Congress.
They only had the facts that Bush laid out - and a very short time to act on them. Bush lied, and he got the war he wanted.
Fortunately for him, he had morons backing him up, thinking that he was telling the truth. Those same morons are now in the minority, thank goodness. Those same morons got their butts whipped in the last election. They will be the minority for a long time, and maybe now we can fix some of the horrible crimes that Bush's lies created.
I sincerely hope he is tried for war crimes. He can hang from a tree or a street lamp...makes no difference to me.
The people who follow him are lemmings. I hope they see the light some day.
2006-12-10 02:47:04 · answer #3 · answered by Stuart 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Congress was pretty much forced into it.. supporting the commander in chief and all. Plus the atmosphere created in Washington after 9/11 was that you either support the Prez in whatever he does or you are un-American and not patriotic. Now more people recognize this as bullsh*t. Bush was the commander in chief things were his decision. he got on tv defending his plan too. and thats why people blame him. Dont forget his 1st secretary of state resigned because he couldnt tell the lies anymore. and even rumsfield it is clear had no real decision making power but had to do what he was told. that's a bad atmosphere for a leader to have created... having just people around you who are yes man and persecuting anyone who dares to oppose you or bring another viewpoint. however, congress isnt entirely off the hook in my book. They were some scared people, to worried about protecting their own position in washington and less worried about bringing discussion to the floor about all the issues.
If you ask me, most of them are a bunch of fat cats that are out of touch with america.
2006-12-10 02:51:51 · answer #4 · answered by answers999 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't usually respond to political debate, but I do believe that there are many against the pres because he did indeed push for the war. Also, I believe that individuals want to honor the position of the president and have the desire to follow his lead. Finally, members of congress (across the board) have expressed that they felt mislead in the information presented by the president, as do many of the citizens of the U.S.
2006-12-10 03:02:13 · answer #5 · answered by kisha 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Great mind opener to everyone.
I guess its the same reason why everyone blame Islam becoz of some group of stupid terrorists!!
I wish everyone would actually begin to think and do some research before even saying something.
2006-12-10 02:45:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anne H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Bush lied about the information to get us into war. Everyone believed him. Well, almost everyone.
2006-12-10 07:00:28 · answer #7 · answered by jackie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What was Congress? REPUBLICANS!!!! Holy cow..tough answer. They are all drones that do whatever their master wants. Bush says, "wash my daddy's dirty laundry" and it is done. No objections from the house or congress because he owned them.
2006-12-10 02:51:27 · answer #8 · answered by mj24 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Like all political leaders, he'll take the credit if something good happens. If he's the leader , the buck stops with him
2006-12-10 02:50:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because small minds want simple answers. And its far simpler to blame Bush.
2006-12-10 02:44:10 · answer #10 · answered by Holly 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋