2006-12-11 06:48:48 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I generally support Bush, but this is his gravest error.
It lends support to all those who think his concerns about Iraq are not about national or world security, but somehow related to economics. "What explains fighting in Iraq but also letting millions of unknown people flood in?" they ask.
I bet that if the Republicans had been united and effective at controlling the border, they would not have lost the House.
2006-12-11 06:51:31 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you're genuinely dazzling bearing directly to the waste of yank lives and limbs in Iraq - their presence does not shield our liberty because of the fact that our liberty became into on no account threatened by using Iraq. Our invading and occupying Iraq has greater suitable terrorism, actual in Iraq itself and by using the international because of the fact it has became in any different case independent Moslems into fairly annoyed activists, waiting to kill themselves as long as they are in a position to take out many different innocents. yet, turning the yankee protection rigidity into border guards is surely not the respond to protecting American soil against terrorist strikes. bear in mind, the 9/11 hijackers have been interior the U.S. thoroughly and entirely legally - they have been granted visas. clever terrorists won't trek around the Mexican wasteland to get in. i don't experience that is as massive a topic as shipment entering the U.S. unchecked and unguarded nuclear and chemical flowers. A wall is a stupid concept - it does not even conceal one hundred% of the terrority and the fee to taxpayers is exhorbitant. Spend the money on making our ports safer and that i've got confidence we would be doing the terrific we are in a position to.
2016-10-18 03:01:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously something happened last night while I was asleep,
because the last I saw the border patrol was doing a pretty
good job.
People can still get through, but that will happen no matter what.
Thank you very much, while you're up!!
2006-12-11 06:57:41 · answer #3 · answered by producer_vortex 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are not spending all our money fighting terrorists. We are spending all of our money in the failed occupation of Iraq, which has little to do with the war on terror.
2006-12-11 06:53:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Pathetic isn't.. but remember, we are staying the course as we fight them over there. We are fighting Islamofascists. Never mind the fact that they are sneaking in from the West Coast in broad daylight. Just doesn't stand scrutiny does it. I pity his supporters.
2006-12-11 06:54:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
On this I agree with all of the Bush-bashers. We need to focus on our borders. If we got rid of all the illegals and people who have overstayed their visa, this country would be a lot safer.
.
2006-12-11 06:53:44 · answer #6 · answered by MelBright 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ah, one of my pet peeves. It's an obscenity that we're going to end up paying for dearly.
2006-12-11 06:58:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
$500 Billion well spent huh?
2006-12-11 06:53:46 · answer #8 · answered by edubya 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the question is stupid since we could do both. and its the liberals that want to do neither. find me a liberal that doesnt want to give illegals drivers licenses so they can get their vote. they are sick
2006-12-11 06:57:12 · answer #9 · answered by ghggj g 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hey!! Lou Dobbs for President!!!!
2006-12-11 06:52:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋