. . . would the Republicans have allowed him to get away with making it the centerpiece of his re-election campaign?
2006-12-12 15:19:27 · 10 answers · asked by logan2012 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
it didn't happen on anyone's watch or lack thereof except Bush. He's the one to blame. He had all the intelligence to move the CIA and FBI out before 9/11 He could have stopped it but did nothing. If it happened on a Democrats watch the planes would have been shot down rather than called back to base. We would not have gone into Iraq using bad intelligence. Let's face it, this regime is constantly lying to the American people and we buy into it. C'mon folks, look at it from history's view. Didn't we learn anything from Hitler? or are we too afraid to know the truth?
2006-12-12 15:25:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋
It wouldn't matter the Media would make it the centerpiece and anyone that tried to say that it was being politicized would be raked over coals. Also if it was a democrat in office they probably would have just nuked someone, sort of like they did in WWII. Other than tucking tale and running, demcocrats would perfer to nuke someone.
2006-12-12 23:25:45 · answer #2 · answered by jirwin7211 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Actually it was on the watch of the republicans not the democrats. If you can recall George Bush was still president on the attack of 9/11. The American government knew about the attack 6 months in advance just like pearl harbor. Our government didn't do anything to protect this country and our American people of all the causalities and family that were lost. Nevertheless we were attacked by Afghanistan. Why did our government attack Iraq. They didn't attack us. There is a long hatred situation with our government with other countries when our government feels threatened by them. Please take my advise and do some research on our american government. Then you will see the whole picture problem of who is in the right and who is in the wrong.
2006-12-12 23:40:36 · answer #3 · answered by George 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes. Not only that, but if a Democratic president had made good decisions, the Republicans would have rallied behind him...much the same way they did with FDR.
2006-12-12 23:33:55 · answer #4 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
no the queston is if the dems would back them. I understand the reason we must be proactive. I could care less what letter is next to the presidents name. if they were willing to do what needs to be done they could have a Q next to their name for all I care. Actually Bush was too weak to begin with so Im upset with him for allowing the left to hinder our ability to wage the war we should have fought from the beginning.
2006-12-12 23:30:48 · answer #5 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They wouldn't have to because al gore would have been so paralyzed with fear that his inability to respond would have even disgusted jimmy carter. His lack of response would have emboldened the radicals so much that they would have escalated their attacks instead of hiding in spider holes like saddam husain.
BTW doesn't saddam have a date with the hangman pretty soon?
2006-12-12 23:37:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
We wouldn't be spending some trillion dollars in Iraq for sure if we had democrat in power.
2006-12-13 03:24:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think it would have made a difference which government was in, they kinda had no choice to go to Iraq but now they really need to focus on Africa.
2006-12-12 23:22:27 · answer #8 · answered by Stigmeister 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes and there wouldn't have been any conspiracy theories by the right either.
2006-12-12 23:22:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
No, I think the Dems would have lost in 04 -- but only if they were as incompetant as Bush was.
2006-12-12 23:22:18 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin F 2 · 1⤊ 5⤋