First it was they had wepons of mass destructions,rich uranium,alluminum tubes from Africa,and yellow cake...A huge threat to the U.S.A...They will give the wmd's to Osama and Al qaida...Later it was "mission accomplished",then it was Iraqi insergents are in the final throns,then it was we are winning,then it was a tie,today we are not winning,...How can you keep up and???How can you take any of this serious???This administration is lame....
2006-12-20
11:44:56
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
I am just quoting Bush and Cheny???They said it...so why you mad at me???
2006-12-20
11:50:40 ·
update #1
Not a right winger but,, you are right on,,this Administration is beyond lame
2006-12-20 11:46:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sean 4
·
4⤊
2⤋
What are you complaining about if your working and in good health. We have not been attacked in the U.S since 2001 there have been attempts but through intell and bushes persistence on the terrorist we are keeping them at bay. We don't want this on our soil if we give up and walk away we look like fools. We dont need another loss for the U. S. we are not the generation of WWII we had pride in our country and a urge to stand behind the soldiers and our president we have become a society of pacifist our leaders our chosen by us we the people not we the republicans or the democrats our nation has lost what our founding fathers based a belief of god and country on. What is your view and how do we get back to what our country was founded on the basics the love of country
2006-12-20 19:58:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by youcallwehaul4u 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well the lie started back in the late 90's and Bush is protecting America(nothing lame about that). Everything you mentioned was believed by the previous administration, the UN, and other countries where Iraq was concerned.
"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.
If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/
2006-12-20 19:49:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
1. Iraq did have WMD's. They admitted it to the UN, gassed the Kurds. The list goes on and on. The report you refer to did not say Saddam got uranium, just that he tried. It was not definitive. Ever read it?
The mission accomplished comment was that Saddam was removed. Iraq has a freely elected government. That is the first time ever in an arab country.
The enemy changes what it does. There is never one way to fight them.
And the most intelligent thing you said is the administration is lame. Wow, that really won me to your point of view.
2006-12-20 19:56:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Chainsaw 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The lies started with the so-called "American Revolution"... Yes, THAT long ago. Nation-states are a grave danger to world peace - people such as H.G. Wells were saying this back in the 1930s and they have been proved right.
2006-12-20 19:52:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by radiocitizen 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
i agree. the current administration is constantly trying to mislead us. we need to get the soldiers out of there. at least the president is a lame duck and has been rendered impotent by the newly elected senate.
2006-12-20 19:51:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's a big lie......to line the pockets of Bush's already-rich buddies.
2006-12-20 19:47:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by foleycat 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
They did have waepons of mass destruction. Have you not been following the Saddam Hussein trial?
2006-12-20 19:48:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Yes,quite lame.
2006-12-20 19:46:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Max 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes it is.
“The superior man is distressed by the limitations of his ability; he is not distressed by the fact that men do not recognize the ability that he has.”
2006-12-20 19:51:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Elerth Morrow ™ 5
·
1⤊
0⤋