Wasn't he to blame for all things wrong with this war?
2006-12-21 23:22:22 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Change of personnel at the Defense Dept. doesn't means a change in Iraq policy.
2006-12-21 23:26:12 · answer #1 · answered by WC 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Maybe because the top Democrats once elected decided to stay in Iraq for at least the next two years! Didn't hear that rhetoric during the campaign. And Pelosi is too busy pissing off her fellow Democrats to be of any use. Which I said, when she was selected as speaker, that she would single handedly hand the Repubs the elections back in 08.
2006-12-21 23:36:37 · answer #2 · answered by mark g 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. You think like a Liberal. You have it backwards as usual. The terrorists are to blame. The radical Islamic killers. The ones who started the war. Remember them?
2006-12-22 00:13:16 · answer #3 · answered by Zee HatMan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Sodiers" are still dying because the enemy fights on even though they are taking heavy losses, why is this? because of liberal morons who are not unified behind our President and troops they are waiting for us to withdraw because of political pressure here at home....imagine if CNN existed in 1864 and them ripping on Lincoln and covering the anti war riots in New York and interviewing disgruntled generals who publicly called him a dumb ape ....you know many historians considered him the greatest president.
2006-12-21 23:57:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
People die in wars! That is the way it's always been and always will be! Did you know that in WWII, we sometimes lost more people in one day than the total lost in Iraq? If the Left would let us fight the war the way a war is supposed to be fought, we would have been out of there a long time ago!
2006-12-21 23:26:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
I think because there is a war going on !
2006-12-21 23:26:26 · answer #6 · answered by dadacoolone 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because we are still fighting a war.. People die when there are wars..
2006-12-21 23:25:54 · answer #7 · answered by LokoLobo 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
duh the war is still going on! You can't lay the balme on the secretary of defense for a war, his job is not to decide policy but to adminster the war effort
2006-12-22 00:03:28 · answer #8 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
well.. no.
he'd just done what his superiors told him to do..
what most people dont realize, is that it's a giant chess game - with satanists in charge. the joint cheifs of staff are the highest ranking Christians in the land. (and they cant order troops)
he left 'cause he didn't want the blood on his hands.
rummy just got yelled at for spreading his troops really thin & sloppily - inviting others to attack america. it's complex really. i believe he was ordered to do so.
whenever there's a regime change, i believe it to be for the worse - progressive steps quite planned out.
if lieberman IS the next pres (choosen for 8yrs), like i've been told - run for the hills, 'cause things are as bad as you've heard imagined.
this 'terror' crap is fueled by those in power
http://honorablepassion.wiki.com/steps
2006-12-21 23:29:40 · answer #9 · answered by honorablepassion 2 · 0⤊ 5⤋
According to the Democrats, yes.
Secretary Rumsfield is a great American patriot. More than I can say about any Democrat because they are too self-serving to get a broad title such as "great American patriot."
2006-12-21 23:27:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋