a democrat ordered the dropping of 2 atomic bombs on japan. is this their way of relieving the feelings of guilt?
2006-12-28 23:05:45 · 9 answers · asked by z571436 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
yes
2006-12-31 06:02:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ok I am not a Democrat, but I do believe your statement is incorrect. Most Democrats are against the war in Iraq, not the war on terror. There are many arguments you can make about Iraq, but frankly while I do believe Saddam supported terrorism, I don't believe there were large groups of terrorists in the country before we invaded. Do not misunderstand, I do support the war effort, just not for the reasons stated by the administration. Whether or not there were terrorists before is irrelevant now, as there are most surely terrorists now and we must finish what we have started. So while I do believe that justification was a valid argument for Democrats, I don't believe it is relevant to the current situation any longer. Iraq is now a part of the war on terror whether anyone chooses to believe it or not. Personally I believe it is better to engage them there than try to find them later when they go into hiding again and spread out all over the world. The argument that annoys me the most is that we are creating terrorists. I do not believe this. Children are being taught from the earliest possible opportunity to hate the western lifestyle. They are being groomed to take on active roles as terrorists when they reach maturity. The terrorists were already out there, we are not creating them, we are just drawing them out of hiding.
phil j: If you honestly believe that then explain 1 terrorist attack under the current administration versus numerous attacks against American interests under the last. In order to fight terrorism you must be aggressive, no administration and I include Republicans previous to the current one can show a good record in this area.
2006-12-29 07:46:23 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't believe it was just a Democrat that ordered the bomb be dropped, I believe that the congress had to approve such a move. I also don't believe they are uptight about the war on terrorism I just don't think they understand that by taking the fight to them, we are stopping them from doing any more damage here.
2006-12-29 08:51:24 · answer #3 · answered by Rosie 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan SAVED millions of lives because we did not have to invade Japan. With the Republican's self described respect for life you would think that they would understand that. And as for the "war" on terror, that is miss-named. You can't have a war against a group of people that have no land or army. It is more of an international police action against criminals. The war in Iraq was over three years ago.
2006-12-29 08:22:27 · answer #4 · answered by industrialconfusion 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because it is phony, and a "wish fulfilling prophesy."
It is a lie based on a falsehood which came from a deception. Bush is making it come true by his actions. If you bomb people long enough, they will all hate you. Just ask the Israelis. The more he does the more terrorists there are, and if he is allowed to continue, eventually he will have his dream come true and all Muslims will hate this country and conspire to hurt us. That is why so many Dem's are uptight about this phony war.
2006-12-29 07:41:01 · answer #5 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They're upset about it because most of the Country rallied behind it and the Democrats can't stand the thought of people reacting well to anything the Republicans do. The Democrats have thrown their entire effort into sniping at everything to do with ending world terrorism, and the liberal news media has been concentrating so hard on only showing one side of the situation that a lot of Americans are losing faith in spite of the amazing progress we've made.
2006-12-29 07:13:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
It just goes to show that the Democrats know how to fight terror as opposed to encouraging extremist to sign up to be terrorist.
2006-12-29 07:18:22 · answer #7 · answered by Herr Raging Boehner. 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Here's a simple answer for you...Nearly 3,000 dead American service men to capture and condemn a man on the charges of him killing 148 men. Do the math.
2006-12-29 07:09:30 · answer #8 · answered by tiptoesan 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
How can anyone respond to such a ridiculous question?
2006-12-29 07:09:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋