Bushes daughters to war will solve everything and end the war?
Guess they are uneducated to understand the reality of things in the real world?
I am a Marine, Father and American!
2007-01-02 09:48:09 · 21 answers · asked by DyrtByrd 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Why thanx for responding Honorable Mr. Bush!
2007-01-02 09:53:27 · update #1
I can count how many times Ive heard that that would stop the war and read it here on Answers!
2007-01-02 09:55:15 · update #2
I think those here denying theyve heard this or said this are not telling the truth? Maybe your the ones who know its not an answer to end the war.
2007-01-02 09:58:56 · update #3
I guess alot here with the negative answers still cant understand the concept of all VOLUNTEER Military?!
2007-01-02 10:27:46 · update #4
Because the libtards in this country want to make ridiculous statements that have no merit or purpose. They don't possess the courage to fight, nor the intelligence to see when fighting is necessary. If it were up to them, the US would be an Islamofacist's paradise.
ooo-rah!
2007-01-02 09:55:04 · answer #1 · answered by Travis G 1 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Thank you Marine, for your service.
I do respectively have a differing view. While I do not believe that Bush's daughters enlisting in the military would solve anything, or end the war, I personally see it as an indifference to the commitment to service to country. I do not hold the father responsible, since it should have been the girls themselves, who would want to be alongside their age group peers.
2007-01-02 18:17:32 · answer #2 · answered by navymom 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a very emotional issue, but I think their point is that this a futile war and the President doesn't hesitate to send other parents' kids to die. Now it appears that he is ready to disregard the Iraq Study Group Report recommendations and send more troops.
It's time that Iraqi troops take over the war effort. US troops should be training, advising and perhaps back up and support the Iraq troops. No more front line stuff.
Remember, in May 2003 the President said that major combat operations in Iraq have ended. How much longer?
2007-01-02 18:56:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Obviously it won't stop the war. However, it could make going to war a lot less attractive if policition's kids were in the military. I appreciate your feelings and as a veteran, I understand your position. However, in looking at people like Cheney who received several deferrments so he could avoid military service still rubs me the wrong way. He believes in war, but is too much of a coward to fight it himself. I know that Clinton also received deferrments, but he never believed in the Vietnam war and openly stated that. Cheney believed in it but ran the other way.
2007-01-02 17:54:48 · answer #4 · answered by David L 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because people seem to think that will cause him to look at the war differently. I don't think it would change him at all. If I were in his shoes, I would encourage them to join the military. The fact is, by him being the president, his daughters are probably in more danger here than they would be in a war zone. They are certainly more restricted in their movements than the children of any of the Bush bashing liberals who want his girls to die in Iraq. They don't enjoy the same freedoms than any normal citizens enjoy. Leave them alone. But then, it is just typical of a liberal to want to see somebodys child die, just so that their point can be made.
2007-01-02 17:59:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
It's because of his seeming callousness and disregard for lives. If you look at other politicians with family members in Iraq, they feel very differently than Bush. The way he treated Cindy Sheehan didn't help matters. He comes across as ivory tower (but not intellectually). That's just honest, he doesn't appear to be concerned.
2007-01-02 17:51:41 · answer #6 · answered by Angry Daisy 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No one literally thinks sending Bush's daughters to war will solve anything. they are making the point that throughout the ages the masters of war rarely make the actual sacrifices. It could be applied to almost every leader during war.
2007-01-02 17:51:57 · answer #7 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because those people know how to insult their politicians by using the first amendment but they do not know how to insult the terrorists who are the real problem.Since president Bush saw nearly 3,000 of his people die on 9/11.He feared that nuclear weapons given to terrorists by Iraq would result in worser case attack.as a leader he did not want that.Iraq may be for the wrong cause but it was his solution for stopping terrorism.Why can't those people insult Osama Bin Ladin.Those liberals don't know what it would be like without their precious first amendment.they would all be slaughtered without it.They are too much of cowards to insult and opress the terrorists and so blame everything on Bush.
2007-01-02 19:12:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
GOOD FOR YOU! (Not sarcasm BTW lol)
People dont understand that the ones out there fighting SIGNED UP ON THEIR OWN FREE WILL, Bush's daughters did now. Also, I dont think that the Military wants people that dont want to be there.
2007-01-02 17:56:34 · answer #9 · answered by I Hate Liberals 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
You may be a marine, but you miss a valid point! The point is, if the rich and congressmen had their children being sent to places like Iraq perhaps they would think twice before they got 3, 253 brought home in body bags for absolutely nothing!
I have an education, and I understand it quite well. We know what colleges the rich hid at during Vietnam, and which National Guard Units they were missing from!
I was US Army Airborne, a father, and an American!
2007-01-02 17:56:37 · answer #10 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋