They imply that our president and his cohorts are too incompetent to prevent attacks against the homeland if we leave Iraq. That's why they say if we quit the war we will bring the fight to America. Realistically-speaking, a competent government and Intelligence wouldn't allow that to happen.
So I don't get it. Do republicans believe that our government is unable to provide any homeland security beyond our mere presence in Iraq? They certainly are implying it...but they aren't admitting it.
2007-01-07 06:55:42 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Basically, they are agreeing with democrats that the 109th Congress was incompetent. They are agreeing and don't even realize it.
2007-01-07 06:58:35 · update #1
Tom W, don't patronize me. I know Intelligence is bipartisan. DUH! Common knowledge. I am saying what republicans are implying about the government and homeland security. I never said republicans controlled the entire Intelligence. Sheesh.
2007-01-07 07:05:21 · update #2
It's not Republicans,genius! You're questions is a very good one.I agree with what is implied about our intelligence in not wanting to leave Iraq, but I also think it's the President not having total trust in his intelligence agencies, as it has been proven to be the case in the past...Moron
2007-01-07 06:59:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am a con who supports the war in Iraq but not Bush. I do agree the last Congress was incompetent on many things but terrorism is not one of them. The Iraq war has more implications then most people see. The last Congress was way too p***y and i am glad the democrats won so that Bush would wake up and see that his plan in Iraq was not working as well as other plans could work.
2007-01-07 07:00:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This one Republican in no way pronounced the two on those issues you're ranting approximately. Our intelligence agenies are the reason we are in Iraq. In record after record we've been informed of the weapons construct up and Saddam ignoring the UN. It replaced into their dazzling artwork and analyze that informed all human beings Iraq had WMD. most of the courtroom situations appropriate to the Iraq conflict is the theory the intelligence replaced into incorrect. In some techniques I do have faith Iraq did have the WMDs yet after media debates , time lines and arranged sessions for the preliminary attack I even have faith Saddam had the foresight and time to pass them. I do have faith that by protecting the insurgents busy in Iraq they are not over right here. not because of the fact the government says so - because of the fact my son replaced into in Iraq and that's what he informed me. He dreads the terrorists ever coming right here as they kill every person only to get media coverage. With the present inflow of unlawful immigrants getting into the rustic - i don't see terrorists having lots subject. All they want is to locate a "money starvation coyote" like the different unlawful. Coyotes do not ask why you opt for interior the U. S. - only which you money is green. So my ideals are not lots contradictions as seeing the complete image at diverse angles and attempting to return to a determination that's the main secure. And on the 2d no selection seems to any extent further helpful than the different.
2016-12-16 04:06:24 · answer #3 · answered by phylys 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, its a poorly phrased question that is not a question but a statement that indicates that you believe that Republicans control the government. They don't, nor do they control the Senate Intelligence committee and did not at the time of 9/11. Its a pretty uninformed statement and I guess meant to display your affiliation or that your a part of some bowling team.
2007-01-07 07:01:03 · answer #4 · answered by Tom W 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who ever said the CIA is competent?
9/11....intelligence over Iraq...remember Bush basically blamed that whole fiasco on GT.
2007-01-07 07:02:03 · answer #5 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The way they don't let attacks on the homeland happen is by keeping the war in Iraq(and not here).
2007-01-07 07:00:04 · answer #6 · answered by mr_sizzelin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What?? We are fully competent to stop any attacks but what if it means stopping them on our soil? Why risk bringing it anywhere near the States when we can keep it right where it is and why am I trying to explain this to you??? You liberals are totally unable to have a sensible thought except to bash even when it makes no sense!!
2007-01-07 07:28:07 · answer #7 · answered by Brianne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋