Kennedy is under contract with the Navy since he is so good at killing people in water - we have to give the liberals THAT ONE.
After that... they got nothing!
2007-01-09 10:58:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋
They are against "troop surge" proposed by Bush.
They are saying that BUSH will not have a blank check to do what he wants re IRAQ.
The unwarranted invasion of IRAQ has done more damage to the United States than anything Pelosi, Reid, and Kennedy are doing now.
What they are doing now is what they should have been doing in early 2003 before the invasion of IRAQ began.
But the were fed they same faulty intel that presented IRAQ as an immediate threat. Fabrications for the most part. And it doesn't get more faulty than that.
And...
I suspect troop surge does not mean 20000 warm bodies taken off the street and put into a uniform.
It most likely means redeploying from Europe or Asia.
And of course the easiest solution.
Extend tours of units already in IRAQ.
Enough of that.
Because they are volunteers does not mean they can be run into the ground.
2007-01-09 11:39:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Flame on, this is ridiculous. As if Bush is some kind of military genius. Please, Bush served? Bush got special treatment, like you said, come on, even you Bushies can't point to his decorous service, there isn't any. Pelosi, Reid, and Kennedy are going to do whatever they can to stop Bush from committing yet another tremendous blunder. They should be, it is why we voted the Dems into majority in November - to deal with Bush and his incompetence. The real military geniuses? Those are the guys that Bush keeps pushing aside so he can install "yes" men that will keep their traps shut and be the parrots he requires to keep his arrogant ego intact.
2007-01-09 11:04:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Not sure about Pelosi or Reid, but Kennedy probably found the answers in the bottom of a Jack Daniels bottle. Oh, wait - that's not refined enough, is it? He found the answers in a bottle of cognac - the price of which could feed a family of four for a week.
2007-01-09 10:59:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jadis 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
I dont think they are trying to destroy America, but it is just political posturing, let the generals decide, you know the guys with military experiance, training, and education!!!!!!!
2007-01-09 10:55:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by asmith1022_2006 5
·
6⤊
1⤋
and isn't sending 20,000 more troops to do the same job that the first 100,000 are doing- just political posturing?
No- I don't think that the democrats are military geniuses- but we've proven that Bush isn't - so it's time we start questioning his actions before we send more american kids into harms way just so that Bush can say "I tried".
2007-01-09 10:55:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by Morey000 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
they don't think so, but they are prepared to take advice from people who are. they also don't want to see more americans killed in a war that cannot be won this way. 'an attempt by them to destroy america'?! hello.... bush has been doing that for six years.
2007-01-09 11:01:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts139.html
Why don't you listen to the philosophy of Ronald Reagan's Treasury Assistant. I don't think Chimpy needs any more help destroying America--he's doing a fine job Brownie!! on his own.
2007-01-09 11:01:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by scottyurb 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Reps are pretty much all chickenhawks.
lots of Democrats served in combat.
2007-01-09 11:21:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by bettysdad 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Even the top honcho says we'll be there for three more years,get ready for a tax increase to pay for it.
2007-01-09 10:54:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Carl Levin (D)-Michigan. Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
2007-01-09 10:56:52
·
answer #11
·
answered by no worries 4
·
2⤊
4⤋