I do. I think he's exactly right about that.
He also has no clue what to do about it, and is clearly willing to kill more young Americans trying to muddle his way out of this, admitted, blunder.
Sad.
2007-01-10 15:39:20 · 17 answers · asked by Handsome Boy Modeling School 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Yes.
Nothing more really needs to be said.
2007-01-10 15:51:41 · answer #1 · answered by Samurai Jack 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree that he's responsible for the mess; after all, he's the Commander in Chief, so the ultimate responsibility is his.
As for his being "clueless," I doubt that. I think he knows more about the situation in Iraq than we do because there are lots of things that are not released to the general public. I also doubt VERY seriously if he is "willing to kill more Americans." One of the hardest things about being a commander of a military force is having to give orders that you know will result in the deaths of your men. Until you've sat in his chair, don't be so quick to judge.
I see that the tired old "impeach Bush" subject has come up yet again...one would think that by now people would get the message, but apparently not.
Here's the message in case you missed it: Bush hasn't done anything that he can be impeached for. He has NOT committed a crime, therefore cannot be impeached. It just ain't gonna happen, so get over it already!
2007-01-10 23:44:52 · answer #2 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I agree 100%, and watch, if this latest round of playing the shell game with soldiers fails, Bush will find a way to blame the Iraqi's for HIS failures.
2007-01-10 23:52:13 · answer #3 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
responsible as in... he will go to prison for his crimes?
Bush's plans so far have worked 100%
what you see is what he has wanted from the beginning of the covert ops called 9/11.
what he says publicly is only a PRETEXT
when will you see through his falsehood?
Lord, open the people's eyes to see the truth... but then again not my will but your will be done.
2007-01-10 23:49:01 · answer #4 · answered by lovefights 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He had no idea then. He's a moron! He received a "gentleman's C " in college which means that he failed, but his family donated enough money to give him a degree. Cheney & his father orchestrated this every step of the way. They finally taught him how to pronounce every word except "nuclear" correctly.
2007-01-10 23:50:05 · answer #5 · answered by shermynewstart 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He is one of many responsible for the problem. The original problem started long ago, we are trying to fix generations of corruption and brainwashing.
The real culpurate to loosing American lives could lie with the Senate if they decide not to release the money needed to supply the troops with equipment over the next year.
2007-01-10 23:50:32 · answer #6 · answered by AF Gfriend 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Bush has always fought the war like he was playing Risk in the collage dorm commons.
2007-01-10 23:58:35 · answer #7 · answered by Paul K 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only thing sad is this "question." President Bush is not the King of America. A hell of a lot of people are responsible, including some of your beloved liberals. I can't believe we Americans are this weak, jumping ship this early when the going gets a little rough. Thank God your types weren't around in WWII or we would all be speaking German. And that is the truth! God bless our troops and GW.
2007-01-10 23:45:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
No. If the UN, France, Germany & Russia had not been so interested in taking bribes from Saddam to help him ignore the UN mandates, the war would never have happened. He would have had no choice but to tow the line.
2007-01-10 23:45:45 · answer #9 · answered by Boomer Wisdom 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Usually you can see an administration make mistakes and then try to correct them, In the case of Bush, I believe he was the main and maybe the only force in starting this war because of how Saddam treated his father.
Now Saddam is dead and ALL of our lives are changed forever.
The lives that made it that is:(
2007-01-10 23:45:23 · answer #10 · answered by Nort 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
why not?he's wasted taxpayers dough fighting what? yet,there's no evidence to prove that iraq possessed the much hyped weapons of mass destruction b4 saddam was captured.i think 500bn dollars could have gone way to alleviate poverty in africa or better still improve living conditions of we blacks in da hood!!!
2007-01-10 23:51:35 · answer #11 · answered by snowman 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋