2007-01-11 08:03:47 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's safe to say he'd bring the troops home tomorrow. But, I'm sure they take after their father and are cowards who would never think of wearing a uniform into combat.
2007-01-11 08:15:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
If the twins were in the military they would be in positions that would remain stateside.
Politicians ask from the average American what they are not willing to do themselves!
It would be interesting to have the actual numbers of politicians children actively enlisted in the military.
The president would not have changed his strategy but his girls would not be in the troops on the ground anyway!
Connections-- connections---connections!
Daddy would not let them be put in harms way!!!!
Turboweegie: Why must you make all or most questions political? Why does every answer pit Left against right?
No one argues that Chelsea wouldn't serve anymore than the Bush girls would serve!!!
That's ONE thing BOTH parties share!
When you have the POWER to avoid having your children in harms way.... even at the defense of your country MANY would choose to use their position to allow their children a free pass!!!
That's something that affects both parties EQUALLY!!!
At least use reasoning in your arguements!
2007-01-11 16:11:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Why would they do anything different than Dad? He would NEVER let them go to Iraq. The military is lower in the caste system than the ruling class. They would talk in pitying terms about the military over tea (or jello shots in Tijuana), but wouldn't ever think of actually JOINING them!
2007-01-11 16:17:57 · answer #3 · answered by Garth Rocket 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. First, being of such high value as targets for the enemy, it would be foolish to have them in a war zone. This is basic.
Of course they could emulate the heroic Chelsea Clinton, who served in Mogadishu.. uh Kosovo.. uh.. Haiti... uh.. Iraq.. oh, she didn't serve in the military at all.
Keep that double standard going, I don't know what you'd have to say if you didn't have your hypocrisy.
2007-01-11 16:20:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. His main goal is to protect America from another 9/11. So far he has been successful and God willing the next president will have the courage to continue his policies.
2007-01-11 16:12:28 · answer #5 · answered by slodana2003 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
no, he wouldn't. i don't like the man, but i really believe he's convinced he's doing the right thing. he's so f'ing pigheaded, that wouldn't change....if you think about it, right now, he's betting his place in history on this action; in a way, he's potentially ruining his daughters' lives, anyway.
2007-01-11 16:09:23 · answer #6 · answered by feebleweazle 1 · 4⤊ 1⤋
you have just stolen my question lol , i was about to ask the same thing re:tonly blair, deep down we know what the answer is, they dont mind sending other peoples children to die....sorry i mean war..but their precious babies....who u kidding???
2007-01-11 16:11:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No. I don't think so.
2007-01-11 16:21:55 · answer #8 · answered by Sean 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO......it would SUCK as they're both quite "prissy" but, they would get through it like "Private Benjamin"......LOL
2007-01-11 16:08:54 · answer #9 · answered by #1 "Abuela" 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No
2007-01-11 16:08:54 · answer #10 · answered by joevette 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋