Have you even CONSIDERED that the President's Plan is a HUGE personal risk for him and the Republican Party ? If it doesn't work. . .... obviously there'll be hell to pay come election time . The Republican Party will lose almost EVERYTHING . That's pretty much a 'given' . So, doesn't it make much more SENSE that the 'Plan' has a great chance for success ? And clearly there are things within the plan that are NOT going to be made PUBLIC .
I'll wait to see your responses, but Consider the 'Big Picture' and wouldn't that make EVERYONE HAPPY to have a successful operation ?
2007-01-24 07:37:07 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"They think you are stupid."
They think you wouldn't know the difference.
2007-01-24 07:40:25 · answer #1 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I'll give you credit, you've got to be one of the president's more die hard lap doggies. Give the people here a little more credit -- we KNOW you're a staunch neo-con and that these "questions" you pose are loaded.
The other day the president talked about a bi-partisan efforts to decide the future of the war in Iraq...just to let the president know...the bi-partisan group that will decide the future of the war in Iraq Mr. President is called Congress you moron.
Your day is over. While in 2008 the White House will still be up for grabs (the country, sadly, is still to backward to elect a minority or a woman as president) the House will fall further into the blue as will the Senate.
And by-the-way... I've noticed you've never brought up a question regarding the deficit. You know...that pesky red-ink problem Clinton took care of and "your" brilliant leader has run up well past the billions mark. Any reason for that?
But to answer your "question", the go home now option is viable and does have workable solutions. Though you're not really here for answers or to listen are you? Just like the president.
2007-01-28 11:53:26 · answer #2 · answered by Andy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think we should pull out, but I'd really like to see more of a plan on how and when we will try to get out. I don't feel like that is very well defined. I realize that a plan such as that can never be completely certain, as situations change so much, but some idea would make me much more confident and comfortable with Bush being on the right track. I realize the word has been thrown around an awful lot, but I do feel benchmarks are needed in the situation, although I've yet to hear anyone go into what these benchmarks would be.
2007-01-24 15:42:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Before we went into Iraq, I was against it. And that's not Monday-morning-quarterbacking. It didn't make sense. Even the resident generals and ex-generals, many who had been to Iraq before, had problems with it.
But once we were in, I wanted it to be successful. Despite what many conservatives believe, liberals do not want America to fail. We just want it to be the best it can be.
But the major problem wasn't that this administration was given bad information. They were given information they chose not to listen to. They were hoping for flower strewn streets as the tanks rolled into Baghdad. And on their way out of town, Mustafa Jefferson and Muhamad Adams would jump up from behind the rubble. Ready to bring democracy to a country that has never known it. As far as "benchmarks" and "when Iraq has turned the corner" - this war has turned more corners than a hooker convention.
Donald Rumsfeld once said - "You go to war with the army you have, not the one you want."
I've got one better, and it applies to almost everything - "You hope for the best, but prepare for the worst."
This administration didn't do that, and that's why this war was a failure from the beginning.
2007-01-25 09:27:50 · answer #4 · answered by buzzzard 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Electing Bush in the first place was a huge risk for the Republican party. Your party is already divided and is going down like a sinking ship.
2007-01-24 15:44:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We had a successful operation. We deposed Saddam and destroyed the biological and chemical weapons. Do you think we can get the Shiites and Sunnis to agree on who is the legitimate heir to Mohammad? That's a religious disagreement that's at least 800 years old.
2007-01-24 15:41:55 · answer #6 · answered by David M 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't care about the Republican party. I don't even care if Exxon doesnt make a profit this year. Seems to me Bush has been flying by the seat of his pants for years anyway, so what difference does it make?
2007-01-24 15:42:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes... i have considered that. but my big concern is that he truly seems to not know what he's doing. his generals are all complaining that this is too little too late.
have you stopped for a moment and asked yourself, what if the war just goes on and we don't win? how long should we keep sending people there for no further reason than to maintain the charade of effort?
don't you want to move forward and make progress? that isn't going to be very likely if we continue these battles that just suck our time and resources away for no reason.
2007-01-24 15:47:02 · answer #8 · answered by uncle osbert 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, if that's so, then Bush can RAISE TAXES to prove that he is serious about this.
Tax cuts during a time of war? It's never happened before... and then Bush came along.
2007-01-24 15:43:59 · answer #9 · answered by ck4829 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
waht does all that have to do with us leaving. We should elave. we have no place their any longer. no other country belongs in another countries civil war. as we've learned from our history, no one can stop a war amongest citizens if they really want to fight.
2007-01-24 17:58:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Big picture? What big picture? There is no big picture. I just want to raise taxes and put my family at risk of additional terrorist attacks in my hometown.
2007-01-24 15:44:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋