When Bush says he is "the decision-maker when it comes to Iraq", does that make Americans worry?

Answer 1

Well, he doesn't learn from his past mistakes, so YES! He even made a big deal about having a commission tell him what he needs to do in Iraq, and he said after the election he was going to change course, but NOPE. Same 'ol bad plan. Anymore, I'm not even sure what victory in Iraq entails. What's the goal? A democracy? Likely Sunni's would win. A government friendly to the US? Would that mean Sunni oppression? We have no plan, and we don't even have a clear vision or goal. Scary.

Answer 2

Wait a minute.....where were you liberals when Clinton sent his army after the little cuban boy in Miami and sent him back to a communist nation, and burned down the compound at Waco while entering a private residence without presenting a warrant. Sure Clinton is not stupid enough to send our uniformed army to do his bidding, he sends in his civilian army, such as the ATF and the FBI. You saw them shove the guns in the little boy's uncle's face and tell him "you move and I'll blow you away". They didn't show that one too many times on the liberal TV stations...did they? You libs didn't want him called anything but the commander and chief then. Well it goes with the job.

Answer 3

Bush is now perceived to be a dictator for saying that he is now the decision maker when it comes to Iraq issues.

Answer 4

Then even as all is declared and achieved and the conflict in Iraq is over it is his palms which will be lined interior the blood of each and every of the yankee adult adult males and females over there immediately lack of life for no longer some thing and he can stay with their deaths on his sense of precise and incorrect. To undesirable his father did not teach him that it takes a larger guy to stroll remote from a strive against then it does to strive against for some thing it is faulty.

Answer 5

It may make UNINFORMED Americans worry, but the plain fact is that as Commander-in-Chief, control of the military is a responsibility granted to the President by our very Constitution. See the link below.

As for the Congress, if they have a differing opinion, they can indirectly affect the progress of the war by controlling the purse strings and reduce/eliminate funding ... and this role is granted to them by virtue of our Constitution, too.

As much as some politicians are opposed to our involvement in Iraq for example, they can make all the "noise" they want, but you're not going to see any of them stand up and try to order the troops to return home. Again, as I hope you already knew, the one and only Commander-in-Chief, the President, makes these decisions.

Answer 6

No because most America presidents have had their noses stuck in other countries business where it doesn't belong. They should have been more attentive to their own country, America. What worries me is that people know politicians are lieing, stealing, selfish, crooks, but people still play along. When will people of the world realize that they have the power and not their governments

Answer 7

Yes, as the polls show. It seems he feels he is the decision maker in diminishing the quality of life in this country by his dictatorial decisions regarding trade, immigration, tax reform, health care, environment to name a few.

Iraq is only one of many decisions that will keep this country in a tail-spin for years to come.

Answer 8

Yes, he has been wrong so many times before including his "decision" to go to war with Iraq. Iraq posed no threat to anybody and he was only able to do it by manufacturing and picking intelligence that favored his decision, he sold it to congress with this flawed intelligence and thinking, so when he became the sole decider for Iraq he became a menace to world peace and prosperity.

Answer 9

Whenever Bush denies Congress's constitutional powers to declare war, to fund war, and to set rules for the administration of the military, as specified in Article I - it is indeed troublesome and reinforces our concerns that he desires dictatorial powers.

"Section 8. The Congress shall have power...

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress... "

---

Funny - anybody who thumbs-down this post obviously doesn't believe in our constitution or its system of checks and balances - obviously not an American patriot.

Answer 10

No, he was just reminding folks that he's the CIC, and the ankle-biters are occasionally getting too big for their britches. Public resolutions are counterproductive, and I think he is rightly annoyed that displaying all that anti-war sentiment in such public ways for political gain is endangering troops' lives.