Can't in most cases actually mean won't. Saturday was the opening salvo of the end of our involvement in Iraq. It looks eerily similar to Vietnam. When enough Americans start demonstrating in the streets against the war, it won't be too long that the congress starts listening, just like Vietnam. It's only a matter of time until the purse strings start to close on this fiasco.
2007-01-28 05:28:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Let's first decide what the "voice of America" is. Are 10,000 protestors the voice of America or are the 40+ million voters who elected Bush president the voice of America? What do you define as "failed policy?" A war that 86% of America supported until the terrorists invaded Iraq, or the sudden urge to pull our troops out and validate the teachings of radical Islamic clerics?
The question you ask is obviously influenced by the constant stream of media definitions and impressions of international politics and of the course of armed conflicts. This is completely normal. Every war we've ever fought in (including WWII) has experienced this type of change in heart in the media. Here is the truth. Iraq has turned into a mess, that's true. However, the mess is the result of poor planning regarding what would happen after the fall of Saddam. The truth is Rumsfeld stayed Secretary of Defense for so long because he did what his boss (the President) wanted him to do. The truth, no matter how unpopular in the media, is that withdrawing from Iraq under the pretense of a change in political leadership would really endanger us more. The terrorists believe that they can impact American decision making through their impact on American public opinion, and they believe they are winning the war in Iraq because the tide of public opinion seems to be turning against continuing operations there. Every night the news lists the death toll and talks about how much worse the situation is getting there. In reality, the Iraqis are terrified that we are going to pull out and their country will be overrun by the terrorists. It's not popular, and it's not easy, but we have to finish what we started. Everyone was on the bandwagon in the beginning and now everyone is backing out because it's hard. The reality is, the plans weren't there and now we're paying the price for that, but we don't have the option of pulling out now.
You want to talk about plans and commitment ... the terrorists are committed to dying for their religion. They are committed to killing Americans. What are we committed to? Waging a war until it's not popular anymore? Everyone needs to take a step back and remember what it was like to watch thousands of people burning to death, jumping out of windows, and being crushed to death under the weight of the World Trade Center towers. The only thing that has kept that from happening again is the response to tighten security in America and worldwide and keep the terrorists on the defensive in the Middle East. Left unchecked, they will be back, they have repeatedly stated so. The truth is, tens of thousands of Americans do not present a voice of the people, they are a protest. They had their chance to vote against Bush's Iraq policy in 2004, and he was re-elected. The change in Congress represents a change in the will of the people, but mostly because the Republicans that held congressional control failed to deliver on the promises they made when taking office. They were lazy and bloated and ineffective, and they are out of work. The Democrats have a chance to influence policy now. But it is amazing to see what they will say in their race to win the presidency in 2008. My only hope is that they come up with a viable plan that is better than the "phazed redeployment" idea they are presenting now. We can't handle another poorly planned accident.
2007-01-28 13:48:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by Been There 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Perhaps you should retake your high school civics course, as it obviously didn't take the first time. We do not live in a direct democracy, thank God. Our government is a republic featuring representative democracy. You had a voice, it was expressed in November 2004, when the President was reelected. Presidents are supposed to be leaders, not poll-watchers. If the fickle public were to be heeded at all costs, American history would be considerably different than it in fact is...and most of the changes would be for the worse.
2007-01-28 13:31:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rick N 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Because the "voice of America" you're referring to is a group of sheep reliving their 60s hippy past...and they mostly don't know jack about the military beyond the fact that they "hate war".
It's not that simple....and its a "turn the other cheek" philosophy that will truly get us nowhere.
Besides...people like you have been declaring this a failure for as long as you've been trying to get Bush out of the White House...as in, before the Iraq war even started.
Fact is, the left WANTS it to fail because they want BUSH to fail.
2007-01-28 13:29:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by bradxschuman 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Most Americans are still looking to get something for doing nothing. That is why liberals promise more social programs, higher taxes for the rich (although the poorer Americans are usually the ones that get hurt the most). Also why frivolous lawsuits are so prevelant in America
2007-01-28 13:55:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by rwill54287 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
A 2008 Democratic President is the voice of America.
2007-01-28 13:25:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by bobweb 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
tens of thousands out of 300 million, sounds like a few lost souls to me. I support the president and the Iraq policy, He is not Clinton and does not govern by the actions of a few cowards marching in the streets
2007-01-28 13:28:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by 007 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
What some people like in this evil and corrupt president is that he will not change his mind, however this stubbornness is causing unnecessary deaths in Iraq. Why they do not listen is you guess as good as mine, however if it is for personal gain as I suspect then they should be tried in a criminal court for all the murders in Iraq.
2007-01-28 13:31:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Because we are not a true democracy, and Bush isn't trying to serve the people.
If this were a real democracy, Bush never would have been in office to begin with, even if he had won Florida by thousands of votes.
2007-01-28 13:26:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ashley 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
Because these same tens of thousands of protesting Americans
will be protesting again about defending our nation once terrorist
bombings start happening at their local malls...
You can't pay attention to mob mentality...
2007-01-28 13:26:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋