2007-02-01 09:17:35 · 7 answers · asked by kongdog1 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The war machine is a money maker for the few! This War is NOT justified & MY fellow Americans are being hoodwink as always. We should be directing all our resources in getting our HOUSE in order "THE USA" Resolving all levels of poverty if we truely want to be strong! We also need to build up the members of the armed forces up to 5 million or more cause of China! They currently have 11 million members in service. I am pro-draft recruit 18 to 40 year olds manditory 6 years of obligation.
2007-02-01 09:33:36 · answer #1 · answered by bulabate 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Well, regardless if we were at war or not. We would still have homeless people. Except for people's attitudes, what makes you think things would be different here if we weren't in Iraq?
2007-02-01 17:22:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The government definitely does NOT need to support social welfare programs, it needs to provide tax incentive and less burdensome regulation so that PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and charaties can. And the future is, unless we engage al qaeda now and whever we can there is no future, they want us dead.
god..another liberal that STILL doesnt get it...sheesh....ok ...one last time. theres this group called al qaeda...perhaps youve heard of them...theyve declared a war on the west called jihad. that stands for holy war. in simple english, they want you dead. they dont care how, where or when. they hate you, your lifestyle and your race. this war in iraq involves engaging al qaeda so they dont respond here. If there is no war against the insurgents they will create one here. They tried once and will try again, they are funded by al qaeda and are real deadly and very intent on carrying out what they believe as they believe they are blessed by allah to do so.
before you tell me isolationism is better, consider the "clinton response"
the attack on the uss cole...clinton response...NADA...
the attack on the african embassies...clinton response...BUPKUS...
the first attack on wtc....clinton response..NIL
MY POINT HERE. is that isolationism, or lack of a response brings further attack. Robert Gates, present Secretary of Defense echoed that theme by saying the Pelosi, cut and run strategy only emboldens the enemy and bolsters there cause. He also went on to say the war then folllows our soldiers home. This is not an idle or radical thought, its ENTIRELY CORRECT.
Its probably frustrating to you that the Pelosi/Reid regieme cant dictate liberal agenda to Al Qaeda but the truth is exactly that. Bush quickly engaged Al Qaeda after 911 and we havent had a known successfull attack on us soil since.
So, as Howie Mandel would say...Bottom line...Deal or no deal, we attack them there or here, they dont care. The sad part about it is Nancy Pelosi engaged alot of you in what clearly by her own admission was a power grab and had little to do with Iraq. If your waiting for a solution to come out of those people, grab an easy chair, its going to be a long night.
2007-02-01 17:36:48 · answer #3 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Without freedom from terror, all those things are meaningless. That being said, we are spending billions on domestic programs. It is specious argument that we should disband our military and spend the money on our citizens. The results of that are pretty plain to see......we fall behind and that creates worldwide chaos.
2007-02-01 18:13:58 · answer #4 · answered by united9198 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you don't know by now. It wouldn't be worth my time to even begin and try to explain, not to mention the space limitations here.
2007-02-01 17:24:24 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We had the same problems domestic problems when we went to Germany and Japan in WW2....but we went anyway.
2007-02-01 17:24:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Assuring your freedom
2007-02-01 17:21:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋