English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

and removed all troops from Iraq, allowed the middle east to be taken over once again by lunatic, radical muslims, let Iran continue their enrichments of nuclear power, now with the help of America and the rest of the world because we pulled out, and Iraq as their stomping ground and Islamic Center for the new Anti-America Militia, or ICAAM with all the ability to govern and fund new plots to carry out and destroy The United States within the next 5-10 years, would that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside? Would you sleep better at night then?? Would you hold your head up high proclaiming that you were "right"??! What about when their WMD's take the lives of your children right here at home?? Or is that the way you prefer it?!?

2007-02-09 05:14:20 · 22 answers · asked by panthrchic 4 in Politics & Government Politics

You brilliant people complaining about my statements lack of "facts"; Because its a "possibility" of the FUTURE!!! Don't we base many of our decisions on its consequences? Or do you believe that if there's no history there (precedence, as one stated), there's no consequence?? That would explain idiotic, leftist ideals anyway.

2007-02-09 05:31:32 · update #1

22 answers

As long as the left have knuckleheads like Jane Fonda, Michael Moore, and Sean Penn(head) writing their policy thru words and deeds, realistic political discourse will always suffer and many will consider their policies tantamount to sleeping with the enemy. Aid and comfort comes in many shapes and sizes. The left is making a habit of turning it into a science. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
And don't confuse the left with the possibilities that can occur because of their rhetoric or actions. That is a subject that they never really contemplate while spouting hateful words towards their own people and government. They knew full well the disastrous consequences that would befall the people of southeast asia when they forced a pullout by cutting funding. But that mattered not. The political machine was at full power headed for the '76 elections and they weren't going to miss the opportunity. The mass slaughter was in full swing when even George McGovern decried the unconscionable killing that, in the end left at least 3,000,000 dead in the fields "after" the war. Not a sound or a peep from anyone else including the revered "anti-war protesters." So folks, lets drop the clap-trap that we really don't know what will happen if we leave. History repeats itself. Let's hope the dems have learned from the death and destruction that they could have prevented in the past. Doubtful but hope springs eternal in the hearts of man.

2007-02-09 05:50:49 · answer #1 · answered by Rich S 4 · 1 0

Actually, unlike her stupidity during the Vietnam War, she is completely right on with these points. There was no legitimate reason or need to invade Iraq, it was a war of aggression. Our government clearly favors christian fundamentalism and pushes to combine church and state. There have been numerous instances of scientists making discoveries and statements regarding global warming that the White House has suppressed because they didn't want to hear or repeat the truth. The bush administration has damaged successful AIDS fighting programs in order to spread abstinence programs that don't work.

2016-05-24 01:44:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

we can't stop iran from doing anything while we have troops in iraq. futhermore, people are dying at a higher rate now than they were when saddam was in power. i think we should take some responsibility for creating this problem to begin with and i can't think of a single successful democracy that was forcefully initiated by an outside government.

2007-02-09 05:20:39 · answer #3 · answered by craminator 3 · 2 1

You are incredibly naive!! Saddam wasn't a Muslim fundamentalist...he was a secular Arab. This whole mess over in Iraq was brought to us from the NeoCons at the "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC...google it) who want to take over the world with the use of our military...just like Hitler in the 1930's. They simply want to control the last drop of oil in the world in order to keep China from expanding so fast and Russia from re-emerging as a super power.

You are being led like a sheep to the destruction of your country...seriously do you think ANY other country would object at this point if Russia just nuked the USA out of existence?

2007-02-09 05:27:04 · answer #4 · answered by Perry L 5 · 0 2

Excuse me. I am a Liberal, but I agree with you on this one. Don't be so shocked, there are many of us who don't believe we should pull out now. That would create unimaginable chaos, world wide, and since we went there, we have an obligation to the people of Iraq to stay and help fix the mess we created. Obviously, I did not agree with the war, but to pull out now would be foolish.

2007-02-09 05:22:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

no, if we have it our way, we would have never invaded the country to begin with. then there would not be a "stomping ground" for terrorist to work in. we would have left the innocent nation alone, the one that never threatened us or attacked us, and then we wouldnt have so many problems in the middle east. so yes, all the troops need to leave iraq, and go fight terrorists in Afghanistan, where the rest of the world agrees there is a problem. or we could do it the conservative way and destroy every single country that didnt do what we say...would that work for you?

2007-02-09 05:22:55 · answer #6 · answered by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 · 1 3

Sounds like sophistry in the form of a statement of conjecture not based on any actually known facts that could be derived from precedent.

2007-02-09 05:26:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Terrorism is a worldwide problem and terrorists exist in every nation . Don't you think that it is fundamentally stupid to squander all of our resources, both human and monetary on just Iraq and Afghanistan? I want us to fight terrorism, but I think there MUST be a more intelligent way to do it. And so does 70% of the country, apparently.

2007-02-09 05:20:47 · answer #8 · answered by Julia Sugarbaker 7 · 3 2

Hanoi Jane is a disgrace to liberals everywhere. Nobody is advocating pulling out of Iraq, just putting a cap on the troops there and trying different approaches. Sorry about confusing you with facts though.

F*ck you, tink.
Again, can't believe some idiots starred this question.

2007-02-09 05:20:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

Considering that Reagan (a Republican) helped arm Saddam Hussein with chem weapons, I'm more concerned about Republicans these days.

2007-02-09 05:20:08 · answer #10 · answered by Gemini 5 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers