did we not see the twin towers burn down, did we not display our flags proudly as we went into battle, should we not to support our President, 100 percent?
2007-02-12 11:35:40 · 16 answers · asked by 5-Stars 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Yes - with very little opposition, I might add, and lots of support from both sides of the isle.
Unless you have listened to Hillery lately. Her flip-flopping is enough to make you dizzy.
I recall Bush clearly stating that we were in for a long and tough battle - and still I heard little opposition. Seems like when the reality sets in, the liberals revert right back to their idealistic and unrealistic "live and let live" fantasy world.
2007-02-12 11:52:48 · answer #1 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sheeple People who refuse to accept the fact that the Bush administration Orchestrated the Terror Attacks of 911 are just plain ignorant. It's impossible for Jet fuel or Kerosene to melt iron...LOOK AT THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS. Also if the floors collapsed causing a chain reaction it would have taken well over 90 seconds for the buildings to come down. They came down at free fall speed....9 seconds. There is no logical argument here. Explosives were pre-planted in the building. Case closed! Why are so many people having a hard time accepting this?
2007-02-12 21:13:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He needs to conduct the police action with police and security forces, not soldiers and marines. Divide Iraq into three parts with the Kurds up North, the Sunnis in the West, and the Shiites in the Southeast. The capital can remain shared but the three zones will reduce the squabbles. The Kurds have had their act together and do not deserve to be clustered with the two primitive antagonists.
2007-02-12 20:28:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although the FBI puts the blame on 19 Saudis, they only cite passports found on 9/11, which they admit were stolen identities. 7 of the supposed hijackers have been found to be alive and well, so we don't really know who pulled off 9/11.
Afghanistan was a reasonable venture in light of the possibility of al-Qaeda involvement in 9/11, but Iraq was entirely unnecessary.
No government deserves the blind faith of its citizens. We the People must be continuously vigilant against the excesses of government, and must not allow it to overstep its boundaries.
2007-02-12 20:16:27 · answer #4 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We did. And we should. And we won't.
Why? It's because we have an ever-shorter attention span. And it's because the temptation to tear down, criticize and fear-monger is irresistible to the out-party. We got a taste of it for the mid-term elections. Now we're going to get a belly full of it.
As I've said here before, the Left distills our complex and diverse American culture into three patronizing and simplistic categories:
1. Victims (you poor struggling, helpless folk)
2. Oppressors (those with more than the victims) and Evil-doers (Conservatives and Republicans)
3. Saviors (Liberals and your Democratic politicians)
They left out "Patriots".
2007-02-12 22:45:18 · answer #5 · answered by idlebud 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes I think we should. After seeing a building that was like a work of art go down in just a few hours and people who lost their life's that didn't even ask for this to happen I think we should stand behind our government when they need us most. If not for the Government for the families that lost their loved ones.
2007-02-12 23:10:57 · answer #6 · answered by T78 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes we stood proudly by our leader. It is just with loss of life that we begin to complain. Most people who are complaining the loudest do not have anyone to lose to Iraq. I do, but yet I stand behind the president.
2007-02-12 19:45:44 · answer #7 · answered by grandma 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We thought there were WMD in Iraq, whoops didn't find any. We know there are WMD in Iran, naw they just need electricity. So where is Bin Laden? Isn't he the one we are supposed to be after because of 911? Who's lying? Our President you want us to support does stupid things. 1st he tries to hand over our ports to the enemy( if a nuclear bomb gets into America it will probably get in by our shipping system), then he tell us we are going to stay in Iraq because he say so. Bahaaa sheep he thinks we are.
2007-02-13 00:36:52 · answer #8 · answered by Mother of a Marine 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We agreed to go to war on the country that provided aid and comfort to the people who attacked us. He had the country's wholehearted support for that.The country was Afghanistan. Iraq and Saddam had nothing to do with the attack on us. Even President Dimwit had to finally admit to that last year
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/140133_bushiraq18.html
His reasons for his war of choice, Iraq, have changed like the sands in the Sahara but ultimately we went to war in Iraq based on a lie.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memos.html
2007-02-12 20:03:42 · answer #9 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes to go after Osama and Al Qaeda not Iraq!
2007-02-12 21:04:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋