2007-02-17 05:47:20 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It is not likely to happen. They want Iraq to be a failure to embarass Bush, who removed one of their favorite Socialist Dictators from power. Iran is their ally in this matter.
Democrats are now doing what they did to hand victory to the enemy in Vietnam. They are de-funding the military operation just as it is close to success. The Communist Vietcong considered Democrats their allies in war against the US.
Meanwhile, many people of Iran are rebelling against Ahmadinejad, killing some of his elite military forces, shaving their beards when they attend his speeches... I saw some amazing coverage of this that is not making it to US mainstream news.
2007-02-17 05:51:03 · answer #1 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It by no potential happens to the extremists that the mainstream is something different than relatively unlike themselves. i'm liberal and help the democratic social gathering simply by fact they're the only social gathering that represents the seen government fixing problems for the individuals. The republicans purely do this for the moneyed hobbies and the Libertarians and Tea social gathering think of it relatively is probably no longer achieved in any respect. yet i choose for a working, functioning government that insures equivalent justice and rule of regulation, addresses problems in Society which would be properly addressed via collective action, invests in destiny and implements the individuals's will. it relatively is not any that the Democratic social gathering is suited or maybe stable at it. yet all different events (inclusive of republican) have become particular activity ax grinders for the 'me purely' constituencies. relatively - on what planet can we subsidize the concentration of inner maximum wealth with public debt and then blame the burden of the damaging for the financial mess it makes - yet that has been the Republican drum beat for 30 years. On what planet can we sacrifice the wellness, protection, and sustainability of our very ecosystem in the call of commerce and or worse - liberty. yet that has been the libertarian drum beat for ever considering that we took collective action to bathe the air and water of the business grime they see as maximum properly known to any rule of regulation against it.
2016-10-02 07:25:45 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, Iran wouldn't have stood a snowball's chance in hell to have any influence in Iraq if the neoCON Republics hadn't been so hot to oust Saddam and get the war profiteering moving along. besides, the neoCONS WANT a war with Iran and are trumping up any little suspicion they can to justify attacking Iran. not only would a war with Iran divert attention from the failing wars they've already started but they'd be making even MORE profit from a new war and would have a shot at stealing Iran's oil reserves as per the PNAC plan.
you Republic Party 29 percenters are so easily duped. you'll believe ANYTHING that is spewed out of the lying yaps of Bu$hCo.
2007-02-17 06:11:34 · answer #3 · answered by nebtet 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Anyone with any sense knows the Democratic party supports the troops and the war on terror. If proof of Iran's interference in Iraq is brought forward they will not only denounce Iran, but they would give the OK to go after the perpetrators.
2007-02-17 05:53:19 · answer #4 · answered by itsdabigbadwolf 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
When will the idiot republican party quit turning nations into terrorist States? Every non-partisan Middle East expert predicted this would happen if Bush invaded - as did Bush's own father in his book, 'A World Transformed' - and, as did Colin Powell, who told Bush, if you break it [Iraq], you own it.
Well, you guys broke it, so quit whining like babies and admit that it was your own ignorance and arrogance that got America into this mess, and now the Democrats are the only hope we have to get out of it.
Al-Qaeda is more powerful in Afghanistan that ever before. There were no terrorists in Iraq before Bush invaded.
North Korea did not have nuclear weapons before Bush became President.
How much failure will be enough to satisfy you?
2007-02-17 06:03:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
You should have had that lobotomy Pimple. From what I gather the real US problem with Iran is that they want their oil customers to pay in Euros. And Europe is fine with that. America of course is not. They would prefer everyone to pay in US dollars. I assume it hurts the US economy or devalues the dollar. Any oil America might buy from Iran would mean converting the dollar to euros first. An economist or banker could explain it better, but when the US attacks Iran it won't be because of terrorism. It'll be because of the US economy.
2007-02-18 01:25:13 · answer #6 · answered by Watcher 465 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As soon as the Republicans admit they armed Saddam with chem weapons & were warned by Democrats that Iran would become a M.E. powerhouse as the result of the Iraq disaster. You Repubs should fix your own problems first, then look for blame in others.
2007-02-17 06:04:52 · answer #7 · answered by Gemini 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Never. They are too busy denouncing the President for hurting Ahmadinejad's poor little feelings.
2007-02-17 05:52:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
When will the ultra far right wing republic party admit the Dictator Dumbya Big Lie Iraqi Crusade was based on a deliberate lie?
2007-02-17 05:54:33 · answer #9 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
When all the liberal women and homosexuals want to stop having sex with iranians.
2007-02-17 05:54:16 · answer #10 · answered by Val 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋