2007-02-17
15:11:18
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Longhaired Freaky Person
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
joey, why do you believe that it was only the administration that preferred lies about WMD, and pro-war Democrats were innocent lambs? DESPITE all the lies cooked into the CIA reports, 23 Democratic senators saw through the lies and voted against the war.
HOW MANY of those pro-war cowards are being proffered to us as Presidential material? Kerry, Edwards, Lieberman, Clinton, Biden, Dodd...the list seems endless.
How many anti-war candidates? I hope you like Obama.
2007-02-17
16:58:36 ·
update #1
no, she was in the white house when the intel was gathered if anyone should have known it was lies she should have. She was complicit in the whole thing and now wants to leave the troops in Iraq. Hows leaving them there moral support. Is it supporting the troops telling them they cant go home the job isnt finished? I can think of nothing more demoralizing than being told you have to stay in a place where you get shot and and ambushed 50% of the time because the intel you get is from the Iraqi's themselves. Its important to realize we are being drawn into a civil war and choosing a side. It happens everyday when the decision is made to raid this or that part of the city.
2007-02-17 15:19:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
This is a very difficult question to answer, even tho' I am not a great Hillary supporter.
It appears that she made her initial decision (pro-war) based on the poor intelligence and lies proffered by the administration. So, in her eyes, that was a proper decision. If she were to apologize for that decision, that would be like saying that she would not vote for war even if the circumstances warranted it.
What she is saying is that now that she knows "the truth", she is no longer in favor of the troops being there. It is a consistent stance, and does not denote "flip-flopping" or cowardice--very politically savvy.
On the other hand, a politician cannot really say much of anything these days, no matter how carefully they they weigh their words, because the opposition will turn it against them in some way.
2007-02-18 00:10:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Joey's Back 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
She is just getting more press time. She says that she supports our troops. But, totally screwed up our health care while Billy was in office and has done nothing to straighten it out since she has been in the Senate. She claims to support the Iraq war and then is seen with Hanoi Jane protesting the war. Which side she is on depends on what press is available. Does this remind anyone of flip flop during the 2004 elections? If she did apologize who would believe her? It would be like Billy saying he will never commit adultery again.
2007-02-17 23:26:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gunny Bill 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not particularly. I still support her, but she's going to have to use the "M" word or this will simply continue to plague her. It hasn't hurt the other candidates to say it was a mistake and I don't think it would hurt her. I just think she's still so po'd about being hoodwinked that the word just sticks in her throat and chokes her. She's going to have to get over that, and get on with it IMO. Truth be told, I agree with what she's saying now, but it just isn't good enough for those who want an apology from the lady herself. She says she's sorry for believing Bush, but she's going to have to say she's sorry for her own error in judgment in doing so, and she hasn't expressed that yet.
2007-02-17 23:16:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't care one way or the other whether Hillary supports the war in Iraq. People are upset because she is changing her mind. At first she supports the war, then she doesn't... make up your mind! And do you notice how when the Dems are in public they don't miss a chance to jump up and clap in support of the troops (i.e. watch Pelosi at the State of the Union Address) when they'll turn around and say nothing but bad stuff about what the troops are doing over there? Looking for approval?? Hmmm...
2007-02-17 23:18:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes, it decreases her likelihood of winning the Democratic primaries.
2007-02-18 12:48:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Michael E 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I love your trick questions. I suppose she is at least staying consistent, but Hillary, in general, does not make me really happy.
2007-02-17 23:31:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think that no one who supported the war should apologize. It sends a mixed signal to our troops.
2007-02-17 23:15:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lilith_Angel 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I support Hillary's decisions, she knows what she is doing. Could be she is drawing in more Republicans.
2007-02-18 03:13:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by GO HILLARY 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I see it as a sign of honesty, things have changed since the war began. Rather than her being concerned with pleasing everyone. (which is impossible) Hillary has guts, I hope she wins.
2007-02-17 23:15:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Squirrley Temple 7
·
1⤊
3⤋