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

"I believe the Democrats want a stable Iraq, they just don't want the Republicans to get credit for it."

Also, do you think the Democrats will try to take credit if things start to go well in Iraq?

2007-02-18 17:20:35 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

Poo poop dee doo............

Well I believe that the Democrats do want a stable Iraq. So there is some truth to that statement. However if it happens........ it won't be the republicans that get credit for it. It will be the soldiers that fought and died and were crippled and maimed.

But I can understand the Republicans wanting that credit. They are just like so many other arm-chair quarterbacks that like to take credit for their favorite team winning a game on T.V. because they were watching them play while sucking down the suds and feeding their fat faces with fried chicken.

*kiss*

2007-02-18 17:51:09 · answer #1 · answered by Marilyn 2 · 5 1

No, it's incorrect. We want a stable Iraq, we just don't approve of the plan that the President has for it. He's going about it wrong. If I could use a metaphor, we can't hold onto the bike seat forever; eventually we need to let them go, and hope that they make it.

As for your second part, no, the Democrats will only "take credit" if any improvement in Iraq stems from the Democrats plan to withdrawal. Otherwise, things probably won't EVER go right in Iraq (they haven't since "Mission Accomplished"), so your question is sadly probably irrelevant.

I also believe that the above poster is saying that the soldiers who happen to be liberal (the so-called "7%") are not pulling as much weight in Iraq as conservative troops are. This is a completely irresponsible and wrong thing to say.

2007-02-18 17:29:27 · answer #2 · answered by amg503 7 · 2 1

No, I think that statement is senseless. How can they take credit? They haven't made any changes. The Decider won't allow it. So far nothing has been accomplished but a non-binding resolution. They have yet to address funding for instance. It's well known from sea to shining sea who is running this show. He sinks or swims with it, not the Democrats, at least not at this juncture.

2007-02-18 17:26:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Don't worry - things will not be going well in Iraq for a very long time. Bush can have total credit for this fiasco, and he always will. Historians will note that some democrats were very brave, but that most were cowed by the pathetic display of angry, blood-thirsty, jingoistic, anti-dissenter, brain-dead faux patriotism of the american people in the wake of 9/11

2007-02-18 17:45:06 · answer #4 · answered by cassandra 6 · 3 1

It won't be about anyone trying to take credit. The Democrats are simply trying to open "The Decider's" eyes to the fact that his plan isn't working. Common sense dictates that when something doesn't work, it's time to try something else.

2007-02-19 06:52:35 · answer #5 · answered by frenchy62 7 · 1 0

I'd say the statement is fair. Putting it any other way makes the Democrats look really bad. Or should I say, really worse.

If things go well in Iraq, they can have the credit, for all I care. I just want things to go well.

2007-02-18 17:41:31 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 0 3

Definite YES to both! They're good at taking credit when they don't deserve it!! Does anyone remember how they took credit for the "balanced budget" when Clinton was in office? And did anyone notice how the deficit started to go down [and kept going down] AFTER the Republicans were in the majority in Congress and controlled America's purse strings??? And to answer all you libs out there--I do know about the huge deficit now! My question to you all: do you know what 9/11 cost the US and do you know we're fighting a war against terrorism?

2007-02-18 17:31:55 · answer #7 · answered by jlmGranny 2 · 1 3

Did the sun come up this morning. Have you noticed, they were for the war before they understood a soldier could get hurt and then they were against the war? They wanted additional troops on the ground before the President asked for them, then they were against additional troops.

They are for everything the polls show their constituents are for and against anything that is correct and honest.

When was the last time an elected Democrat had any corrective criticism? Do not like the plan, do not come up with another, scream the one in place is not good and do no more..... The next 6 years are not going to be any fun.

2007-02-18 17:31:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 5

an prolonged time interior the previous I quickly did some artwork on "reality tables".* It does look such as you have a simplified 3-point sort of sort. in spite of everything, i've got self assurance that ur end is purely too rationally..robust. something like , " as a consequence, God exists in multiplicity,sts; God exists in many minds (and not in purely the only strategies)."

2016-10-15 23:55:36 · answer #9 · answered by dusik 4 · 0 0

Yes, actually, and if the situation were reversed, the Republicans would be the same way, no doubt ......it's the nature of the beast, don't you know. Politics, that is.

2007-02-18 17:57:51 · answer #10 · answered by kathjarq 3 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers