Are Liberal Democrats too Dangerous to the national security of the U.S.A.?

Answer 1

YES THEY ARE SEDITIONISTS AND TREASONISTS FOR SURE...

They are the single greatest risk to America. They are the enemy from within and, therefore, more dangerous than Al Qaeda.

Answer 2

No only the neocons who are so arrogant to go against Powell and GEN.Shinseki and Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold (He had the courage to resign.) when they charged full steam ahead into Iraq.
It's like Powell said "you broke it so know buy it"

How come the only veteran of the Iraq invasion is a Democrat? He's opposed too Bush,Cheney, and the rest of the Neocon crowd who blundered their way into the quagmire of Iraq. So is Reagan's former SEC OF NAVY Jim Webb not a man I wouldn't call a liberal or John Warner for that matter.

Look my Congressman John J Duncan JR (FROM Eastern Tennessee) a Conservative Republican has voted against Bush since the get go over this war. I guess you would label him dangerous to national security of U.S.A He just knows how one Ahmed Chalabi and the rest of the INC where going to screw us big time!!! Wow what ever happened to the billions embezzled in a Lebanese bank? Sure didn't end up equipping the Iraqis.


Thanks to being stuck in Iraq the job in Afghanistan is only getting harder as we outsourced this to NATO. Read Gary Schroen's account "First In"decide for you self why we didn't finish the job. Let me see a unit of Special Forces trained in the way of Afghan culture dedicated to killing Bin Laden where pulled out so they can get ready for Iraq good call!!!.

Finally I would like to thank Don Rumsfeld for playing the role of McNamara and being called < "one of the worst SEC OF DEF EVER" John MCCAIN>
General Richard Myers,Gen. Sanchez and Gen. Tommy Franks you all had a supporting role. I am really gratefull that these men and many other senior leaders took the lessons of "Deriliction of Duty" by H.R. Mcmaster too heart. You turned into just a bunch of Gene. Westmorlands and Paul Harkins.

Finall to VP Cheney the man who sneered there wouldn't be any sectarian violence and my all time favorite "Insurgency in its last throughs" I say " LEARN TO EAT SOUP WITH A KNIFE"

Well this old member of the GOP in a former life would have been in your crowd. I'll be voting for Hagel praying for Powell enter the ring. PS: Anthony Zinni you where right. If you hate the anti-Iraq crowd boycott Tom Clancy a true freind of the military for opposing this war!!!

Well Gen.Petraeus looks like you got your work cut out for you < but you're a great man. GOD SPEED

We don't need liberals to be dangerous for America as long as men like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas Feith can due so much damage.

Answer 3

absolutely. they lack the greater vision for where this country needs to be in the fight against terror. they want to use diplomacy as their main weapon. but, what is not realized for whatever reason, is this approach should be your first option. but, you can't keep using it when there is not sufficient progress in a relatively short amount of time. we need to be demanding, not accomodating. time is running out, we don't need to waste it. something else that needs to be understood... terrorists use diplomacy and cease fires to their advantage. believe it or not, we've got them on the ropes, we just need that knockout punch. not call timeouts and let them get out of their daze. that's why we cannot pull out of Iraq, and that's why we NEED those extra troops. if more advantages can be taken, why not use it? not a single soldier would tell you that they would prefer not having extra help. Libs have a tendancy to not use common sense. that's why they say liberalism is a mental disorder. not alot of what they do or say makes sense. that's dangerous in my book.

Answer 4

we had the entire world behind us when we were attacked by Al-Qeida
The Duh-cider went after Iraq instead
Now most of the world sees us as agressors

Walking lock step with a rouge leader is the most dangerous thing we can do just ask the Germans

I think the real question should be

Are ditto heads too stupid and dangerous to allow their opinions to be heard

Answer 5

No. Not even a little. Liberals are the only ones interested in the security of the United States. They are interested in fighting the real war on terror. Not some trumped up war in Iraq that is taking away our resources to fight the real war on terror.

Answer 6

I've said it before, I'd be honored to live in the Taliban controlled territory formerly known as LA. Just give me a supply of rocks to throw and a bandana and I'll be all set.

Answer 7

Since the DoD states there has been a 5000% increase in global terrorism since the Iraq war began, the problem is conservative republicans.

Answer 8

that question alone is dangerous to the national security of the united states . we have a right to our opinion and it is guaranteed by the Constitution any one trying to quite our opinion is going against what the united states was founded on

Answer 9

According to what Bill Clinton permitted; the terrorist to blow up New York City, YES, they are a danger to our security.

Answer 10

You ask this after bush has screwed over and screwed up so much?

why did you not worry about this when bush was feeding?
the country verbal diarrhea ?

brain.
dead.
looser.