yes or no simple question
2007-02-23 13:10:10 · 21 answers · asked by Jeremy P 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
i forgot to edit when i pressed submit everyone forgets right thehuntre.
2007-02-23 13:24:49 · update #1
True Patriot thats funny i was laughing no really Clinton in his four years had an advantage,to take out Osama when he was here. Oh and Obama he dosn't want to deal with them and only been in the senate 16 month's a freshman neither will Hillary but my opinion than there's yours gotta love America.
2007-02-23 13:32:00 · update #2
What's your cause? from my point of view he was not president because of his dad the media and liberal movie makers made it look that way every politician has had a father before them or brother on the senate but president seat is earned not giving so I think he earned it liked everyone else who been there.
2007-02-23 13:37:56 · update #3
Mark C some what you said was true but lets say there was another big terrorist attack and hillary or obama was president and the only thing they do was to talk to them would you agree to that. Would you blame them and said they did the bombing like some people are doing today would you be still anti war if you are or would you say everyting they doing is alright ? would there poll's be any different than bush's when he was president? just ask these questions then see what they say thats just my advice ok.
2007-02-23 13:55:09 · update #4
you have to remember kris13iam terrorist or dictators are going to pop up anywhere so we better be ready when they start attacking so we can defend are selfs from these wakkos.
2007-02-23 13:58:29 · update #5
No.
What has stopped terrorism the past 5/6 years. The PATRIOT Act, and the War on Terror.
What do they BOTH oppose?
The PATRIOT Act, and the War on Terror.
If one of them is President, the terrorists would rejoice for their victory. We cannot let either one of them be President.
Remember what Obama said? "3000 lives lost for nothing"
>That doesn't help to stop terrorism.
And Clinton? She's changing her stance on Iraq every other month. Who knows what she really thinks.
2007-02-23 15:21:57 · answer #1 · answered by Chopper 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Presidents make decisions based on the advice and reccomendations of the military and their advisors. The right decision is not cut and dry, so to blame the fact Osama is alive on Clinton is a little misinformed, don't you think? And yes, I think both Hillary or Obama are quite capable of handling terrorism in our country. There is no sure way to stop it, if that's what you're asking. Is that what you are asking?
2007-02-23 13:43:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think it takes more than one person to handle terrorist. The goal of any leader is to inspire and motivate its people. Obama has spent years studying the islamic culture, and could provide some insite into this culture. Empathy and understanding are the first keys to success.
I don't think anyone on earth would beleive for 2 minutes that Hillary Clinton would be a candidate for president if she was not married to Former President Clinton. Look what appointing GW Jr. did for our country, and he was elected simply becuase of his ties to his father.
I think Obama is our best bet....at this point.
2007-02-23 13:27:54 · answer #3 · answered by Answers Nickname 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
pondering the finished job of calming terrorist that the rebublicans were doing over the years....i'd say sure so a recommendations. a minimum of he's sensible sufficient to pay interest earlier he speaks. Hell Bush used to say warfare earlier the words of overseas nationals were translated! Please do no longer make the topic of terrorism look an instantaneous results of President Obama being elected.
2016-12-04 21:00:54 · answer #4 · answered by barnas 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they can and will handle it better than Bush did. Dont forget that it was the Bush Administration that IGNORED a memo stating that Osama planned to attack the US from the air!
2007-02-23 14:02:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush couldn't, that's why we had 9/11 on his watch.
Hillary and Obama both have more intelligence than Bush so yes, definitely. They have the ability to think ahead, look at the war in Iraq where Bush thought it'd be over in a few weeks and they'd greet us as liberators...Not too much going on upstairs there. I think he stuffed a sock in his pants for the Mission Accomplished photo, too. I wish he could stuff a brain in his skull, instead. Stupid frat boy cokehead.
2007-02-23 13:17:37 · answer #6 · answered by Cerulean 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes, especially because it's not the President's job to "handle" terrorism.
2007-02-23 13:17:13 · answer #7 · answered by starsonmymind 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hillary will absorb advise from every cabinet member not just the direction of her VP. So would Obama but he lacks experience. Would Hillary authorize the killing of terrorists--absolutely-she would not flinch.
2007-02-23 16:48:38 · answer #8 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
No, not a chance. Terrorism is not a short term problem. Politicians such as these two run their policies based on the latest polls and pulse of the nation. They could not handle a long term problem if it lasted longer then a year.
2007-02-23 13:22:51 · answer #9 · answered by El P 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Yes.
2007-02-23 13:49:01 · answer #10 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋