2007-02-24 08:57:40 · 13 answers · asked by jxt299 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
This your first time on acid?
2007-02-24 09:06:25 · answer #1 · answered by Panama Jack 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It's time for a reality check here. At this time, more than 2/3 of Americans disapprove of President Bush. Anytime real facts are presented (Re: The Downing Street Memos), etc, instead of debate, The Clones/Sheep resort to name calling or anything else to divert from the issue. Both Bush & Cheney have called anyone who is against the invasion of Iraq "Supporters of Terorists" Or "If your against the War you are Anti-Troops". The troops are our own family, neighbors & friends & not some abstract thing. It's my beleif when history looks back on Bush 43, They will see how a President tried to take over the United States & make it his own. But just like in Iraq, he will fail at that too.
2007-02-24 10:41:12 · answer #2 · answered by donronsen 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush and the GOP started the Iraq War to make tons of money for their friends in the military industrial complex. Too bad so many young people have to die or be critically maimed so that a few fat cats can cash in.
2007-02-24 09:06:59 · answer #3 · answered by Feathery 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Dude, you are really confused! Bush started the war with the excuse that Iraq had WMD's.
Here's a bio of your hero:
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
.
2007-02-24 09:03:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
incredibly you have a dizzying mind, OP. You of course have no comprehend-how of any of those subject concerns you advance. I prefer I felt like stepping into each and each of them in intensity, yet i will in basic terms carry on with the "conflict." i'm not a democrat, and that i'm hardly one to safeguard democratic congressmen, yet they deserve it whilst uneducated, misinformed invoice O'Reilly disciples spew what you have repeated. on the subject of the "conflict," the "surge" has not worked. once you're saying each and every analyst consents in this, you're misinformed. The surge presented added secure practices that has brought about non everlasting decreases in casualties, yet has instituted 0 lasting outcomes--this is, if those added troops have been to be withdrawn, the affected aspects would in basic terms approximately easily return to their pre-surge tendencies. On Barack Obama's stance on Iraq, please show us a turn-flop, because of the fact i've got not seen one. He has stated he would withdraw troops as quickly as a threat--that would not recommend putting us all on the 1st C-130s out of Iraq as quickly as Obama takes the oath of place of work, yet particularly as quickly as rotation out of theater would be completed mutually as briefing the as a rule Iraqi replace secure practices equipment. which would be a sixteen-18 month proposition, be certain. As on your asinine fact that "we could of course win Iraq in the previous we are able to combat one f," have you ever stopped to think of that there replace into extremely no good reason to be in Iraq interior the 1st place?
2016-10-16 10:02:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
wow they spun the media really well to make it look the other way, and they somehow managed to make the president and the cabinet say the same things!
2007-02-24 09:13:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why do you Hate America? lol
have another beer, your still sober enough to type.
2007-02-24 09:07:31 · answer #7 · answered by Jimbo 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Amen!
GOD bless America always.
2007-02-24 09:04:59 · answer #8 · answered by May I help You? 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Huh? You're mixed up.
2007-02-24 09:09:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Cuz that's what we do. It's our jobs to be gay terrorists who hate America, babies, and freedom and, doggone it, we try our best.
2007-02-24 09:03:08 · answer #10 · answered by kungfufighting66 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋