Great point. He is just like the guy that we have in there now. Neither of them care what the people of the U.S. think. A responder before me states that if we don't then we may be looking at the expense of another 9/11. September 11th could have been avoided~we did receive warnings, they were ignored. We need to get a president that works with the People of the U.S. for the best interest of the People of the U.S. Shouldn't we ALL be entitled to the same benefits package as our U.S. Senators and Congressman? We have poverty here, we have more outsourcing of business than any other country in the world and it continues to expand. Hershey will be laying off 15,000 American citizens and opening a new plant in Mexico.....Opening day of that plant will end my purchasing of Hershey products. I want the decisions made by our congress and house reps be for the best of the American citizens and sending our children in to battle (whilst theirs are earning a college degree at Stanford, Harvard and Princeton) is nothing more than a discriminatory act at its best. Wow, I got a bit carried away.
2007-02-26 03:48:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I am all in favor of McCain (or any other leader) posting questions for people to answer. I think he does care what people think, and I think his decision to support an increase in troops is specifically done because it caters to a specific group of people who do think it's a good idea. I don't agree with that notion, but I don't think he's taking the stand without listening to what people think.
To EXPOSE LIBERALS--I agree that the U.S. should not have to suffer another "9/11". That is exactly why we need to leave Iraq. Don't forget, there is not now, nor has there ever been any connection between Iraq and the people who made 9/11 happen. At best we are fomenting resentment against the U.S. in people who would have otherwise remained neutral, especially among the people who matter most--the people in the Middle East with money, the ones who can either give that money to Al Qaeda or spend it on luxury items. Our continued presence in Iraq is a boon to Al Qaeda and other militant groups, not a hindrance.
2007-02-26 03:35:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by Qwyrx 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Is it at all POSSIBLE that sending more troops to purge Iraq of insurgents once and for all MIGHT be a good idea? Is it POSSIBLE that sending more troops to clean the place out before handing control of the country back over to the Iraqis could mean a quicker withdrawl than if we tried to do it with the troop numbers we had before? Maybe......just MAYBE....sending more troops to speed things up could be a GOOD thing. Did you ever think about that????
2007-02-26 03:42:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
If John McCain replaced 2 subject concerns, he would circulate way up on my record. a million) The conflict is the biggest waste of money and lives that this u . s . has ever experienced. If he incredibly is doing as you point out, that could be great in my e book (in spite of the certainty that the approximately face is incredibly unnerving) 2) unlawful immigration- regrettably, all 3 applicants have taken a stance that opposes my perspectives on illegals. If McCain have been to take a good stance against unlawful immigration he would circulate way up on my record.
2016-12-14 06:05:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not EVERYONE despites sending more troops to Iraq.
Our pitfall for failure has to do with the LACK-THERE-OF.
I think a Massive wave of troops should be deployed to clean this mess up for once and all. Swiftley and Quickley.
2007-02-26 03:33:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by pepsicolastar 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
The military is not a democracy. You follow orders from the top down, whether you agree or not.
2007-02-26 03:33:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
John McCain is just another warmonger who thinks the way to make friends is to go to their country, blow them up and steal their oil.
2007-02-26 03:33:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I wouldn't charade with him if my life depended on it. I don't want more troops, I want them out.
2007-02-26 03:33:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Giliathriel 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
He wants to finish what the is on the Republican's agenda-"freedom for Iraq and the fight against terrorism".
2007-02-26 03:32:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
He's is trying to be elected President, but GWB has closed that door for him.
The USA cannot afford another 'I am the Decider', no matter what the voters say.
2007-02-26 03:34:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋