Who thinks the Dem's would do a better job at running the war effort ?

Question

With there cut and run mentality we would be fighting these terrorist's in our own backyards! We have not had an attack on our soil since 9/11 and we won't as long as we fight them in there backyards!

Answer 1

The Dems were great at fighting terrorism - unless you count the first World Trade Center bombing, the USS Cole attack and Embassy bombings.........

Answer 2

No Democrats have a "cut and run". They do have plans where GW doesn't. Joe Biden has the best plan for success.

First, the plan calls for maintaining a unified Iraq by decentralizing it and giving Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis their own regions. The central government would be left in charge of common interests, such as border security and the distribution of oil revenue.

Second, it would bind the Sunnis to the deal by guaranteeing them a proportionate share of oil revenue. Each group would have an incentive to maximize oil production, making oil the glue that binds the country together.

Third, the plan would create a massive jobs program while increasing reconstruction aid -- especially from the oil-rich Gulf states -- but tying it to the protection of minority rights.

Fourth, it would convene an international conference that would produce a regional nonaggression pact and create a Contact Group to enforce regional commitments.

Fifth, it would begin the phased redeployment of U.S. forces this year and withdraw most of them by the end of 2007, while maintaining a small follow-on force to keep the neighbors honest and to strike any concentration of terrorists.

Answer 3

This reads like a sound bite from FAUX News. To Bush bots, anything that counters Bush's policies is referred to as "cut and run." It's a tired catch phrase invented by Republicans to make those who disagree with them sound unpatriotic. If the terrorists wish to enter our backyard, they won't have much trouble doing so. Bush can't keep illegals out, how's he going to stop terrorists from doing so? Stop swallowing the b.s. that we are fighting terrorists in Baghdad. We are policing a civil war while the Taliban grows in leaps and bounds in Afghanistan and the Western Province of Iraq. The British are pulling out of Iraq, but sending troops to help NATO fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. Which backyard do you really think we ought to be in right now? The Taliban is thrilled to see us bogged down in Baghdad, they can operate in other areas more freely due to that. If you knew anything about Al Queda, and we all got primers after 9/11, you would remember that they take an average of 5 years to plan and execute large scale attacks. Don't start feeling quite so safe due to your hero Bush just yet. He flounders in the middle of a civil war while Al Queda is working on a Spring Offensive, or hasn't FAUX News covered that yet? It's not only Democrats that know this, but many Republicans that are acutely aware of it as well. I'd even be relieved to hand the mismanaged chaos we're calling a war to another Republican to deal with - anyone but this incompetent stubborn man who is sitting in the Oval Office.

Answer 4

You only have to look at their track record for fighting terrorism to know what the democrats would do. A long and most non-tirumphent history of voting against additional military and intelligence spending. JUST as they're suggesting now! But as it relates to actual terrorism, let's review.....

02/26/93: Al Qaeda plans and executes it’s first attack on the World Trade Center Towers. Six are killed and over 1000 are injured. Democrats consider the incident only a criminal act, arrests six, and considers the case closed.

06/26/96: Militans strike US military barracks with a truck bomb in Saudi Arabia. 19 are killed. NOTHING was done until Bush took office and a federal grand jury indicted 13 Saudis and a Lebanese. Democrats considered the case closed.

08/07/98: Al Qaeda attacks US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 and injuring over 5000. Two weeks later the Clinton Adminstration launches cruise missiles against an aspirin factory in Sudan, and considers the case closed.

10/12/00: Al Qaeda attacks the USS Cole, murdering 17 sailors. Democrats did abosolutely nothing, focussed instead on Al Gore's run for the White House!

And THESE are the people that will fight a smarter war on terror?????

Answer 5

Why do you think that it would make a difference in anything other than presentation? The second half of your question makes that clear, you believe your government's propaganda!
The terrorists that the people who control your government are pretending to fight are largely in Saudi and Pakistan. You are currently fighting insurgents against the American occupation of Iraq (who live there) and form the vast majority, that is why you have no chance of winning their oil fields and far more chance of inciting terrorists from all over the region.

Answer 6

You want be fighting them in your back yard that is another Bush lie. The Democrat are trying to not cut and run, (which is a silly
Republican phrase). They want just like 66 % of Americans do bring our troops home from a war that was started on George Bush lies and should never have been. If you want the troops to be killed and slaughtered because of your President. Then go join the branch of your choice, suit up , grab a rifle and catch the next flight out to their back yard. When you get there just start fighting knock them off one by one,. Your flight back will be on the Casket plane with a flag draped over you, with George Bush stating , "I'm proud of you boy".. Get off that computer talking big talk and go do some big fighting.

Answer 7

I doubt it. They don't have a real solution to the war. Politicians often just parrot back the views of the general public. A majority of Americans are now against the war, so these politicians are going to say they are against the war in order to get more votes. I bet you that if a majority of people supported the war, the democrats (or any politican) would be singing a different tune. They care about getting votes and gaining power. Very few of them care at all about the Middle East or the future of America.

Answer 8

Why is it that every three months Democrats come up with another way of saying "retreat"?

Do they think we're stupid or something?

REDEPLOYMENT is the same as quitting! When you're in a fist fight, you don't "redeploy"! You kick the guys duffus and make sure he doesn't get up again!

To answer your question, democrats won't fight at all. They're cowards, losers and anti-American. They really don't deserve to be in power.

If I were in the oval office, I'd be on the White House lawn DAILY calling out on the carpet every hypocrite in Congress who dares to prefer capitulating to murdering thugs rather than supporting our service members.

I would be showing pictures every day of the dead bodies of innocent men, women and children slaughtered in their homes by armed criminals who weren't even from Iraq.

I would be addressing the nation every Wednesday evening 8pm eastern with a call to arms against terrorism and liberal stupidity.

If Democrats and liberals had any love for this nation at all, they would stand up and be counted, and take advantage of this opportunity we have right now to make America great and ONCE AND FOR ALL liberate the peoples of the Middle East who are living under the threat of crime families with 6th grade level education and guns.

The fact that they have nothing better to do with their time than rant about stupid stuff they just make up in their dead time weakens America. They are not patriots, they're scum, and they endanger the rest of us.

Answer 9

With the title, I thought this was going to be a real question, not a statement.

I don't believe that cutting and running is a very good idea either, but I don't think this was the best way to share it.

Answer 10

Anyone with common sense could tell you that the "war effort" could be better run by just about anyone except The Bush Loons and their Lemming followers.

Maybe if the GOP's head wasn't stuck in Clinton's zipper they would have passed his anti-terror measures in '98 and we wouldn't have had a 9-11. Or if Bush wouldn't have been on vacation 30% of the time, or read his memo's, or done anything.