English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-17 19:11:36 · 13 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government Politics

Funny how some knee jerks below assume I've never served.

2007-03-18 08:23:05 · update #1

13 answers

Unlike yourself, US soldiers volunteered, they were not drafted or forced into the military. Bush did not kill them. Until your a real soldier, you have no opinion that matters. Better be careful there, if a LIb is elected for Pres in 2008, they will start the draft, what hole will the military have to drag you out of to serve. Can not use the same one as Sodamn Insane, they fill that hole up with cement, just before the hanging party.

2007-03-17 19:21:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

No, Bush is not trying to build a Nation, or is he? Frankly after four years, I don't think he knows what he is trying to do. Or, possibly he knows but he is unwilling to say so.
One speculation is that he is trying to set up a client state that will tolerate America power in Iraq in the form or several American fortresses. From those bases America could be close to the oil in the Middle East in case there is need to protect our oil supply.
Also, American power in Iraq would check the power of Iran and in the region and help keep the Sunni and the Shia from engaging in a larger war.
Maybe that is what we are doing in the Middle East.

2007-03-18 02:30:15 · answer #2 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 1 0

No, nation building is not the objective.

The objective is to establish a condition of semi-controlled chaos to ensure complete US control for the future.

Do you really think a free Iraq would repair and resupply the oil pipeline to Israel?

What position would the democratically elected government of Iraq take in the Israeli occupation of Palestine?

How many permanent US military bases would a truly Iraqi government approve?

No, this administration, the defense contractors, and the big oil corporations all benefit from an Iraq in civil war.

If we didn't want lawlessness, we would not have disbanded all civil and military institutions.

If we didn't want foreign fighters and al Qaeda to enter Iraq, we would have secured the international borders.

If we wanted to prevent an organized, well funded, and well armed insurgency, we would not have lost billions in cash, and many weapons, effectively making a donation to the insurgency and al Qaeda.

We would have secured and or destroyed the many conventional weapons caches throughout Iraq. The CIA trained Bin Laden and others in the manufacture of IED's from conventional weapons, such as artillery shells, to use against the Russians in Afghanistan. Our leadership should have been prepared for their use against our soldiers.

If we were interested in winning the hearts and minds of the general Iraqi population, we would never use white phosphorous, napalm, depleted uranium, or any other weapons which either inflict horrifying injuries, or lifetimes of damage after the battles are over, especially in urban settings.

Since every major "mistake" made in the prosecution of this war was exactly what needed to be done to ensure anarchy, I have to assume that GW got exactly the result he desired.

2007-03-18 02:56:14 · answer #3 · answered by Jack C 3 · 0 3

Do you forget that the UN released a 400+ page report on Iraq and its military capabilities which did include WMD's? The way I see it, if the UN did their job in the first place we wouldn't be in this situation. THEY got the US into Iraq and if we pull out now, you will see a civil war and genecide like the world has never seen since biblical times.

2007-03-18 02:34:55 · answer #4 · answered by Voice of Liberty 5 · 5 0

Bush is into building opportunities for private profit on behalf of the privileged social class that is his true constituency.

With the lives of US soldiers. And hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. Probably to the detriment of national security, our freedoms, or the economic interests of the lower 90% of the economic classes.

2007-03-18 02:48:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I'm absolutely certain George Bush would rather NOT build or rebuild any other nation, did it not come with the territory of war and responsibility.

2007-03-18 02:35:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Yes, every soldier and vet in the US is recievingf better care than any soldiers anywhere else in the world. They are heroes, and if you doubt they are being treated as heroes, then you hate america.

2007-03-18 02:21:06 · answer #7 · answered by OctopusGuy 1 · 3 0

nope! the democrats are using the soldiers and the situation to further their political careers though.They own defeat and preach it.Why dont they defund it completly,if they dont agree with it,and why do all their time limits for the war end at the presidential elections?

2007-03-18 02:46:43 · answer #8 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 1 1

I guess he could do it with YOUR life but you would just curl up in a corner.

Let the people who have volunteered to fight this do the job and win the fight.

I promise to leave you alone if you promise to stay out of our business.

2007-03-18 02:19:01 · answer #9 · answered by ? 6 · 4 0

Look out! He's from Homeland Security, he's tryin to trick us into saying bad things about the worst president ever so he can use the Patriot Act to search our computers for pirated mp3's!

2007-03-18 02:22:38 · answer #10 · answered by William C 2 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers