Would republicans support our troops in the Iraqi civil war if the president was a Democrat?

Answer 1

Of course.

Republicans supported (and continue to support, since they're still there) our troops in Kosovo, and in Bosnia, and in Vietnam (a Democratic War - Remember Kennedy and Johnson?), and everywhere else.

Democrats seem to be the ones who only support the troops occasionally.

Orion

Answer 2

Yes. See this is where you have to say (and yes I probably will get off the subject) that irregardless of what political horse you back it should be all about support of the troops. I come from a military family. My father was in the Marines as well as my husband and my brother-in-law. People say pull them out Bush is killing them. You have to understand that it is a selfless commitment that these brave and wonderful young men and women are making to make sure that every intelligent person and or jackass in America can speak their mind freely. How many of you would freely lay down your life so someone could live free no matter where they were from? Not many. They know from the time they sign those papers that they have made a choice to serve their country and they know what the sacrifices are should war rear it's ugly head. I am not saying war is right I am saying as long as someone that I do not necessarily know is willing to lay down their life for me they have my greatest and most heart felt respect. God bless them!

Sorry if I went off but man I had to say that. I can't help but feel that this whole suffering is our generation's Pearl Harbor and Vietnam. You have a nation that is divided and says "Support 'em" and others that say "Spit on 'em".

Answer 3

There is no civil war in Iraq. That's a liberal invention. What does happen in Iraq is some of gang violence.

You never hear the liberal media mention the Kurds, who are doing swimmingly up north. They're currently building a university that they're naming after America to thank us for liberating them.

In LA you have the Crips and Bloods fighting each other, but the rest of the population is generally peaceful. In much the same manner, here in Iraq you have the Sunnis fighting the Shiites (under the influence of Syria and Iran, respectively), but the Kurds live rather peacefully. That's not a civil war; it's gang violence.

I've always felt that we should have finished the job in Somalia, from which Clinton pulled us out. In much the same manner, I feel that we need to finish the job here in Iraq. Victory does not include giving up just because the liberal media doesn't think things are going well.

Answer 4

I do not know about the politicians. Most of them blindly disagree with each other no matter what the situation. Both sides are quilt of that. Except the extreme Liberals, they disagree with anything none socialist. As for me I am a conservative, and I would happily support a Democratic President that has the guts to protect the US.

Answer 5

i think of republicans get slightly perplexed, i help the troops. i recommend, why does not i? i assume i'm going to assist anybody for that rely, bypass human beings! what i don't help is that this warfare which, as you reported, substitute into began under fake data. what i detect so ironic approximately this administration, is they're going to make each and all the accusations they choose, yet while some thing is going incorrect all you hear is "its not my fault." now, anybody who's ever been in a protection stress surroundings, is familiar with that in case you do some thing incorrect, it in simple terms isn't taken kindly in case you attempt to make excuses. i'm going to enable this slide with our contemporary administration considering that they don't precisely have a protection stress historic past. see, republican's are so slender minded (ok, thats a miles less high priced shot) that they think of all they could do is say "i help the troops, you're unpatriotic" and that they are upward thrust up electorate. it truly is like how giuliani says "i substitute into there durring 9/11" and sheds a tear, yet he won't point out that he underfunded each civil branch of manhattan while he substitute into in workplace. inclusive of the fire dept.! that's why the firefighters union is going after him for being a phony. ok, i've got ranted adequate, truly i'm asserting i agree alongside with your fact.

Answer 6

Of course not; but let them speak for themselves as they did when Clinton attacked Kosovo -

--------------------------
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“You can support the troops but not the president."

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today."

--------------------------

--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years." --Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

--------------------------

--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?" --Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

--------------------------

--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."


--------------------------
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."

--------------------------

--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)


"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--------------------------

--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/republicans_clinton_war.html

----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------


a_wood80 -

Every non-partisan Middle East expert in the world predicted that the most likely outcome of invading Iraq would be a civil war. In fact, everyone with any knowledge of the region knew this to be true. Bush’s own father says so in his 1998 book ‘A World Transformed’. And, that is what Colin Powell meant when he told Bush, “If you break it [Iraq], you own it”.

If you knew anything about the geopolitics of the region, you would know that the only ‘swimming’ in store for the Kurds will be in their own blood. Turkey and Syria, as well as every non-Kurd in Iraq, want the Kurds dead and gone; and, as soon as the Shi’a and Sunni civil war stabilizes somewhat, that is just what will happen.

Answer 7

yes that is why a very large majority of the people in the military vote republican... and we all know we dont wanna lose the votes since 95% of the military votes instead of watching american idle

Answer 8

Probably true. It has never been about the war, it's about hatred of the President.

Answer 9

No! Most republican politicians are idiots.

Answer 10

No. They are liars and opportunistic geeks.