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

The cost of the war in Iraq is over $400 billion and counting.
Gasoline is more than $3.00 per gallon nationwide.
Home foreclosures are at an all time high?
Our nation's credibility is at an all time low.
The country's infrastructure is crumbling around us.

Yet, despite it all, neocons continue to support this Administration's continued involvement in war that can't be won. Please answer why?

2007-05-09 08:05:49 · 30 answers · asked by ken erestu 6 in Politics & Government Politics

I didn't realize that my question would generate such discourse. I do admire "justgetitright" and "electronic_dad' as their response demonstrates a blind and total devotion to the Bush Administration while unsympathetic to the realities faced by everyday Americans.

The best answer I select will surprise you.

2007-05-09 10:29:53 · update #1

30 answers

I'll answer your question one at a time.

1. The cost of the war is high because at every turn the Dems are giving the enemy more ammunition to recruit more terrorist. If the Dems would get behind this war and try to win it we could probably be out within a year.

2. Gasoline is $3.00 a gallon because we have to import most of our oil because the Dems won't let us drill our own oil and bring down the price. If we were to develope our own supply the price would go down and then the Dems would have one less thing to gripe about and blame on Bush.

3. Home foreclosures are up because people (not Bush) made bad desicions and bought houses out of their price range. If I buy a Lear Jet and then can't afford the payments is it my fault or the Pres's?

4. The Dems have more to do with our credibility being low because they're the one's out there telling the world how bad we are and how the American people are stupid and worthless and how the president that the other countries have to deal with is fake and lied and cheated to become president.

5. The infrastructure of our country is deteriating because of the corruption in local gov'ts. The national gov't gives the states and cities money to keep up the infrastructure but the local gov't end up spending it on social programs that benefit the few but make them look like they care.

So all the things you mentioned I've explained away. NEXT!!!

2007-05-09 08:23:47 · answer #1 · answered by LIL_TXN 4 · 8 5

The question needed to be asked before Bush attempted to make the UN relevant. When the UN chose to be irrelevant the US didn't Have a choice but to go in or become equally irrelevant.

Either the coalition discovers a way to have the Iraqis better off than they were under Saddam, or the 1st world we be worse off than when Saddam was in power.

If the area breaks out into a full blown civil war both the economy of the 1st world will spiral down & the planets environment will worsen. All those burning oil feels will do a number on global warming. Whom ever doesn't get the profits off the oil will torch them, because some of the funds will be used for arms for the ones that own them!

Start using your superior intelect to come up with a solution!

2007-05-09 15:40:54 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 1 1

For a moment I thought Wow, a reasonable question
until I got to the NEOCON crap and realized that you
are noting more that yet another uneducated dimwit
that can not see beyond his nose.

How much did WWII, Korea and Vietnam cost in TODAYS
dollars.

Gasoline, Al Gore sold a substantial portion of the federal
petroleum reserves to Occidental Petroleum, a company that
his father was a VP and a company that is paying Gore
$20,000 a year for mineral rights.

Home foreclosures are high primarily due to people
taking out to many loans for stuff they don't need except
to try and impress someone down the street, and they
take out mortgages that negatively amortize. If you can't
pay for it don't buy it, seems simple enough/

Our credibility is low, what a laugh, the only way that our
credibility will get low is if we allow the liberals to put
a pull out date on the war. What country would be able
to rely on us if they know that we will pull out.

Yep our infrastructure is falling apart, starting with the
DJIA, never been lower in its life, 1929 all over again.

When you start raising taxes and people will have less
money to spend on things that they need and have to
go on welfare to survive, then you will see our infrastructure
crumble.

YOU LOUSY LIBERALS ARE DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND I AM SICK AND TIRED OF YOUR
MEANINGLESS BULL CRAP, PULL YOUR HEADS
OUT OF YOUR CRACK AND TAKE A GLIMPSE OF
REALITY.

You are welcome, thanks for asking.

2007-05-09 15:43:20 · answer #3 · answered by justgetitright 7 · 2 3

there are types of folks out there that refuse to admit when they are wrong and even if they and a roomful of others can blatantly see that there wrong they still won't admit it they just hold on to the hope that something will change and than maybe they'll be right and when that never happens they lay blame on others as if it was their fault
or they could just be wearing blinders and have small closed minds
don't get all fussy anybody there are people like this in every party every country and every culture known to man i wasn't addressing a particular party just a particular type of person

2007-05-09 15:55:03 · answer #4 · answered by auntie s 4 · 1 1

I don't think that the items you listed have too too much to do with the latter. I can speak to the gas costs however.
1) State and local governments tack on quite a large percentage of what you pay at the pump.
2) Because of different state and national laws, the oil companies have to switch between different "blends" at different times of years. Most if not all of the refineries that do this are around 30 years old. This slows down the entire process. If we had one national blend, this would go away, and fuel costs would be more consistent. Also, if we were allowed to build more Nuclear plants, the cost of fuel would go down because the demand would be less. OR if we were allowed to tap the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, the supply would increase and our prices would be lower.

As far as the home foreclosures, I think that has more to do with a lack of personal responsibility. People have bigger eyes than they do wallets, and believe that they can afford things that they clearly cannot... and therefore the lose it. If people had better understandings of their own financial situation, they wouldn't lose their homes. Not all of us can own $200,000+ homes... and people need to accept that and learn to live within their means.

If our national credibility was so horrible, then why would the new President of France want to be friends?

2007-05-09 15:18:39 · answer #5 · answered by dougandkate 2 · 9 4

On the Cost of fighting terrorism:
If money is the only (Or one of the top) reasons for fighting, or not fighting terrorism.....at what $dollar$ amount do you set your cut off limits?........Is $300billion OK, but $301billion too much?

On gas prices:
Oil prices (Like EVERYTHING ELSE in a market driven World economy) are driven by (SAY IT WITH ME NOW!) WORLD Market Demand/WORLD Market Prices!
If you have a finite amount of a product (Like Oil), and a high enough World demand for it....The bidding (Price) is/will be set by the WORLD MARKET.
NOT SOME IMAGINARY "BIG OIL" EXECUTIVE(S)!

On Home Foreclosures:
If "Skippy" decides to purchase a home that is beyond his ability to afford, or IF "Skippy's" job is lost and "Skippy" has been spending beyond his means/not saving some of his income......Then, Yes..."Skippy" will be in bad financial trouble.

On Our nation's creditability:
Our nation's creditability would be just fine, outside of all of the CONSTANT America bashing, bitching, and complaining by Every Lib-tard, Drive-by media type, and moonbat.

We Are, and always have been the first to respond to trouble anywhere in the world.

We Are, and always have been the first to respond with help, anywhere in the world.

We Are, and always have been the first to respond with cash, medical supplies, and food anywhere in the world.

We Are, and always have been the first to respond with disaster relief anywhere in the world.

On Our Crumbling Infrastructure:
With untold TRILLIONS going to support Welfare, and every other Entitlement program......and fewer and fewer people actually wanting to WORK.....+ Our Dear friends, the Libs wanting to "Repeal Tax Breaks" (AKA....Increase Taxes!), and start new Entitlements all of the time......

I have a great suggestion where we could get all of the money to fix all of our infrastructure....and I know where we can get all of the labor to do the work too....(Can you guess what it might be?!?!?)

Finally, On Bush/War:
"Oh No! We can never win, We're doomed!" Blah!, Blah!, Blah!

It's a fight....We are the biggest, baddest, and the best......We can win ANYTHING we set our minds/hearts to......It's people like you who don't WANT us to do so.

Go wring your hands somewhere else......I hear you could find a spot on "The View".

T.S.

2007-05-09 15:42:49 · answer #6 · answered by electronic_dad 3 · 1 3

The right decision is not always the popular one...you cannot please everyone...we live in a nation who wants instant gratification..in times of war it simply is not feasible...sacrifices for the greater good...All the average non military citizen has complained about sacrificing is it costs a little more to go to the mall or take that trip to Disney world...there is something wrong with a mentality that complains about a minor inconvenience like gas prices when compared to wondering if you will die trying to buy milk at the market for your baby...

2007-05-09 15:37:45 · answer #7 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 4 2

the war could have been prevented if clinton had been more decisive.
refining cost is the main culprit on gas.
forclosures is because all those morons took a sub-prime rate not taking into account the variable interest rate.
credibility is an issue, but for all the wrong reasons.
our infrastructure is fine. i believe in 1983, cost adjusted, gas was more expensive equalling in effect $3.17 per. the dow is at an all time high. iran is starting to shift positions. n. korea is about to dismantle. a conservative won in france. it is not as bad as you make it out to be. as far as the war, we left the kurds high and dry and how many tens of thousands were killed. we can not make the same mistake. we would be out of there by now if those cowards in iraq would stand up. militarily we have won, it is the politicians screwing the pooch on this one. god bless america.

2007-05-09 15:19:30 · answer #8 · answered by BRYAN H 5 · 8 5

Sure. First off do you know what a neo-con is?
Second. Did Congress vote to allow the war? They did.
Third. Did Congress fail to put enough votes together to stop the war? They did fail to override the veto. So there must be a lot of them for the war too.
So, I guess you are saying that the Democratic controlled House and Senate are Neo-Cons?
Sorry about your infrastructure. It seems just fine where I am.
I guess the war, as you refer to it, caused all of the people to get so deep in debt borrowing to pay off bills for their BMW's 98 inch TV's etc, so now they cannot afford to pay off their houses.
And since you have decided that it is a war that cannot be won why is your name not up there on the list of candidates?
If you need any more help, just ask.

2007-05-09 15:16:34 · answer #9 · answered by Oldvet 4 · 7 6

The war can be won and is being won. 95% of Iraq is violence free and prosperous. The media focuses on the 5% that is violent and ignores the rest. To claim the war is lost is blind ignorance and a distortion of reality.

The price of gas has no relation to the war.
Home foreclosures have no relation to the war.
Our credibility is fine with people that know the truth.
Our infrastructure is not crumbling.

It's truly sad that in the "information age" somebody can be as massively ignorant of facts and reality as you are. Grow up and educate yourself.

2007-05-09 15:16:41 · answer #10 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 9 8

fedest.com, questions and answers