2007-06-14 22:24:46 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
if "by today's definition, yes it is." - is true, then they would be rightly called "NEO-CONSERVATIVES."
2007-06-14 22:40:46 · update #1
i will not support the government if they are fuc|
2007-06-14
22:52:31 ·
update #2
It has nothing to do with conservative, liberal, or moderate. There are some from all three who support the war.
2007-06-14 22:27:32 · answer #1 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It seems you already have the answer to your question, just by the way it was asked.
There is nothing conservative or liberal about supporting the troops in a time a war. Don't like the war? I don't believe anybody likes war, buts this about more than Dem's beliveing there was no WMD's, or the belief in gov. conspiracies. We tried apeacement for 10 yrs, it didn't work. 17 resolutions later they were still shooting at American planes patroling "no fly zones" issued by the U.N.. Even the U.N. beilieved they were hiding WMD's (not to mention, Dem's too) , Sadam kicked out the inspectors and Clinton did nothing. Their are satelite images of U.N. inspectors walking into a building, while trucks drove away in the back. It was a cat and mouse game. I could go on, but if you can't support your country in a time of war, when will you? When its too late?
2007-06-15 05:43:19 · answer #2 · answered by Nacho 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'll give you the same answer I just gave someone else:
Nobody likes it that we are at war, but we simply can not let insurgent terrorists take over an oil rich region. What would be nice is if other nations would help us out. After all, they too are dependent on the free flow of oil.
Yes, it is about oil, in part, not war profiteers getting richer but the free world in need of it. Also, the fact remains that if we leave now, millions of innocent people risk being slaughtered by these thugs.
2007-06-15 06:23:32 · answer #3 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
By today's definition of Conservative yes it is.
But a traditional conservative usually does not agree with police action, it brings to much power and money to the Government.
2007-06-15 05:37:02 · answer #4 · answered by Rek T 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, thats neconservtaive philosphy or extrem right wing. they dont support jsut any war it has to be beniicial. but you fail to realize that conservatives are needed. to understant what a conservative is you have to look at republicans pst tdr and pre reagan. Nixon being a great example who leesened the war in vietnam but also used sady tricks such as invading camboida
2007-06-15 06:12:18 · answer #5 · answered by sjdesai1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The benefits greatly outweigh the costs
2007-06-15 06:18:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well,seeing as how the democrats were the ones to get america into world war 2, korea, and vietnam.... and seeing as how g.w. bush is a republican, and CERTAINLY NOT a conservative... the liberal / socialist / communist / one world government people are certainly proficient at waging warfare, to the betterment of their and their military-industrial complex friends bank accounts.
2007-06-15 05:41:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, and it isn't rational as well. I miss the old conservatives, they at least were slightly short of stark raving mad.
2007-06-15 05:34:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What price can you put on freedom?
2007-06-16 16:28:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It's American:
"The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission. " - John F. Kennedy
You prefer surrender don't you (which will lead to submission)?
2007-06-15 05:53:11 · answer #10 · answered by last_errant_knight 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋