And putting our troops in danger for no clear purpose?
2007-07-09 11:32:16 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nearly 80% of Americans would ask the same question. I think Mr. Bush has some kind of ax to grind on behalf of his father. However, since he has made so many other blunders, I'm not so sure of that.
I'm wondering if there is a magic number of casualties that he might think is unacceptable; 10,000 or 20,000 or even more. He apparently doesn't care about securing our borders or ports either, so I guess he's just trying to drive the country into bankruptcy and allowing Mexico to become part of the U.S. and pushing for Canada to do the same.
Why would he commute a sentence for someone (Libby) who was convicted of a white collar crime (before the appeal process), while at the same time, allow our two border agents to sit in jail (during the appeal process) and allow a drug smuggler to go free?
There is clearly no military solution in Iraq, but there might be if we had allies with as many troops as we did there. No other country has triple digit troops in Iraq because they know it is futile to change the minds of 25 million people in a country where they all just can't get along.
I hate to say it, but let them (Iraq) fight it out until there is no one else to fight. Bush has made the U.S. government the laughing stock of the world. However, most of the world knows the people of the U.S. do not support the decisions of this administration. Only a change in that administration will change the direction of what is going on both within and outside our fine country.
2007-07-09 11:46:24 · answer #1 · answered by Boomer 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Government contractors are making very good money in Iraq, and for every Billion we spend on the war Cheney gets another Million in his offshore bank account.
2007-07-09 18:35:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Because he has no diplomatic skills. His only answer is continued military action until he wins. This will be permanent since there is no military solution.
2007-07-09 18:36:32 · answer #3 · answered by redphish 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
because its as much of a military conflict as it is a political conflict. there can be no political progress if the federal government has bombs exploding outside of the building.
2007-07-09 18:36:28 · answer #4 · answered by Razgriz01 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
You can't solve things politically if there isn't enough security.
2007-07-09 18:37:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it would mean that GW Bush would have to think, you serious?
2007-07-09 18:35:27 · answer #6 · answered by niddlie diddle 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋