Not to mention that Al Qaida has been reported to be stonger than ever since before 9/11. Sounds like Bush has been a grand failure in his job as Commander in Chief. What say you?
2007-07-16 08:47:05 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The main objectives for going to war have not been accomplished. Who could support such a failure/liar?
2007-07-16 08:59:59 · update #1
I totally agree, I support our troops but do not support the reason they are there. I think that is is totally absurd that Bush is sending BILLIONS of dollars over there to rebuild their country in Iraq. WHY DONT BUSH MAKE THEM PAY FOR THE WORLD TRADE CENTERS, THE PENTAGON, AND THE HUGE HOLE THAT WAS CREATED BY THE PLANE THAT OUR BRAVE CITIZENS TRIED TO TAKE BACK FROM THE TERRORISTS AND RESULTED IN THE PLANE MAKING A CRATER IN THE GROUND!!!! There are thousands if not millions of AMERICANS starving, sleeping in the streets with no money or shelter. WHY DOESN'T BUSH USE THE TAX DOLLARS FOR THEM INSTEAD OF IRAQ. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEY DON'T WANT OUR HELP OR THEY WOULD HELP TO PROTECT OUR SOLDIERS OVER THERE FIGHTING FOR THEIR FREEDOM. GOD BLESS ALL OF OUR TROOPS OVER THERE AND I PRAY THEY ALL COME HOME SOON. Our troops are being decapitated, slaughtered and blown up. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! The soldiers are there serving for our country to keep us free, but are dying for reasons that we are having a hard time understanding. WHERE IS THE WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRUCTION?!?!?!?!?!?!? If Bin Laden and the WMD's are so hard to find then there should be new people hired to catch them.
2007-07-16 08:56:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
not to mention the wasted lives from his futile effort to break up a pack of fighting dogs. there is plenty there to be dissatisfied about, tho'.
i think that he still has a huge support system in place. it would cost a lot of people money were he to be displaced before the end of his term. there would have to be a literal smoking gun.
i appreciate your thought. he is a failure as the cic, and many other facets of his life.
2007-07-16 16:01:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Getting rid of Bush won't accomplish anything. Look who is next in line the puppet master himself Cheney. Nothing would change!
2007-07-16 15:51:44 · answer #3 · answered by tender loving dyke 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
In other words, he's doing just as good a job as Clinton did.
2007-07-16 17:00:30 · answer #4 · answered by Eukodol 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So you want to fire someone because something is hard to find? Hard to find meaning you acknowledge the danger they both pose, but would rather put someone who is trying to stop them out of office?
Awesome train of thought.
2007-07-16 15:54:45 · answer #5 · answered by Gump023 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
"Is this a good enough reason to fire Bush & Co?"
Apparently not . ;D
2007-07-16 23:32:29 · answer #6 · answered by mikeinportc 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never voted for Bush to begin with. I voted, but not for our current president.
2007-07-16 15:51:02 · answer #7 · answered by Bear 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No.
Clinton lied to his wife and his country and we could only impeach him in the house.
No chance for impeaching Bush. Sorry.
2007-07-16 15:50:36 · answer #8 · answered by Hoptoad City 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I'd say so, I can't believe people still back this idiot!
2007-07-16 15:52:08 · answer #9 · answered by Rob S 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, I say fire those who do not support the war on terror.
2007-07-16 15:50:05 · answer #10 · answered by heThatDoesNotWantToBeNamed 5 · 3⤊ 5⤋