Hey conservatives, why are you still talking?

Question

Okay, before I commence my assail on conservative hypocrisy, let me just say that this is coming from an objectvie viewpoint, as I am a proud independent.

I'll begin with Dick Cheney. In spite of his enigmatic unconstitutionality, Dick Cheney wasn't always a bad guy. In a 1994 interview, Dick Cheney told a reporter that going into Iraq (after the Gulf War, of course) would be mistake. That pieces of the country would fall off among the secular conflict. Hmm, that doesn't sound too much like the Dick we know an love. Now tell me, why would he influence a trillion dollar operation that he even said was sure to fail. Is he a hypocrite or does his stubborness run so deep that he is morally content with sacrificing lives and the country's resources for a doomed operation. Conservatives, if there is any reasonable conunterargument to denounce my question, I will shut up and you will never hear from me again. So please, enlighten me. Mind you, this is just one example. I have many, many more

Answer 1

How can you possibly be MORE enlightened? You've got it all figured out. I'm not sure why you even asked the question.
Ah, but despite those astutely crafted words you so eloquently graced this forum with, you've nevertheless merely pointed out the obvious: Politicians are hypocrites. Wow, what a breakthrough there! However, your conclusion that hypocrisy is limited ONLY to the republican party is both ignorant and very, very naive.

Answer 2

On September 11 2001
we were hit my Islamic Fundamentalist....

We were also hit in 1993 WTC I, Tanzania, Kenya, Kobar towers, Yemen...but 911 was the straw that broke the camel's back.

On 911, a new era of thinking began. It changed everything.

Are next concern was countries who had WMDs...

Saddam Hussein constantly defied the UN, resolution after resolution. But the UN could not enforce its own laws. (Laws without enforcement is an invitation to chaos)

Our concern was that his WMD would get in the hands of the wrong people. That we would be attacked by proxy.

There was every indication that he still had WMDs. Democrats and Republicans BOTH believed in it. Bill Clinton too.

President Bush decided that Saddam could not be left unchallenged...due to the New World threat by Islamic Radicals.

911....changed everything.

Any 'reasonable' person could understand the events that led up to the War in Iraq. Its no a matter of conservatisim. Its a matter of reason. Remember, ...conservatives were not the only ones pressing for the war.

In world history....there has always been sacrifice and struggle. 60 Million deaths was an end result to stopping the Axis Powers in WWII. 500,000 to preserve our Union and to end slavery. About 25,000 to declare our independence.

You sound like an idealist.

So let me ask you....if you could go back in time and prevent the US from partaking in WWII, Civil War, and the American Revolution...in order to prevent Americans from losing their lives? Would you chance it?

Don't be so quick to judge the 'what if's' in history. It is too early to judge Iraq War aftermath.

Answer 3

You will always fail what you quit, but I guess that's what you need when your ideology is so vested in defeat that your entire worldview would be shattered if we succeeded .

People made the same "they'll never get along" arguments about the US under the articles of confederation. The average Iraqi has no interest in civil strife, it's the Iran, Syria, and al Qaeda-backed fighters that try to create a civil war. If we can secure the borders so they can't be supported, attack them every chance we get, and help the Iraqis defend their own nation, we will win.

Answer 4

Assuming that you crafted that question on your own, inasmuch as you seem to be advocating the execution of geopolitical policy based on conditions that are more than a decade old, I would say that you are a waste of a perfectly good vocabulary and an ersatz intellect or a liberal malcontent in an independent's corduroy suit getting his fad information from, of all places, youtube.
Your red is showing comrade.

Answer 5

I think he may disagree with Pres. Bush. But he is also aware of Thomas Jefferson's quote "united we stand, divided we fall". He know's that right or wrong, if we are divided we will fail. He also know's that the decision to go to war is ultimately that of the President. (Not the Vice President) He is standing behind the president because he actually has some honor, and actaully does want what is best for this country, despite his personal feelings regarding the war.

Answer 6

Much of your nonsensical posting is so extremely ludicrous! Of course, some of our fine young men and women were bound to die in this war; but, if goofy LIBERALS like yourself had their way... we would've ended up twiddling our thumbs and the insurgents, Al Queada and Taliban would have your silly self converted into the Muslim religion in short order!

Answer 7

What does Dick Cheney have to do with Conservatives? He believes in big government and is working toward a one world government under the UN. Perhaps you better clarify your terms.

Answer 8

the two plans have person mandates. The federal outcomes start up small, yet ultimately ramp as much as $695 in line with 365 days or 2.5 p.c. of earnings, whichever is larger. ultimately, federal outcomes can tend to be larger than the Massachusetts plan. Polls tutor the federal regulation has split public opinion. Polls in Massachusetts tutor this technique is severely extra accepted. it fairly is in many cases asserted that RomneyCare is the comparable factor as ObamaCare, yet that's merely not genuine. it fairly is mandatory notice that Massachusetts, the state the place Romneycare replaced into based, opposed Obamacare. in fact, Massachusetts opposed Obamacare plenty that they elected Senator Scott Brown (R) in 2010 to be the figuring out vote against Obamacare after Senator Ted Kennedy’s loss of existence. Why could the state the place Romneycare replaced into based be against Obamacare if the two rules have been fairly the comparable? the respond is, of direction, that they don't seem to be the comparable. mutually as there are similarities between the two rules, there are additionally key adjustments. below Obamacare larger taxes via $500 billion and taxes people who don’t purchase coverage -in spite of vast federal gov. debt, Obama nevertheless handed Obamacare -Cuts Medicare via $500 billion -ordinary expenses unknown! below Romneycare there have been no new taxes! -Romney balanced the state’s budget first, then handed healthcare regulation -No cuts to Medicare advantages -Modest fee to state (purely further a million% to state budget) The superb court docket ruled that federal government purely has the authority to enact this regulation via its means to “tax,” and would not meet the mandatory standards to be seen a “penalty.” -This tax breaks Obama’s promise that he does not boost taxes on the midsection type superb court docket chief Justice Roberts ruled state mandates are “outcomes” with the aid of fact states have diverse authority and powers than the fed. gov. -Mass. shape on no account seen this a tax Massachusetts created a answer to extra healthful the citizens of the state purely in assessment to the Obamacare plan with its' "one length suits all" application! those are purely some speaking factors...yet...i does not anticipate you to appreciate them!

Answer 9

well in 1994 cheney was NOT chairman of Halliburton.

Answer 10

Ever notice that the more and more unpopular Bush and Cheney become, the more and more Conservatives are saying that they are NOT Conservatives.

That is b.s.... they are the same people that the Conservatives voted for TWICE.... trying to distance themselves from them now is not going to work. People that voted for them twice are responsible for them being elected. period....................