Is he blaming the American public for wanting to pull out of an intractable war--which he says could've been won--if we have had only stayed until at least through 1985?
Because I get the sense that if we pull out now, the GOP and their supporters will not only be blaming Democrats for leaving, but everyone else who was against this war from the get-go.
Is this a fair use of government strategy, or are we just looking at another attempt by this failed administration to shift blame onto someone else for their failed little oil 'enterprise'?
2007-08-26 22:30:59 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The problem with Vietnam and Iraq is that the politicians made both wars a political foot ball. They used and are using both wars as a way to advance their own political ambitions. Even the leaders in Vietnam admit that they were ready to give up but when they saw how the politicians and the people had lost interest in winning the war they decided to continue the fight . The military didn't lose the war the politicians did and the same thing can happen in Iraq.
2007-08-27 01:40:40 · answer #1 · answered by hdean45 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
or are we just looking at another attempt by this failed administration to shift blame onto someone else for their failed little oil 'enterprise'?
Yes.In the Bush administration "the negation of truth is so systematic. Dishonest accounting, willful scientific illiteracy, bowdlerized federal fact sheets, payola paid to putative journalists, 'news' networks run by right-wing apparatchiks, think tanks devoted to propaganda rather than thought, the purging of intelligence gatherers and experts throughout the bureaucracy whose findings might refute the party line -- this is the machinery of mendacity...The point here is not the hypocrisy involved, though that is egregious. The point is the downgrading of truth and honesty from principles with universal meaning to partisan weapons to be sheathed or drawn as necessary. No wonder the Bush administration feels no compunction to honor the truth or seek it; it conceives truth as a tactic, valuable only insofar as it is useful against one's enemies
2007-08-27 07:28:03 · answer #2 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You either support the use of violence or don't, no flip flopping. Vietnam was a misunderstanding, due to arrogance and the failings of racist right wing fundamentalists. Do the research, America didn't pull out of Vietnam they were pushed out, much the same as the french before them who were only trying to reclaim a former occupied territory. I also believe that if the middle east get their act together the same thing will happen. Leaving America to lie about their defeat. Just like Vietnam.
2007-08-27 05:57:57 · answer #3 · answered by jmilwacker 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Pres Bush is blaming the democrats for everything that he thinks has been bad in the past. Notice, he never says anything bad about anything the republicans have done or proposed.
Even now, when some republicans are saying that the troops should be pulled back from Iraq, Pres Bush only complains about the democrats that say the same thing.
2007-08-27 05:38:26 · answer #4 · answered by khorat k 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Bush should have fought in that Vietnam war maybe he wouldn't have jumped and lied to get into another, oh but wait it was sooo profitable for him and his buddies though! How does anyone determine who wins in a war? Body counts? Here's one for you idiots no one wins in war except the corrupt bastards that start and profit from them. And this war is and always will be blamed on Bush and Chenay,and the Halliburton group of bubbas because it's the truth and it hurts!
2007-08-27 05:57:09 · answer #5 · answered by sally sue 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We are looking at another attempt to shift blame for this fiasco. That's the answer.
To all the people who said this question didn't have an answer, you either need to learn to read again or open your blinders. I guess this question "had no real answer" because it wasn't the answer you'd want to admit to, I guess. So why answer it with a non-answer in the first place? Morons...
2007-08-27 06:53:06 · answer #6 · answered by DethNcarnate 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Failed little oil Enterprise ??? With that statement alone your credibility is lost. As far as the rest of your little story could you fit any more spin in it ? You and your Liberal friends better get it in your heads that we are fighting Terrorist ! If we stop fighting the Terrorist they will not stop and will gladly fight on American soil. Is that what you want? This is not a scare tactic it is a hard fact based on the last 2 Democrat presidents who got the USA into this mess in the first place and now that America is facing it's biggest threat ever you want to slip in a Democrat President .In there debates they wont even talk about Terrorism but Global Warming is there first concern (Gore scam) .This is not a lack of intelligence it is nonexistent intelligence!
2007-08-27 06:03:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
if everybody was against this war from They get go then how was it voted into a war by congress (even dems voted for war)
2007-08-27 09:07:30 · answer #8 · answered by crazy_devil_dan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, if dems get their hands on this and screw it up the way they say they want to, Bush will likely see them as accountable for their actions. But then again, he won't be president by then so who will care what he thinks. Dems wanna run the war, and will have to answer for the decisions they make.
2007-08-27 05:46:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Good thing he does what he wants and doesn't have to listen to the public. By the way , there were very few people against this war from the "get go," even the democrates supported the war at first, I guess that's why they are called "flip floppers"
2007-08-27 05:41:19 · answer #10 · answered by Rocman 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋