http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070906/NATION/109060064/1001
2007-09-06 10:44:10 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
because they want bad news or no news... Good news must be a lie.. I think our troops are doing an awesome job, and I will be glad when they can start down sizing
2007-09-06 10:49:16 · answer #1 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
because they really didn't have an idea of who he was...
they seem to think they have some clue now...
but I don't think they were exactly "in his corner" when he took charge...
I think many saw him as one of the few that wasn't saying "stay the course" and actually had something that could have been proactive in Iraq... most notably "the surge"
the only problem is... his plan has gotten mixed reviews and mixed results... from everything I have seen... and now he seems to be saying the same old "stay the course" again... except it's his course...
2007-09-06 17:55:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
un·der·mine /ËÊndÉrËmaɪn or, esp. for 1, 2, 4, ËÊndÉrËmaɪn/ Pronunciation Key - [uhn-der-mahyn or, esp. for 1, 2, 4, uhn-der-mahyn] –verb (used with object), -mined, -min·ing.
1. to injure or destroy by insidious activity or imperceptible stages, sometimes tending toward a sudden dramatic effect.
2. to attack by indirect, secret, or underhand means; attempt to subvert by stealth.
3. to make an excavation under; dig or tunnel beneath, as a military stronghold.
4. to weaken or cause to collapse by removing underlying support, as by digging away or eroding the foundation.
So are you saying that liberals are weakening the military?
Damn, we're some powerful people.
2007-09-06 17:55:42 · answer #3 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Bush changed because they now know he went to Iraq the other day just to take Petraeus his speech that Bush had written for him. That all the surge is working even though we are losing the war and more bodies everyday.
2007-09-06 17:50:41 · answer #4 · answered by Nicki 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Let's see now....Comander guy goes quietly and suddenly to war zone and talks to subordinate general. Tells general what to say in report and expects people to believe the good general's report. Generals are soldiers trained to take orders and so maybe Durbin might be on to something. Maybe not, but one can be suspicious with the lies and secrecy of Bushco.
2007-09-06 17:53:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because before he took over, Petraeus didn't do anything to hurt the Democrats' cause.
Now, he's going to tell the world some of the good news coming out of Iraq.
2007-09-06 17:50:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Because when he took command it was appropriate to allow him time to do his job, now he's had time and we don't need HIS report there are enough credible sources of information to draw the conclusion that the surge HASN'T worked and it's time to let the Iraqi's sort out their own futures what's so hard to understand about that?
2007-09-06 17:52:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
What changed is the report will be good news and many democrats have stated that good news in Iraq is bad news for the democratic party.
So their solution is to make Patraeus look bad then they can pretend the good news is nothing but smoke screen.
2007-09-06 17:52:40 · answer #8 · answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Because it isn't Gen. Petraeus' report.
It is Bush's report, meaning that it won't be unbiased.
How many times are you going to ask the same question?
2007-09-06 17:49:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
"Betrayus" has quickly shown that he is another person who will bend the truth like the people he works for.
Being Liberals we welcomed his initial appointment because we believe in treating everyone as equals , with equal opportunities and chances. He has shown by his pronouncements that he too cannot be trusted.
2007-09-06 17:49:59 · answer #10 · answered by Dream Realized 2 · 6⤊ 1⤋