What if Petraeus is telling the truth?

Question

Could you liberals put your hatred aside and work with conservatives to finish the job?

Answer 1

God knows for sure.

But then again, even if Petraeus is telling the truth, the liberals aren't willing to compromise with the Conservatives on basically anything.

If nothing ever goes in accordance with the liberals plan, then they'll most likely not support it.

Answer 2

The word hatred doesn't apply. The proper word is frustration. Bush doesn't seem capable of bringing Iraq to secure closure. The stakes are high in Iraq. I don't think the situation can just tread water until someone else with international leadership skills can take over the White House.
Withdrawing from Iraq is not an option. If it were, the Democratically control congress would have already stopped funding the war. Leaving Iraq in a power void simply cannot be done. I fear that a secure closure will not be accomplished by this administration. This is an administration that couldn't properly run disaster relief within our own borders in New Orleans. How can we expect it to control a battlefield when war by its nature creates disaster.
Bush is in over his head. The solution to Iraq can't wait for 2009.

Answer 3

What you ask is moot. It's up to the voters to decide if the "job" is hateful and not if the liberals are hateful as you contend. I didn't hear General Petraeus give any predictions as to how long this "job" will last. Do you hate America and our troops so much that you would commit us to a war with no end in sight?

Answer 4

I guess I want to know what you mean by finish the job. Seems like every time a goal is met in Iraq, they set a new one just to stay there. And I have trouble believing a man who was hand-picked by this administration to tell anything but what the administration wants to hear. It's called job security.

Answer 5

I wouldn't count on it. The minute liberals start admitting that George Bush was right about something is the minute the demoncrat party, which has been so invested in defeat, is relegated to third-party status.

Iraq is one of the most important issues currently, for both sides. With Petraeus giving a positive report, it paints the dems, and the left in general, in a BAD light.

Answer 6

As soon as someone will define what "getting the job done" means, then yes, I'm all for cooperation.

The problem is, no-one will declare just exactly what the "goals" are, or commit to a minimum amount of time or resources to acheive them. Reminds me of the CCR song:

"And when you ask them, how much should we give?
Ooh, they only answer more! more! more! . . ."

Give us a list of acheivable goals, and an outline of how and when they might be accomplished, instead of meaningless sound-bite phrases like "victory" and "get the job done" and so on.

Answer 7

They think defeat means victory in the elections.

Answer 8

What hatred? "What if" is a big gamble. His truth doesn't change the facts. We should have never invaded/occupied that country. It was wrong then and wrong now. How do we exit without causing a bigger mess. How do we continue at the risk of bankrupting our country. And when and how can we get Bush and friends out of the way so this can be achieved.

Answer 9

Yes, but we will need a Democrat President to accomplish any semblance of victory.
Us history shows that the Dems are more capable of winning wars.
The Republicans have always been horrible at fighting to win.

Answer 10

The libs will ask for facts from what is happening on the ground :(.