English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Nixon once said that he had a secret plan of getting out of Vietnam: Spend 4 more years until he left office.

Is this the same as Bush's plan? Wait 15 months and then declare "Mission Accomplished!"?

Because we all know that both the GOP and Bush have no intention of letting the Democrats get out like they want to.

Does the term 'obstructionist' ring a bell with anyone here?

It's the same tactic the GOP accused the then minority Democrats of doing for the last six years.

How ironic.

2007-09-11 17:50:41 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Government

7 answers

Absolutely on the mark...you nailed it! Wasn't going to answer, but the other answers need to be addressed. We are not defeatists, cowards or traitors and I am sick to death of the right-wing religious right calling their fellow Americans those rotten names. We are just as patriotic as they are, but we are realists....we do not think Bush has done a credible job...or even a passable one...starting this war was WRONG, and he knows it. We are sick of sacrificing our young people for his egotistical effort to "save face". General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker made it very clear that the war is going badly...everybody knows it! In my mind, it's extremely unpatriotic to blindly follow a bad leader and allow our troops to be facing such horrid danger.

2007-09-11 18:50:51 · answer #1 · answered by ArRo 6 · 3 2

Nixon? Make sure that I understand your question did Nixon bring us out of Viet Nam ? Yes, but could have this happened on another's watch? Yes, do you recall the Tet Offensive (1968 Johnson administration) General Westmoreland was about to finish the war in Viet Nam and Pres. Johnson rained him back. That happened to be a democrat's war Kennedy/ Johnson.

Let's talk more recently Do you recall that Clinton went into Yugoslavia. With out a mandate or being asked in he just took this upon his self and announced to the American people that he has done this because it was the right thing to do, but what he didn 't do was to insure a mandate that had been set in 1992 with the peace accord in Iraq. Iraq had hundreds of violations to the accord but had 17 major violations, Mr. Clinton didn't do his job.

to imply that Mr. Bush lied to we the American people ( similar to Mr. Clinton) is a little bit disingenuous. You are referring to his saying what the intel sorces had reported to him. surely you are not so narrow minded that you believe that the only source for out intel is from our own sources only. We receive intel from all of our allies. It was a well known fact that Iraq had a terrorist training facility in the 1980s. (if you search deep enough you can still find this on line.)

I don't like Mr. Bush, but it has nothing to do with Iraq. He is on target. I know that the news media here in this country isn't going to report all of what is going on in Iraq. I would make the suggestion that you look at news blogs that are based outside of the United States you will find that there is a lot that we just simply are not told by our own news agencies. suggestion Turkey, Germany, France, India, Pakistan, etc.
Further more Nancy Pelosi has enough folks to bring our troops home with their tails between their legs, maybe all that is seen isn't the way that it really is. Remember that Presidents do no allocate funds, only the congress does.

Note; Remember that if you have two dogs and they are laying side by side they both have fleas

2007-09-12 05:14:16 · answer #2 · answered by ffperki 6 · 2 2

I know you don't want to hear this answer because it gives credit to our troops and country... YES the "mission was accomplished" We took out an evil dictator in record time with extremely minimal loss of life.

Do you not understand we are no longer fighting Iraq? We won that war. We are now trying to establish the peace. This is proving to be a little more difficult as militia from other countries are pouring in across the borders to fight. Oh... and they also are cowards that don't wear uniforms and follow no rules of war. So this one is a bit different. I see your side just producing idea after idea.... "run away" is such a good one. Good thing we didn't implement the lib strategy in WWII huh?

Please show me what the perfect blue print for a war like this is? Any examples of any fighting a war like this? I'll give you time.

2007-09-12 01:05:20 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. Perfect 5 · 3 3

Actually, no, the conservatives realize that it's going to be about 20 years in Iraq before the place is calm (As in any occupied country) . Conservatives in politics are not that tricky.

2007-09-12 02:38:14 · answer #4 · answered by TheUber1337 2 · 2 0

You say "obstructionist." I say "victory."

Utterly amazes me how the left in this country salivates at the thought of a national defeat.

Fortunately, enough people in this country are willing to fight terrorists to make up for your defeatist, cowardly beliefs.

2007-09-12 01:26:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Not really it's Cheney's plan, Bush is just the retard he uses as a puppet

2007-09-12 02:20:54 · answer #6 · answered by Clayton B 3 · 3 2

Bush is not smart enough.

2007-09-12 01:00:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers