perhaps they know more than americas top solder does,,what you think?
2007-09-12 13:36:05 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That so called "top soldier" is the man responsible for losing track of over 100,000 weapons that are now in the hands of our enemy. A 10th grade student could have made a simple spread sheet that would have tracked the serial numbers of what weapons went to what Iraqi military unit and police force.
His plan is to simply wait until next spring or summer than rescind the surge. It does nothing to scale back the troops on a large scale.
2007-09-12 13:41:23 · answer #1 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I believe their collective agenda is to keep the drums rolling about the war, because they believe the American voters are still listening to their rhetoric. Actually, these poor souls have nothing else to talk about, that is of any substance ! Well there's always gay Republican Congressman, or illegal immigration, but they don't seem to get a lot of miles out of these two subjects. And, if they piss off the Mexicans too much, they'll lose that voting block, too !
General Petraeous should shed his uniform and throw his hat into the ring, along with the gaggle of deadbeats that are already there. This man would kick some serious butt if he were a candidate, and the country would quickly see just how many free thinking Americans there really is out there.
Americans want security for the country, their families, and their future. Bringing the troops home is not going to let that happen. The war against the Jihad is real, Iran is real and it's evil. The fanatical Muslims really want to harm western Europe and the US, and any country that doesn't switch to Islam.
I wonder if the Muslims welcome Jews to convert to Islam? I have heard that Jews are not allowed to convert to Islam. This must be one that Ahmadinejad thought up. This guy just changes the rules as he sees fit.
2007-09-12 13:57:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Democrats feel, for some reason, that in order to have a chance in the next election they must force the US to fail in Iraq. If they can discredit probably the most knowledgable person in the world concerning the conditions in Iraq, they might continue with the insane notion of pulling our troops out before the time is right and therefore, leave a weak Iraq and then convince people that they were right all along. Isn't it funny how someone who is intent on seeing America fail and sits in a cushy air-conditioned office thinks they know more than a four-star general does who is actually over there?
2007-09-12 14:04:35 · answer #3 · answered by Wookie 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They keep changing their tune, they say the Pres. does, and they have a point, but every time something good happens in Iraq something else is then needed or else it's a failure.
Iraq was failure because we didn't capture Saddam.
Iraq was a failure because we hadn't caught Zarqawi.
Iraq was a failure because we hadn't held elections.
Iraq was a failure because there was not enough security.
Iraq was a failure because there's no political infrastructure.
Iraq was a failure because the sky is blue and the sun is yellow.
Obviously, the Dems are either military geniuses, or just experts on labeling things failures.
2007-09-12 13:42:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Before, we are silent. After, we pan him.
Before the elections, electoral college is fine. When we lose the election, electoral college is bad.
Not all of us (Democrats) feel that way or behave so unethically. Some of us didn't abandon our party because "our party abandoned us," a cheap excuse for leaving the party to the seditious and the socialists.
The general didn't deserve such treatment.
2007-09-12 13:47:34 · answer #5 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because Democrats Must Oppose America.
The Democrat Party, the Insurgents, and the Terrorists, are All working together to Defeat the USA.
It is all about Money & Power.
2007-09-12 13:40:31 · answer #6 · answered by wolf 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Because the purpose of the surge did not work, now did it?
What political progress has been made over there? Other than the vacation they took?
This is what soldiers are asking. Or are we not willing to listen to them?
2007-09-12 13:49:11 · answer #7 · answered by angelpuppyeyes 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
When the democrats don't like the message, they attack the messenger.
The General has forgotten more about the military than the democrats will ever know.
2007-09-12 13:42:53 · answer #8 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Simple. Bush replaced twenty or so others to find one that spoke his language of stay the course.
2007-09-12 13:40:47 · answer #9 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Because there is more to the story than what the general testified to. If you're not to lazy to research it.
2007-09-12 13:43:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋