...moms and dads?
Will Libs then be in caves writing books telling us how wonderful Hillary was?
2007-11-03 05:41:36 · 14 answers · asked by Duminos 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
God forbid Shrillary gets elected...otherwise some raghead terrorist nation WELL build a nuke and turn it on us, or Isreal.
2007-11-03 05:46:56 · answer #1 · answered by commanderbuck383 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
first off Nuclear weapons are very expensive to research,build and stockpile. When you build a nuclear weapon it does not just sit there you have to make sure that it will work properly when the time comes that means a test underground or above(last above ground test was by china in the late 60's) then most nations that are being accused of having nuclear weapons cant afford the military they have less develop a real nuclear weapons program. Think about it in these terms. If Japan a nation with the large funds would find this a heavy burden then a nation like Iran most likely would be hurt more by their own waste of funds than any military attack could. If anything it will be a bio weapon. Takes longer to detect IE the anthrax attack in DC and harder to track down. As for Hillary being responsible why is it that nobody makes the point that the Reagan and bush admin supported anybody fighting the Russians including Osama? Its always the sins of the father not the children so don't put Hillary into the mix after all she is one of many people who allow our gov leeway to make choices that any simp would see as bad for our nation
2007-11-03 13:10:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Even as an avid non-supporter of Hillary Clinton I have to marvel at the stupidity of your question. What? Hillary is not even a liberal and she is definitely a hawk. Why else would Bill Kristol all but endorse her for president, claiming that US foreign policy would not change at all in her administration. Way to crank up the exaggerated new cold war hysteria to serve the needs of the military-industrial complex.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103103095.html?hpid=topnews
2007-11-03 12:52:23 · answer #3 · answered by haywood jablome 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I personally think that Hilary becoming President would be just what this Country needs.
Women think with thier heads and think more of what could happen in the future if the decision is wrong.
Bush has a power struggle going on and thinks more about his oil companies going under. He's not in it to win it.
How long has it been since we heard about Osama Bin Laden?
2007-11-03 12:49:06 · answer #4 · answered by Venus H 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No nukes will be built due to a Democratic presidency. In fact most of the other nations that have built nuclear weapons did it during Republican administrations.
2007-11-03 12:46:06 · answer #5 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The last 20 of 28 years have been Replicans letting countries create nukes so I guess it doesn't matter who is in power.
2007-11-03 12:45:11 · answer #6 · answered by Edge Caliber 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I don't think it matters what political group is in office. Eventually somebody is going to nuke the US.
2007-11-03 12:46:06 · answer #7 · answered by Shubunkin 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another is America, get a grip!
2007-11-03 12:45:02 · answer #8 · answered by Neil G 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
And the world has been so safe under King George's watch.
2007-11-03 12:44:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Are you sure that Karl Rove wrote this?
He didn't seem that utterly stupid to me. I just found him intellectually average and very dangerous.
2007-11-03 12:49:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋