they don't care if it hurts the country?
I despise Bush, but as I read about his upcoming Israeli/Palestinian peace talks I couldn't help the genuine optimism that he might SOMEHOW be able to pull off what no other President has been able to.
And I'm sure I'm not the only screechy, irrational Bush hater that feels the same way...in fact I can almost gurantee you that all but the filthiest of hippies feel this way.
Bush has screwed up so badly, I don't think anyone is worried that he will be "vindicated" anymore. Even if Iraq turns out ok at some point in the future, so what? Anyone who gets their facts from textbooks and experts and not Fox News or Rush Limbaugh knows that Saddam and al Qaeda hated each other and were never going to join forces, so if things go back to normal then what did we gain? We will have lost 4,000+ troops, 500,000+ Iraqis, spent 1.5+ trillion dollars, just to remove one of many murderous dictators from around the world.
So just stop it ok!!
2007-11-24 02:23:32 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
For those wondering where the question is, I refer you to the first sentence, the one that ends with a question mark
FOA:
"Babykillers?!"
Exactly who, might I ask, have you heard blaming the troops themselves for anything other than a couple of specific incidents?
2007-11-24 04:59:52 · update #1
LILLIAN:
I'm glad you know what Democrats are REALLY thinking despite their words and actions, you seem to have very special psychic abilities!
2007-11-24 05:01:56 · update #2
Bush has failed for 7 years. I'm hoping he will soon stop, not keep going.
2007-11-24 02:37:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
we'll stop saying it as you stop doing it. surely you can see how your hopefulness regarding the peace talks was in spite of your natural inclination to want bush to fail. as you put it, you "couldnt help" but be optimistic.
it dosent bother me that you only support america now because you see the president as beyond vindication, as long as you do.
as for your second question, what we (and all countries) have gained is the knowledge that if we are invaded (like kuawit) the world will rally to expel the invader and when that invader surrenders, at least a few countries will hold them to it if they violate those terms... or security.
2007-11-24 15:09:11 · answer #2 · answered by karl k 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The same should go to the republicans that want to blame the dems for clintons sexual acts... So yes Bush is a republican and has made huge mistakes and needs to be out of the white house, and yes Clinton is a Democrat and did have sex while in office.. Lets go on to more important things like trying to fix the mistakes by electing someone who brings America back.
2007-11-24 11:10:03 · answer #3 · answered by Ditka 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
How many times should a country draw a line in the sand before they actually do what they say they will? How many times did Saddam tell the weapons inspectors that they couldn't do their jobs? Everyone seems to forget that the agreement to end the first war with Iraq was that they would allow weapons inspections. They didn't, so Bush did what he said he would and bombed the heck out of them. I don't understand what was wrong with standing up for ourselves rather then being made to look like wimpy fools who get walked all over by a mass murderer like Saddam Hussein.
2007-11-24 10:38:05 · answer #4 · answered by DJ 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Here is what cons utterly fail to understand.
We true blue democrats don't hate the man Bush. I don't necessarily think that Bush pulls the wings off of bugs and dissects small animal for entertainment.
Rather, what most of us absolutely loathe is what Bush has done to this country. Let's take just one example. To it's eternal shame, America under Bush tortures other human beings - despite the semantic games played by this administration saying that we don't. You know we do, and I know we do, and they know we do, too.
I have never wanted Bush to fail at anything. My fondest dream is to wake up one fine morning and find that Bush has miraculously overcome his well documented screw-up self and made this country and world a better place to live in. Bush has the power and means, if he wanted to do so.
But, it just hasn't happened. And that is what everyone but the hardest of hardcore cons hates about Bush.
2007-11-24 11:07:24 · answer #5 · answered by Uhlan 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I don't think anyone wanted Bush to fail, so to speak. For myself I was against him from the start because I thought he would be a poor president and I was against him on many different levels. For all those reasons his term in office has proven me right. At the very least I had hoped his presidency would be uneventful, at the very worst ineffective, but then 9/11 happened and he became a dangerous president.
2007-11-24 10:31:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
The Iraq war wasn't about Al Qaeda... that's the Liberal irrationale.
Certainly not ALL Bush haters would sacrifice the nation to make sure Bush comes out smelling like dung... there are also simply naive Bush haters
2007-11-24 10:31:49 · answer #7 · answered by gcbtrading 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
You are showing what Greenspan called "irrational exuberance" if you think that the Israelis and Palestinians are on the verge of peace. Don't hold your breath 'til it happens.
2007-11-24 10:27:19 · answer #8 · answered by Yahoo Will Never Silence Me 6 · 10⤊ 0⤋
Bush and his administration has failed the truth is the truth and history will tell it.I dont blame only Bush he had lots of help .The thing that amazes me is those who think he is perfect [ the ones who voted him in] still believe all the lies and deception.
2007-11-24 10:45:07 · answer #9 · answered by wanna know 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Good point. I don't hate Bush, I never have. Hell, I'd go have a beer with the guy... I just think he's the wrong person for the job and he's made too many mistakes. How is that unamerican?
2007-11-24 10:27:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋