repeating the same warning to and about IRAN, it is because this time Mr. Bush needs better "ammunition" than the ones he used against Iraq (I'm saying ammunition figuratively of course), and that he cannot risk it by having a WOMAN (Condoleeza Rice), do this. She is really the person most appropriate for this, for she is, just like Colin Powell was, the Secretary of State?
I know his political career seemed to have been completely destroyed after it was all discovered to be untrue_the weapons of mass destruction, I mean_and for which he had been the constant voice of impending doom.
So Mr. Bush doesn't think she can do a better job then Gates, or is he just trying to save her from the same fate Powell suffered?
2007-12-08 07:08:18 · 4 answers · asked by news-n-more-news 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Gates has a history with regards to Iran. Think Iran/contra. Also he goes back to the time of Watergate.
2007-12-08 07:13:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Secretary of State was never the appropriate person to be making a case for war, the Secretary of Defense is. Sec. Powell should have never been asked to do what he did.
2007-12-08 15:13:09 · answer #2 · answered by Hubris252 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It seems this country has more than one Sec of State. We have: Nancy Pelosy, John Kerry and Nelson too! Is it any wonder that Gates would choose to speak out of turn? As for WMD, perhaps had Bill Clinton and the UN been a little more forthright and supportive of the first Weapons Inspector (who resigned in disgust over the lack of support) or if Jimmy Carter had not gutted the CIA way back before you were born, we wouldn't have had to rely on second hand intel. passed on by the Germans.
2007-12-08 15:15:48 · answer #3 · answered by Doc 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
the answer to your question/rant is hes the one repeating the warning but for a good reason and definitely NOT the one you gave. same old liberal pap..over and over...dont you guys EVER give it a rest. read the Richard Butler report...thaaaats right...actually READ IT....the wmds were there, the war wasnt about oil, there are no impeachable crimes...yes youve heard it all before...TRY LISTENING TO IT.
i am offended. the warning is for a reason...ITS CORRECT. The warning is because the last report you seem to want to whine about is stating iran had clear intentions of a bomb and has left the door open. bush is trying to do his job...it would be better if you and the other liberal extremists sat down and let him finish it properly.
2007-12-08 15:23:47 · answer #4 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋