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

I say I want some magical beans that can transport me to an enchanted land. Which one is more possible?

2007-12-14 18:37:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

11 answers

yours. unilateral surrender, that the democrats trumpet, only emboldens the enemy and leaves our soldiers dangling. the same thing was tried in viet nam with the same predictable results. yours is the more plausible plan.

2007-12-14 20:53:40 · answer #1 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1 0

'Divide and Rule' was the colonial policy of the British; and America is not lagging far behind. The splintering of erstwhile USSR, Yugoslavia and now balkanization of Iraq into Shiite, Sunni and Kurd regions. With such policies continued , none can ever bring back a stable Iraq that was existing before the Great Invasion.The three regions will for ever be having conflicts like in the Indian sub continent, middle East, Korea etc, a British legacy.

Only enlightened American public can save the world from more such splintering. May that Day come sooner than later !!

2007-12-15 03:08:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

If the magical beans give you gas maybe you can power a car on methane & reach the enchanted land.

2007-12-15 02:44:53 · answer #3 · answered by Digital One 7 · 1 0

Defeatist whines, while the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines win the fight. Now the Dems are forgetting about Iraq since thier defeatist predictions held no water. Remember when they said no one would show up to the polls in Iraq? Iraq now has more voter turn-out than the US.

2007-12-15 04:08:35 · answer #4 · answered by Richard M 3 · 0 0

They are trying to appeal the most possible number of people. I vote for your magical beans.

2007-12-15 02:45:31 · answer #5 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 2 0

Your question doesn't make any sense. The idea that we're going to turn Iraq into a stable democracy at all even if we stay there for 20 years is a fantasy itself. The Democrats might be technically correct, Iraq could be reasonably stable, until at least 10 minutes after we've left. But it's going to fall apart one way or another, just depends how long you want to drag it out, the Dems want to hurry up and get it over with.

2007-12-15 02:43:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 5

Iraq is not going to be stable in my life time because of two reasons

1. USA has done to much damage in there then good.
2. shites have 50% of they population so they will be in power making what the want go, sunni will not agree atacking they shites, violence everywhere. Iraq was a dead end

2007-12-15 02:58:11 · answer #7 · answered by liverpool fan MAN U SUCKS 6 · 0 2

The enchanted land awaits you.

2007-12-15 04:00:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

do we want to bash the dems, or accept the actions take by a pres who has a total disregard for the democratic process? ask your self is congress and the senate obsolete? are we still living by words handed down to us by greatness. or shall we parish from this earth. if you can belief in an illegal war then so be it. wait i mean so let it be bush so let it done . your a moron

2007-12-15 02:53:13 · answer #9 · answered by rainierboy 2 · 0 1

It's impossible for them to stablize Iraq becoz everyone's money is invested for destablizing it.Better call it "Dance Of Cannibals"

2007-12-15 06:45:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers