what members of bush's cabinet were opposed to war with iraq?
361712
I don't think any were.  That's what the military is for.
570800
Acting on "Bad Intellegence" bush has, with his war, killed countless thousands. Clinton had consentual sex with an of-age woman, then lied about it when he got caught. Obviously, Clinton is the anti-christ.
520333
I can find very little evidence that Republicans officially opposed Operation Desert Fox. Republicans normally support appropriate military action against American enemies. For example, Paul Wolfowitz supported military action against Iraq in 1998. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Democrats.\n\nI suspect that the Republicans who opposed saw it as a typically half-cocked attempt by Bill Clinton to give the appearance of toughness as a distraction from his impeachment. It had little impact on Iraq or Al-Queda other  than to convince them of our lack of will. It is just one example of how his weakness and foreign policy ineptitude sowed the seeds for September 11.\n\nIt is also evidence that the Clinton Adminstration believed that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons and was working with Al-Queda. These views were shared by the Bush administration when it came to office.
1121515
I am totally against the war, however, people who join our military go in knowing that even if it's not necessarily a war they would back, they have comitted to doing their job.  I might also say that no matter what war or why - they have my absolute respect for being a part of a bigger picture that may cause them great harm or even death.  I salute all of them.  Bush, however, can kiss my flabbly butt.
1001441
I support the troops in the fact that they are doing a job that they are ordered to do and they are risking their lives to do that job. I put fire fighters, policemen, etc. in the same category. I support them as well.\n\nI do not support the war in Iraq or the Bush administration. I think this war began on lies and deception. I think too many human lives have been lost, both American and Iraqi.\n\nIt's time to bring our men and women home, before any more lives are needlessly lost.
261625
Nearly four out of five Americans, including 70 percent of Republicans, believe civil war will break out in Iraq the bloody hot spot upon which Bush has staked his presidency. Nearly 70 percent of people say the U.S. is on the wrong track, a 6-point jump since February. \n"I'm not happy with how things are going," said Margaret Campanelli, a retiree in Norwich, Conn., who said she tends to vote Republican. "I'm particularly not happy with Iraq, not happy with how things worked with Hurricane Katrina." \nRepublican Party leaders said the survey explains why GOP lawmakers are rushing to distance themselves from Bush on a range of issues — port security, immigration, spending, warrantless eavesdropping and trade, for example.\nThe positioning is most intense among Republicans facing election in November and those considering 2008 presidential campaigns.
814370
They just don't like what President Bush is doing right now with the War on Iraq,   They know that everything is going great with the economy, and that just drives them crazy.  Liberals seem to think more than act.
778632
I think the US generals disliked him a lot. He ignored everything that was reported about Iraq, and politically didn't act properly. He was an arrogant leader. Many liberals and democrats have called for his resignation. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the man. After all, he did supply Saddam with all those weird weapons.
467300
TEAM B\n\nTo answer the question you have to understand who is in the administration now and what THEIR ideologies are. Rumsfeld and Cheney formed the so-called "Team B" during the 1970's which had access to CIA information and made its own independent recommendations for foreing policy. Paul Wolfowitz was also part of this group, and later became one of the primary planners for the Iraq invasion. At the time the group was formed, the director of the CIA, William Colby, opposed the concept of Team B, and was fired. G. W. Bush's father supported Team B and succeeded Colby as CIA Director. This group was notorious for making erroneous estimates of Soviet strategy predictions, but was able to at least "get away with" certain objectives during the Iran-Contra scandal in the eighties.\n\nIn the early nineties, this group pushed hard for an economic stronghold in the middle east, primarily to maintain security in the region so that contracts for oil and natural gas -- key constituents of our economy -- could continue to be developed. Israel's security was also a key factor, and members of this group are one in the same with the Israeli lobbying group AIPAC and the American Enterprise Institute. Prior to the Iraq war, Cheney set up an independent group called the office of special plans, picking Ahmed Chalabi, who the CIA had deemed corrupt and unreliable, as a key intel source for Hussein's WMD program. Immediately following 9-11, Cheney asked how we could pin the event on Saddam. \n\nSimply stated, there is a group in Washington who is in almost complete control over US foreign policy; the group's objectives are to maintain economic strength in the middle east through ensuring those nations have leaderships who will work with us on development projects. This may mean regime change, invasions, organized coups, or even diplomacy in some circumstances.\n\nThis may not appear to explain foreign policy completely, since relations with other nations is not mentioned. However, keep in mind that 95% of the current administration's foreign policy relates to the above-described securing of resource-supplying nations, therefore deals mainly with the middle east. Similar mechanisms are in place in parts of South America, but the US has much more established control there.\n\nFor more information, there a few wonderful and very easy to read books on the subject. The books are small and do not get mired in minutia. Surprisingly, one the most insightful is Idiot's Guide to Iraq, which explains not only the background behind the war but why we are involved in the middle east so much to begin with.
274031
George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condi Rice
876202
Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge.  They just let problems snowball and ignored them.  They were NOT wise.\n\nLincoln and FDR presided over the greatest wars our country has ever seen (so far).  Were they UNwise?\n\nHistory willl evaluate whether there is a parallel between those listed above, on the one hand, and Clinton and Bush 43 on the other.
44214
You have to remember that a large minority (I'd guess 35-45%) were against the war from the very beginning, an equal percentage will believe and follow our president regardless of what he says or does. The people in the middle were basically fooled by varying lies, like Saddam and Bin Laden were helping one another, Iraq was behind 9/11, Saddam and the WMD's, and so they also went along with the war.\n\nIn the end it doesn't matter what the American people wanted, I can't think of an example where a President asked Congress to declare war and they didn't. \n\nAs far as our troops coming home, speaking for myself of course, as someone who was against the War from the beginning, I don't want to just pull out and leave the Iraqi people to fend for themselves. What I do want is a plan for pulling out, a plan for Iraqi self-government, and some kind of realistic timetable. None of these has been provided by our government, and I doubt will anytime soon.
1075448
1. George W. Bush.  He is evil, despicable and incompetent, has forsworn his oath of office by declaring that the law does not apply to him, and is a war criminal along with Dick Cheney for starting the Iraq war under false pretenses.\n\n2. Karl Rove.  He is why Bush is in office.  He is a war criminal because he helped launch the Iraq war to get Bush re-elected.\n\n3. Alberto Gonzales.  He is helping Bush, Cheney and the Republican Party transform the United States into a totalitarian, plutocratic oligarchy.  He is also a war criminal thanks to his memo concerning the Geneva Convention.\n\nThey are the enemy.  So is anyone who supports them.  These are evil people who must be stopped now.  Luckily the Constitution and laws are still in effect and can be used against them, as Tom DeLay found out.\n\nMay God bless America by destroying terrorists and all other conservatives.\n\n[I also agree that Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy is hateful.]
856630
The nation said no to leaders who defy moral and ethical values with a culture of corruption. Leaders who get indicted for taking bribes from lobbyists like Jack Abamoff and leaders who have to resign for sending inappropriate e-mails to young boys were rejected. Chickenhawk GOP leaders are the ones who've turned their backs on those who fight and give their lives for freedom. On the quagmire in Iraq soon to be former Republican Majority Leader John Boehner blames the military: "Let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld... the fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge." \nRumsfeld himself said,  "As you know, you have to go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want..."\nAmerican patriots have voted and spoken!
713994
Bob Casey!!\n\nSantorum made a fool of himself these last couple years. His idiot comments, his delusions on the Iraq war, the list goes on and on.
780264
Saddam was a friend to Reagan and Bush Sr., because during the time of their respective presidencies, Iraq was at war with Iran, and the US government supported Iraq and the Saddam Regime. One theory is that the CIA, and the US government, gave Saddam the OK to invade Kuwait because the Kuwaiti government had plans of screwing with the oil supply. However, Saddam went too far, and so the US military had to reel him in and put a short leash on him.\n\nThe theory is actually rather plausible, considering that Bush Sr is an advisor to the Carlyle Group, in which the Bin Laden family heavily invests; and considering that James Baker, the Secretary of State under Bush Sr., and whose law firm, Baker Botts, represents foreign oil interests and lobbyists. (As a side note, isn't it interesting that James Baker is now heading the so called Iraq Study Group, to develop a new strategy for the war in Iraq? And, isn't it equally interesting the Baker Botts law firm defended the Bin Laden family against the law suit brought on by the families of the 9-11 victims?)
59675
During the Persian Gulf war in 1991, the first President Bush decided not to invade Iraq.  He later explained that overthrowing the Iraqi government would have "incurred incalculable human and political costs... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq."  He also said if we did invade Iraq, "We're going to be an occupying power — America in an Arab land — with no allies at our side. It would have been disastrous."\n\nPresident George H.W. Bush was right.  That's why the Iraq policy has been a disaster.