Has anyone asked George Bush why he didn't 'stay the course' in Afghanistan?
822121
Someone ask the dictator to explain himself?  Of course not, they would have been ushered from the White House as quickly as possible.  It's very clear, from all reports, that Bush doesn't listen to anyone who doesn't kiss his butt and just accept everything he has to say.  Colin Powell ring any bells?  I fully agree with what this question seems to suggest.  Bush 41 should have finished Hussein when he had the chance, and Bush 43 should have set aside his obsession with Iraq and finished the job in Afghanistan.  Now, thanks to him, the terrorists are now in Iraq in droves.  Self-fulfilling prophecy?  I suppose so, he claimed connection between Hussein and 9/11 before the evidence forced him to admit there was no connection.  Now he can talk about the terrorists being in Iraq all he pleases, we blew the country wide open and gave them very safe passage inside.  Good job again Bush.
855594
It was already too late to salvage votes that would have made the difference, on the other hand, he (GWB) may have salvaged the senate with just a few more votes in Virginia.\n\nGWB explained that he didn't announce  the change until after the election, because he didn't want the troops to think his decision to do so, was political!\n\nRumsfeld had certainly become a lightning rod for the administration, and the delay in doing something about it, festered in the minds of many voters.
480564
Where do we begin with this question...  He LIED to us!!  He broke the law.  He intentionally mislead us into believing that there was cause for a war when there was not.  (And don't say that the attacks were cause for it, because that was not what we went to war for - besides that, I would be upset if someone used my death as an excuse to kill other people)  He hides behind Chritian values, but does not uphold them.  He protects the rich but not the poor.  He continually manipulates the public into backing him on decisions that they normally wouldn't by using their religious convictions against them.  He rigged the election.  \nI mean, come on, people....  The office of President of the U.S. is a difficult one.  There is no doubt about that.  But the difficulties in comparison with the power of the office is minute!  And all the things that have been speculated about him and his cabinet cannot all be complete fabrications.  Just the number of things that he has been accused of doing is proof that all is not right in the house of W.\nLet's not kid ourselves... Bush had an agenda when he ran for office the first time and the second.  \nHe's an idiot.  I am ashamed to be from the same state as him, and unlike the spineless Dixie Chicks, I will not apologize for it.\nAnd as for Clinton - he did something that a million american men do every single day, and was crucified for it.  Killing our soldiers as well as innocent people over seas is in no way comparable to a bl*w j*b.
793503
He was probably told by the President that he was not going to be staying.\nHe didn't cut and run.\nHe was fired.
886784
Bush has finally recognized that to "stay the course" is not a good strategy. Hatred begets hatred. Bigotry begets bigotry. Killing begets killing. Rush Limbaugh is living proof that people will follow evil wherever it goes. \nWe are NOT in Iraq to bring democracy to that country. We are there for three - and only three - reasons:\n1. The Bush family has had a personal vendetta against Hussein ever since the days of Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was criticized for not "finishing the job" and ousting Saddam back then;\n2. The huge U.S. military-industrial complex needs to boost sagging profits, therefore needed another 'war'. Ever since WWII, industrialists realized how profitable war could be, and bought up every politician, hired pricey lobbyists, and formed special interest groups to encourage and promote 'war'. Thus, the U.S.A. was involved in the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam; and Desert Storm. It was time for another major 'war' so that the military-industrial 'fat cats' could get fatter;\n3. Dick Cheney wants all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands so that he and his Exxon-Mobil buddies can get richer and richer and richer as they feed American motorists' dependency on foreign OIL. If we wouldn't drive $60,000 gas-guzzling SUVs, we wouldn't have to share the blame for killing 655,000 Iraqis and 2,800 U.S. soldiers with George W. Bush.\n\nQUESTION: If we're really expecting to withdraw from Iraq any time soon (Bush says 2009), WHY is the U.S.A. building the largest embassy in the world on a 104-acre site in downtown Baghdad overlooking the 'new' puppet Iraqi government installed by the Bush administration?\n\nQUESTION: If we are really interested in bringing democracy to all the dictatorships ruled by evil despots, WHY aren't we sending troops to Darfus and all the other countries reigned by these cretins??? Because those other countries have no OIL!!\nSo, we allow the genocide, rapes, and murders to continue unabated, because the U.S. has no interests to protect.\n\nPREDICTION: Before spring, 2007, Bush handlers will order him to invade Iran (if they can come up with a plausible excuse that ditto heads will 'buy') for the very same reason we're in Iraq: rich fields of easily-accessible OIL.\n\nPREDICTION: If it appears that a Democratic landslide in imminent in November, 2008, the Bush handlers will fake one more 'terrorist attack' on U.S. soil (this time in the Midwest, perhaps Chicago or St. Louis). Then they'll order Bush to declare martial law, claiming that a change in administration would not be in the best interests of national security. This gives Republicans time to groom Jeb Bush for the Presidency.\n\nRepublicans don't care how many tortured, injured or dead bodies there are; they've already been responsible for the deaths of 655,000 Iraqis and 2,800 U.S. soldiers. Until they can suck every drop of OIL out of Iraq's sands, Republicans won't give a damn about the body count. What's more important: OIL money or human lives???  Even Donald Rumsfeld said, early on in the 'war', when asked about civilian casualties: "STUFF HAPPENS!" Such a smug, insensitive remark only demonstrates how calloused this administration is, and how it has absolutely no remorse for all the dead bodies it's piled up.\nThe 'Republicrats' will create enough gridlock in the next two years that NOTHING will be accomplished (except a bunch of adults behaving like spoiled, rotten children). Meanwhile, the killing will continue and we American motorists will continue to drive gas-guzzling vehicles fueled by the blood of Iraqi citizens and American soldiers.                                        -RKO-
620781
where have you been the last 5 years? remember the date 9/11? do you really beilieve planned attack? the why didn't President Bush do another attack when his poll numbers fell.mean his poll numbers were highest after the first attack. if he was willing to do it once then why not again.
940386
It takes courage to admit you've made a mistake and to change course. Bush is incapable of doing this. Do the followers lack courage? Not necessarily, but they've had fear instilled in them by their leaders and through their special right wing propaganda media. \n\nConservatives who react angrily are often those who've been informed by angry right wing talk radio and TV, and little else.
162843
George Bush Jr. for me....Ready to head to war even before 9-11...fiscal irresponsibility....too many disturbing images of hugging and kissing the members of the royal house of Saud...\n\nAnd, in my lifetime..I have never seen the country so extremely divided....\n\nBush claimed to want to "heal" our nation...but it has been split down the middle..and the two side are drifting farther and farther apart....\n\nAlso, when reviewing his first 4 years..and asked if he made any mistakes...or could have done anything differently or better...he replied "Nope."
933225
HAHA...that is pretty good\n\nHeres a couple for ya...\n\nMullah Mohammed Hasan Akhund, the deputy Taliban leader, and George W. Bush agree to meet in Kabul for the first round of talks in a new anti-terrorism process. When George sits down, he notices three buttons on the arm of Akhund's chair. They begin talking. \n\nAfter about five minutes Akhund presses the first button. A boxing glove springs out of a box on the desk and punches Bush in the face. Annoyed, Bush carries on talking as Akhund laughs. A few minutes later the second button is pressed. This time a big boot comes out and kicks Bush in the shin. Again Akhund laughs, and again George carries on talking, not wanting to put off the bigger issue of peace between the two countries. But when the third button is pressed and another boot comes out and kicks Bush square in the privates, he's finally had enough. \n\n"I'm headin' back home!" he calmly tells the Afghan. "We'll finish these talks in Washington in two weeks!" \n\nA fortnight passes and Akhund flies to the United States for talks. As the two men sit down, Akhund notices three buttons on Bush's chair arm and prepares himself for the Texan's retaliation. They begin talking and George presses the first button. Akhund ducks, but nothing happens. George snickers but they continue talking. A few minutes later he presses the second button. Akhund jumps up, but again nothing happens. Bush roars with laughter. They continue the talks but when the third button is pressed, Akhund jumps up again, but again nothing happens. \n\nBush falls on the floor in a fit of hysterics. "Forget this," says Akhund. "I'm going back to Afghanistan!" George W. says, through tears of laughter, "What Afghanistan?" \n\n____________________________________________________\n\nQ: How do you play Taliban bingo?\nA: B-52...F-16...B-1...
897945
I must have blinked..\nI was too concerned with the murders of over 650,000 innocents, rising oil prices, nearly 100 troops killed each month, pedophiles, gays in the closet, \n\nAND Bush rejected by his own party candidates like a pest. Only a stupid starts a war not being sure he'll win it. Serves him well
770075
Stay the course of course. Oops i forgot he never said that.  He never had a plan! Remember cheney said we would be greeted as liberators.  The only plan this moron had was go in and do it. Hell we beat Nazi Germany and Japans culo in less time than we have spent in Iraq. What a horrible shame the most sophisticated well trained military in the world and no clear plan for them to follow.
739141
I disagree with knowsigns... that was one mistake clinton made, but what about the mistakes Buh has made? I'm a New Yorker and was deeply affected by the 9/11 tragedy. What did Bush do about that tragedy? Invade the privacy of millions of Americans  right? What should he have done? If you read Time magazine you would've read a punchline about how some director is making a movie about the search for osama bin laden, it's 300 hours long with no ending. That is precisely the kind of search President Bush led. I am oly 12 and you cannot guess how strong the deep contempt for the failed capture of Osama Bin Laden is. During that search he went off into Iraq, called it operation Iraqi Liberation, or: O.I.L. What did he want? the destroyer of America in jail, or oil? He didn't even need oil then. I know what people will say that he didn't do it for oil, but how sure can you be? My theory about why he changed Operation Iraqi Liberation's name was because OPEC told him you can't have our oil. He didn't want to look stupid that's why he changed the name! In my point of view Bush is the worst president we possibly could have at times like this when theres a war being waged in Iraq!! I'm only 12 years old and i feel this way, call me an anger bomb just waiting to explode, but i would say some very "colorful" things about our dear president if i didn't have faith in the Americans that trusted him.
791119
I don't think we ever got off of Iraq.  With 105 Americans killed in Iraq last month, how could anyone get off that topic.  Bush assured us we will be talking about Iraq for the next two years, when he announced that Rumsfeld we be there as long as he is president, and he still relies on Cheney for his advice on Iraq.  Sounds like "stay the course" to me.
1097276
I did not vote for George W. Bush. \nI do not share the religious or political views of Bush. \nI most certainly would not fight for Bush!\n\n(It so happens I have some health conditions that would make me unable to serve in the military -- not serious, but enough that I couldn't pass boot camp. But even if I didn't have these conditions, I still would not go to war for a man and a cause that I do not believe in).\n\nThat being said, I *do* support the men and women in our military who are overseas. Let's be clear on that -- I respect them greatly and I'm always thinking good thoughts for them. :) They had no choice in where they got sent, and if the truth were known, I'm sure many of them would rather not be in the Middle East either! But they'd face dishonorable discharge or even worse, if they tried to abandon the military.
501170
... it's not time for a different strategy... it's time for A STRATEGY... I don't think Bush ever really had one for the rebuilding in the first place... \n\nDo you remember when all the generals were slamming Rummy... it was because they all said that we needed more troops to stabilize Iraq than we had in there, but Rummy said the number of troops were fine...\n\nSo now what do we have... the wild west... assassinations and car bombings every day with no security except in U.S. controlled zones... you can't build a country without any real security... \n\nNo one wants to help the U.S., because everyone that does ends up dead in a ditch in about a month...
307924
I think he would have gone into Afghanistan and focused on getting Bin Laden. He probably would also have strengthened security measures within the states (something that Bush still hasn't done, or at least not to an extent where it shows a difference). One thing that he would not have done was go into Iraq for supposed WMDs.
934853
Most people agree that the Bush administration was unwilling to seem as though they were changing their minds about the war in Iraq so close to the election, but that the decision was probably made a long time ago for Rumsfeld to leave. If you'll remember, there was talk several weeks ago that Bush was looking into the idea that perhaps the path that we were taking in Iraq wasn't the right one, but almost as quickly, Bush went right back to "stay the course". It appears they did not want to seem weak or appear to be "flip-flopping", to use their phrasing. But in reality, they've finally figured out that the war isn't working and the majority of the people in the US know it.