Why not do what people want?

[mattskramer]

I’m puzzled. It seems to me as though people want our troops out of Iraq or, at they very least, they want a significant change in strategy. My opinion on this was based on the recent off-year election in which Democrats won the house. Yet Bush is not only cutting back. He is sending many more soldiers into IRAQ. I guess that he just doesn’t care what the voters want or the future of the Republican party. It is as if he is solely committed to his own agenda. Now, if it is right or wrong to have a troop surge is a different topic but please comment on this unusual behavior – for a politician to apparently ignore his constituents and do his own thing.

 

[William Joyce]

I’m puzzled. It seems to me as though people want our troops out of Iraq or, at they very least, they want a significant change in strategy. My opinion on this was based on the recent off-year election in which Democrats won the house. Yet Bush is not only cutting back. He is sending many more soldiers into IRAQ. I guess that he just doesn’t care what the voters want or the future of the Republican party. It is as if he is solely committed to his own agenda. Now, if it is right or wrong to have a troop surge is a different topic but please comment on this unusual behavior – for a politician to apparently ignore his constituents and do his own thing.

There is historical precedent. European royalty were often waging wars to aggrandize their own family power and wealth, and this is in part what spurred the revolutions against arbitrary power. The common people --- or at least the nobles below the kings --- saw that the wars WERE NOT for the benefit of the people, but for the benefit of the kings.

So you ask a good question. Why, now that we're "enlightened" enough to have a "democracy," do we see a leader acting with complete disregard --- and even AGAINST --- the will of the people, or the good of the people?

True conservatives have always opposed wars like these, favoring wars like the American Revolution (securing our own power) over imperial missions. But true conservatives aren't in power: neocons are.

 

[pegwinn]

I’m puzzled. It seems to me as though people want our troops out of Iraq or, at they very least, they want a significant change in strategy. The people are misinformed by the slanted coverage of the war. It isn't the first time it has happened (see every war ever fought by the USA) but it will be the second time it was effective.

My opinion on this was based on the recent off-year election in which Democrats won the house. Yet Bush is not only cutting back. He is sending many more soldiers into IRAQ. I guess that he just doesn’t care what the voters want or the future of the Republican party. GWB is doing what he considers to be the right thing. That takes as much courage (albeit morally) as charging a machine gun nest. He is well aware that the cost of his courage may be a Nixonian legacy in the history books.

It is as if he is solely committed to his own agenda. Now, if it is right or wrong to have a troop surge is a different topic but please comment on this unusual behavior – for a politician to apparently ignore his constituents and do his own thing. I guess I did that up there. If you read the two most recent entries in my blog (either at the site on my sig, or here at USMB) I think it might adequately address your question.

Happy Sunday. Every day you ask a question, you save a brain cell. What you choose to do with that brain cell is another matter. (Hey I like that, I might just use it on my kids)

 

[mattskramer]

Happy Sunday. Every day you ask a question, you save a brain cell. What you choose to do with that brain cell is another matter. (Hey I like that, I might just use it on my kids)

LOL. If that were true, my cranium would be 3 times as big as it is. Thanks for your perspective. It does seem a bit patronizing as if Bush is saying that he knows what is best for American interest even if most voting Americans may disagree.

Honestly, I’m ambivalent. I have mixed emotions about the Iraq war. We were not very serious in the way we approached it. We should have had 3 times as many weapons and soldiers and supplies if we were serious. Now we are in something of a quagmire. We need to pull out or we need to send as many men and supplies as we can possibly afford to send and clean up that nation. I think of it this way: We may need a bazooka to kill a mosquito or we need to simply leave the house.

 

[pegwinn]

LOL. If that were true, my cranium would be 3 times as big as it is. Thanks for your perspective. It does seem a bit patronizing as if Bush is saying that he knows what is best for American interest even if most voting Americans may disagree. We elected him to do what he thinks is best for the people. Think of it this way: You do the things you think best are for your kids.... they don't always get an opinion let alone a vote. Voting Americans fail to realise that pols do not, do not, do not, work for them. The difference is in the design of the .gov (republic v. democracy).

Honestly, I’m ambivalent. I have mixed emotions about the Iraq war. We were not very serious in the way we approached it. We should have had 3 times as many weapons and soldiers and supplies if we were serious. Now we are in something of a quagmire. We need to pull out or we need to send as many men and supplies as we can possibly afford to send and clean up that nation. I think of it this way: We may need a bazooka to kill a mosquito or we need to simply leave the house. If we leave the house the mosquito will only breed. Then we may well have to destroy the house to kill the infestation

Yet another happy Sunday

 

[mattskramer]

Yet another happy Sunday

The people voted for him. Congress authorized him. Now the people and the congress, including several Republicans, think that he is not doing a good job. I understand what Kerry meant when he said that he voted for the war before he voted against it. I understand what Hillary meant when she said that, had she known then what she knows now, she would not have voted for it. People trusted the president in this situation, but, as time progressed, they see that their trust was misplaced.

Oh well. The bottom line is that we need to more in one direction or another. We throw many many many more people and weapons into the war or we pull out. I am undecided. So what if we pull out and let Iran and Syria pick up the pieces of our shattered Iraq. So what if we send more of our men to die in Iraq. How many Americans must die before order is firmly established? Rush Limbaugh said that there is more murder in a busy American city than there is in Iraq. Fine, then let the Iraqi police arrest the murders. Part of me says that the “Mission Accomplished”. Saddam is dead and Iraq had a democracy. It is time for them to take care of themselves. Part of me says that we must continue to protect the Iraqi citizens indefinitely.

Happy Sunday

 

[sitarro]

I’m puzzled. It seems to me as though people want our troops out of Iraq or, at they very least, they want a significant change in strategy. My opinion on this was based on the recent off-year election in which Democrats won the house. Yet Bush is not only cutting back. He is sending many more soldiers into IRAQ. I guess that he just doesn’t care what the voters want or the future of the Republican party. It is as if he is solely committed to his own agenda. Now, if it is right or wrong to have a troop surge is a different topic but please comment on this unusual behavior – for a politician to apparently ignore his constituents and do his own thing.

What you see is the difference between a leader and a politician that is ruled by polls. I believe the President has a little more access to information that is actually relavent to the situation than the public and since at least 40-50 percent were merely voting against Republicans in general who gives a shit what they think?

 

[Avatar4321]

There has been a significant change of strategy. In fact, its a strategy that Democrats were advocating for a month before President Bush announced that he was adopting it. Then, of course, they totally changed their positions.

If you want a change of strategy, let the General use his new strategy. Stop trying to undermine him while claiming to support him. Americans arent going to put up with the double talk for long.