Do you think President Bush led us into Iraq recklessly?

Yes. He was a reckless youth and he still hasn't matured mentally! He went against the advice of so many well meaning and smart advisors. Even today, he is going against the advice of the Iraq Study Group and many generals. Too bad, Bush still is denial that he has a pretty flawed mind and mentality! He's still acting like a spoilt child running to those lame ducks who shower him with compliments and spoil him rotten!

Is Bush a Lame Duck? Of course not. He's just a spoilt, stubborn and rotten brat who refuses to acknowlege his wrongs.

I wish that Old Big GAL, Candy Crawley, would shut up. Her analysis makes no sense. Notice that she always picks out only a tiny bit off any speeches or reports to analyze and imagines herself to be a credible and competent at making analysis! CNN ought to send her packing and off to work in Iraq! She's such a downright bore.

Recklessly? No. Alittle naively, perhaps.

The goal to accomplish the toppling of Saddam's Regime was performed in record time with very little colateral damage considering the circumstances. That does not happen because of a reckless decision. That happens because of a well co-ordinated plan.

Where I think President Bush was naive is by underestimating the degree of betrayal that countries like France, Germany and Russia would stoop to to try and stop Saddam's removal. I can respect the fact that any one of these countries may not believe in or want to assist with the offensive taken, but their motives and actions went beyond that. They openly and intentionally tried to defeat the US from the sidelines.

About the whole WMD debate. We all know that the whole world believed that Saddam possessed or had the ability to produce WMD. What the critics of the Presidents policy ignore is it was announced 5 months prior to the invasion what we held Saddam accountable for abusing his people with these WMD and that we were planning on finding them and destroying them. Five months after the warning, I would have been shocked TO FIND THEM. What fool is going to leave the evidence to be discovered. If they didn't exist, why didn't Saddam just let the weapons inspectors do their job. Up until the day before the invasion President Bush gave him that option. So, Saddam had five months to make the WMD disappear.

Reckless. I believe the recklessness that you speak of has come directly from the Democrats. They have recklessly put our country in additional jeopardy all in the name of politics. Never in our nations history has a political party put a goal of party domination above the security and sanctity of the country like the Democrats have.

What I don't understand is the millions of people in our country that find this acceptable.

Yes.

Engaging a country into war is not a simple matter. If there was any indication of false or misleading information, he should have taken more time to sort those thinngs out before declaring war. Because that time was not taken and the advice of policy and military experts against war was ignored, I would have to agree with Sen. Webb.

So, are you able to furnish the united statesa. with the answer a minimum of? Do you have any defense force management experience? Are you any of the severe defense force familiar rank? Are you a defense force strategist? Do you have any mindset on restorting the united statesa. economic device as properly because of the fact the mindset on combating the terrorists & preserving the united statesa.'s wellbeing? final yet no longer least, DO you have ANY acceptable answer that could convey A PROSPERITY & PEACE TO u . s . a . in any respect? Please, don't get indignant by skill of my questions, i'm merely ideas-storming with you because of the fact from my attitude, i've got not got any OF THE strategies to those QUESTIONS that i'm ASKING TO MYSELF. as a effect, i'm fairly be HUMBLE & OBSERVANT on account that i won't be able to remedy ANY of those national protection & distant places coverage subject concerns THAN working MY MOUTH COMPLAINING concerning the forged u . s . a .. i'm A FORMER usa AIR-stress LIEUTENANT, those solders are like part of my families & I help them each and each of ways and now i'm purely a accepted joe working 6-days/week, looking after my family members.....i'm no longer a baby-kisser or any severe member of defense force workers; as a result, i will purely help united statesa. & wish for the better of this u . s . a .. bear in mind, inner branch WILL purely bring about TRAGEDY.

Maybe the people who make the bombs for the army and airforce somehow rigged the 2001/ 2005 votes so he could be president and drag you into iraq. Who knows.

Yes - he duped Congress into supporting it by forcing false WMD reports, then he tried to shortcut and wage "war on the cheap" by undermanning and underequipping our troops. History will not reflect kindly on this worst president of all times.

I think recklessly is about as kind of a word as he could come up with.

I agree with him and I'd also agree with retardedly, self servingly, or unnecessarily.

Absolutely and emphatically yes!! This country does not make war, we make peace... now we are in a war that we made and we cannot create peace... what a debacle!

There were no WMD, there was no threat to US security, there was no plan, there was no need to invade. This president lied, got us into a mess and now, billions of dollars and thousands of young lives lost, we are stuck in a civil war that even the Iraquis can't control.

I think facts are fun.

Here are some....

Most Democrats voted for the war before they voted against it.

The generals on the ground command the war, not Bush.

The troop surge is the generals' idea... it is what they need...

It is not Bush's "evil plan"

Iraq exist in the now.. not the yesteryear...

but then again the best way to soleve problems is to complain about them...