To: AQGeiger
He's so opposed to the war, but he's afraid now that we'll extricate ourselves from our commitment to the war too soon?
But we can't leave Iraq, right? I mean; if it dissolves into civil war and becomes Iran part deux, it's a problem. I worry that Rove will make a calculation in the summer and pull back too far in order to tie up the election; one step forward, two steps back and all.
25 posted on
01/03/2004 10:18:58 AM PST by
logan
To: logan
But we can't leave Iraq, right? I mean; if it dissolves into civil war and becomes Iran part deux, it's a problem. I worry that Rove will make a calculation in the summer and pull back too far in order to tie up the election; one step forward, two steps back and all. I understand your fears. But it seems to me you're basing those fears upon the belief that Karl Rove is running the adminsitration. Personally, I don't think President Bush would let Rove (or anybody) influence his policy to the extent of placing re-election over principle. GW just isn't that kind of guy.
33 posted on
01/03/2004 10:27:39 AM PST by
AQGeiger
(Behind every good 82nd Airborne paratrooper is a wife supporting him All the Way.)
To: logan
Rove has nothing to do with the WOT.
40 posted on
01/03/2004 10:31:21 AM PST by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: logan
I worry that Rove will make a calculation in the summer and pull back too far in order to tie up the election;Rove has nothing to do with decision making regarding Iraq, logan.
Nothing.
50 posted on
01/03/2004 10:43:04 AM PST by
cyncooper
("The evil is in plain sight")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson