Politics - 12 September 2006

Obviously Bin Laden is loved and admired by more people that George washington , but does that make him better?

2006-09-12 02:20:55 · 7 answers · asked by brinlarrr 5

2006-09-12 02:20:27 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

When Yugoslavia broke up there was instant bloodshed. When Iraq was broken by the US invasion the same thins happened.
These are just two examples where it would seem that a tyrranical power was for the peoples' own good.
Can a tyrranical power in such circumstances be justified?

2006-09-12 02:11:04 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

if Bush had not delayed in meeting with his anti terrorism adviser for 9 months would the twin towers still be standing?

2006-09-12 02:07:22 · 12 answers · asked by brinlarrr 5

How come America is so much better than any other country in the world? Probably because of president Bush. He is the best leader in the world right now, better than that *** clown in Korea. And we're so much better than Australia, China, India, France, and every other country.

2006-09-12 02:06:02 · 30 answers · asked by tenacious D fan 2

If Bush had listened to Clinton's warning about Bin Laden, then not only the twin towers would not have been hit, Bush would not have been able to kill all the American soldiers in Iraq. So should we add both body counts to Bush's personal body count?

2006-09-12 02:05:23 · 13 answers · asked by brinlarrr 5

Why did Terroist attack the USA.. only when Bush was Priesdent....sure we have felt the dangers of terroists.only real attack was 9/11..only Priesdent Bush?

2006-09-12 02:03:35 · 8 answers · asked by babo1dm 6

Bin Laden gets a pass by Clinton but Waco, Ruby Ridge and other Americans are fair target .............

2006-09-12 01:44:51 · 14 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3

Is Mr. Busch doing a good job in helping the elderly who cannot work no more and the children like me that have special needs?

2006-09-12 01:38:26 · 9 answers · asked by Special Olympian 1

2006-09-12 01:34:44 · 17 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3

look at the mess that got us into

2006-09-12 01:31:43 · 13 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3

2006-09-12 01:26:13 · 2 answers · asked by BABO 1

That is what a lot of Republicans/Conservatives say when someone disagrees, questions or mocks Mr. Busch. What sense does it make to go to Iraq and bring a democracy, Mr. Saddam would order anyone shot, killed or tortured for disagreeing with him, we got him out of power because he was an evil man like that, so what sense would it make for Mr. Busch supporters to say these things?

2006-09-12 01:25:29 · 27 answers · asked by Special Olympian 1

2006-09-12 01:20:33 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

there for we should just lay down and let it happen , like rape?

2006-09-12 01:06:51 · 16 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3

2006-09-12 01:03:43 · 28 answers · asked by DaNGeRouS MiNDz 2

Was he really the right guy?

2006-09-12 00:29:44 · 28 answers · asked by hfacto 3

I really don't have a clue.

There are some analyses to be made:

Islamic terrorism is gone or nearly gone in ten years. Al Qaida is already losing sympathy rapidly in the main muslim countries, except for Indonesia. Muslim leaders keep on supporting America predominantly.

The economy of Latin America, India and China keep on growing, so the income disparities in the world become smaller. This means that the western world is not so powerful anymore and that the third world will become the tac for Africa and the muslim world only, which means only the label to describe a minority in the world.

The economy will still thrive, Global warming is a slow process. Both nature and economy will not be a major problem.

2006-09-12 00:28:43 · 8 answers · asked by daanschr 2

2006-09-12 00:22:37 · 15 answers · asked by Sedo M 2

Or maybe the US should have concentrated on Ben Laden in Afghanistan? Or maybe the US government should have worked within the aegis of the UN. State your reasons and why. Stay on topic. Please check your emotions at the "door".

2006-09-12 00:18:59 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous

It just puzzles me why the UN thought it practical to allocate Jews their own state. Being a Jew is religious, not nationality or race. If the Jews qualified for land on the basis of belonging to a religion, how come no other religion qualified for land allocation even at that time? Jews are multi-race from black to white, showing clearly that they are a religious group. Why did nobody question this at the time?

Also how come the Jews were allocated in the middle East where they stand out like a sore thumb? The most obvious place would have been the deserts of the Arizona or maybe part of Europe such as Spain/the Balkans etc where the population are already warlike.

2006-09-12 00:00:01 · 13 answers · asked by Mai C 6