Under Saddam Hussein, about 30,000 deaths a year. Under George Bush, about 60,000 deaths a year. I don't get it. Why is it better to have George Bush the king of Iraq rather than Saddam Hussein?
2006-06-08 13:22:41 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
It really isn't..Bush just thinks he can run every country when in reality he is not only the worst president our country has ever had but by far the stupidest...the man can't even put a sentence together for crying out loud! He is a murderer also but wishes to deny he has done anything wrong in his presidency.....The first thing wrong that man did was before he became president...he was born
2006-06-08 14:32:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because with George Bush as king we don't need to sneak oil profits out of Iraq under the UN oil for food program. We ousted the middle man Kofi Anon. Now our oil companies that backed this administration from the get go can have first crack at all the potential profits to be made from selling the Iraqi people's oil.
Haliburton makes a killing repairing infra structure destroyed by Ratheon, Boeing and General Electric products, all around windfall for the US defense industry too. But lets face it if we didn't kick out Saddam do you really think Haliburton could make billions off of no bid contracts repairing Iraq?
2006-06-08 13:45:03 · answer #2 · answered by sscam2001 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton and the Democratic Congress developed a surplus and GW theory it grow to be 'play-money' till his unconstitutional invasion of Iraq putting out a severe decline contained in the US and international economy
2016-11-14 09:11:43 · answer #3 · answered by reneau 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God forbid, George who? The king of where? The man's an idiot and we don't want him king of anything thanks. Jules, Australia.
2006-06-08 13:36:41 · answer #4 · answered by Jules G 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋