2006-07-24 20:14:32 · 23 answers · asked by softguy 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Without sounding like a leftist Democrat or an uneducated knowitall, I'd have to say that President Bush is responsible foe the most deaths.
Osama Bin Ladin is responsible for less than 5000 deaths.
Saddam Hussein killed a number of people during his reign but I would have to say that he killed less than 50,000 people.
The War on Iraq and Afghanistan has caused over 100,000 Civilian deaths, over 2500 US Military deaths and a number of deaths of our "coalition of the willing".
However, you must ask the question...who is responsible for the IRaq War, Saddam or Bush?.
Who do you feel is responsible for September 11th's attack on the WTC?
If you believe Bush is responsible for the Iraq war, then fine, he is responsible for over 100,000 deaths.
You could also argue that his incompetence caused the deaths of the WTC depending upon how anti-Bush you are.
If you believe that Saddam hussein was connected to Al Queda and financed the WTC attacks, (absolutely ridiculous) then you could argue Saddam was responsible for all the people killed in the WTC.
Its all a matter of what you personally believe.
2006-07-24 20:17:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam killed 5000 Kurds at one time. Look at the Halabja link below. Can you compare anything like that to what Bush has done?
OBL has been the father figure of the most destructive radical Muslim movement in our lifetime. I don't think there is any accurate count of how many deaths he has indirectly been responsible for, but you can only assume it's a huge number.
It's ridiculous to put Bush in the same category as the other two.
2006-07-24 20:21:21 · answer #2 · answered by justind_000 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam stopped war in 1992 by working with UN to get a cease-fire. Why didn't he in 2002? Oh yeah, because Saddam lied about keeping the agreement. He lied about being willing to reduce weapons of mass destruction, instead he shipped it all to Syria. He lied about allowing the No-fly zones, and he constantly fired on aircraft, UN and US, patrolling the zone as he agreed.
At the rate Saddam executed political and ethnic prisoners, thousands more Iraqis would have been killed by Saddam than have died since the war began.
You want a real killer? How about the anti-war movement in the 1960's and 70's. Our decision to pull out of Vietnam resulted in the slaughter of hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, and millions more in Cambodia. But American lives are more important, right?
2006-07-24 20:25:15 · answer #3 · answered by Polymath 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush the Ugly
2006-07-24 21:38:24 · answer #4 · answered by notimimi 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More deaths = Bush by a long shot.
And if anyone wants to argue Hilter, Stalin etc... I say to you...'just wait, Bush has 2 more years in office..'
2006-07-24 20:17:39 · answer #5 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the one thing I dont understand about this nation is how did bush get elected when it seems no one likes him.
Its seems to me there are a lot of people that just jumped on the anti-bush bandwagon.
Oh well I voted for him and still support him.
2006-07-24 20:20:58 · answer #6 · answered by JB 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is going to come all the way down to the two as i've got faith the two are the two in charge and have equivalent rights. the place human beings usually get the belief females are people who've extra administration is using females having the determination of an abortion. i do no longer think abortion is a valid determination different than in very dire medical circumstances yet I do locate it complicated to argue with that line of concept. It basically "takes 2 to get pregnant" in the process the belief and after beginning to a lot of human beings for some unusual reason, on a similar time as in the process the being pregnant this is a few thing the female has finished administration over. I nonetheless think of the superb answer is for the two human beings to take administration of their beginning administration in the event that they do no longer look to be finding to have somewhat one, yet the two could have equivalent rights as properly. yet no longer anybody consents on the two 0.5 of that sentence. no longer each and every female could have an abortion besides. No beginning administration that i be attentive to of protects against STDs different than condoms, and that risk-free practices interior of reason constrained.
2016-11-02 22:59:59 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
BUSH is responsible for all deaths
2006-07-24 20:50:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Vietnam killed more than all 3 put together and that was a war that we should have never been in either. if you don't know your history you're doomed to repeat it... don't look now but here it comes again.
Nero attacked his own country to start a war so did napoleon and so did hitler and now so is BUSH! WTC 911 ...weather you wanna believe it or not...thats whats happening. may God have mercy on us all.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1519312457137943386&q=loose+change
2006-07-24 20:27:45 · answer #9 · answered by Tank Stillton 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only answer to this question is Bush.
2006-07-24 21:04:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋