Do you hate it when People go on about how George Bush is responcible for the hundreds of american deaths?

Question

As I see it they made the decision to join the army. They obviously know the risk when joining that they might have to go to war. So why do people say it's Bushs fault?

Answer 1

I agree with you.

It's not like they were drafted.

Answer 2

I agree that soldiers know there is always a possibility of going to war when they join the military. If they didn't, why would they be learning to use guns and bombs?

I don't see how Bush is responsible for their deaths when it's the terrorists and insurgents that are shooting at our soldiers. If you want to blame someone for killing our soldiers, why not blame the people pulling the triggers? I don't remember Bush ever going there and shooting any soldiers.

Besides, it's not just Americans over there being killed. It's NATO forces from around the world that are trying to establish peace over there. Many soldiers from England, Canada, Austrailia, Germany, Japan and others are there putting their lives on the line as well. If you want to blame Bush, then you have to blame the leaders of every country trying to get the government of Iraq up and running.

Answer 3

You ought to know that President George Bush is the Commander-in-Chief of the US Army. So, any decision to send the army to anywhere is supposed to have been taken by that Commander and for the consequences he should be held responsible too! Look at what is happening to Sadan Hussein, former president of Iraq. He is on trial accused of causing death to hundreds of people while in power. What President Bush has been doing ever since he got into the White House is exactly what Sadam is accused of doing years ago! So, logically, there is no difference between Sadam and Bush, and Bush also deserves to be tried in a War Tribunal for his crimes against humanity, including hundreds of Americans who have been killed as a result of his irresponsible decisions!

Answer 4

Because that idiotic dumbass had no reason for declaring war on Iraq other than as a personal vendetta. On his first day in office, the fool told his intimates that he was going to remove Saddam Hussein because he (Saddam) had put out a contract on Daddy at the time of the first Gulf War. He just used 9/11 as an excuse. He knew there were no terrorists in Iraq (although Syria - his good friends - are shipping them across the border now), no weapons of mass destruction. It was a vendetta on the Bush the Butcher's part. Americans have died needlessly to satisfy his pride and vanity.

Answer 5

Yes, and it's not like Bush asked the terrorists to involve us right after he became president. He and the soldiers are just doing their jobs. Can the American public control and remove the terrorists and their bombs? If one of those planes crashed into your house, how different would you feel, assuming you were still alive? No one can make the right decisions all the time, but are we just supposed to sit here and wait for the world to destroy itself? And do you really think the terrorists would have stopped with the WTC and the Pentagon? If so, you seriously need to reexamine what you know about terrorists. It's their jobs to make people live in fear. They're doing their jobs. We need to do ours.

Answer 6

people who condemn Bush and his policy against terror are

1 - too lazy to KNOW the facts
2 - going with the flow and whatever sounds hip. Hey, the chicks dig it when you preach peace instead of war right? All that make love and not war right??

If they bothered to read more, and supplement the **** that the media constantly dishes to us will know that

- Iraqi terrorists are being systematically destroyed and allowing REAL Iraqis the chance to live a normal life with normal human pursuits

-That all Iraqi terrorists are cowards, hiding behind women and children and as they seek to free IraQ FROM the Big Satan,. So Satan has now become the country that puts their young men and women's lives on the line to free the oprresive regime of another person? And the 'good' guys are those that would kill an Iraqi soldier's family to force him to enlist in the army because he didnt want to serve because he wanted to provide for his family?

I hereby vehemently declare that Bush is doing a GREAT thing in Iraq and the soldiers from all countries, esp those from America, are truly heroes who are doing a noble deed in freeing Iraq from a tyrannical oppressor

Cant wait for the sentencing in Oct.

Burn Saddam Burn! I wish all the Innocent Kurds you gassed, all the people u have sent to abu graib, all the families you have destroyed by draining the river where thy plant their crops will have front seats to watch ur dead ***, black eyes go dead with death, as they see your useless body undergo its last spasms as it is slowly suffocated to death.

because at the end of the day, u deserve even worse

Answer 7

They say its bush's fault because he lied about the WMD in Iraq, and that caused the need to insert troops. Bush isnt directly responsible, its the roadside bombs and bullets that are responsbile. But if the bush administration would stop covering up Iran and Saudi Arabias involvment in terrorism then people would probably stop dying. Yea I hate it too, its just people talking who dont know all the facts.

Answer 8

for sure no i don`t hate it, it's just the opposite i find it good thinking and logical... I do say that this is bush's fault since first he didn`t know how to control this country only by his FBI and CIA and stuff like that, second because he thought and he is still thinking that he could control the world for a reason...
third because he tainted the general view of the Americans all over the world...

Answer 9

Harry S Truman said, "The buck stops here," meaning that all the blame ends with the president. He decides policy such as going to war. Bush went into a war based on lies and over 10,000 have died. It is getting worse every day.

Answer 10

Wsell, I will blame him for sending them there...but I am pretty sure that Bush did not pull a gun, and shoot.....or set off a bomb that kill any of them.....when the Liberals learn to be able to accept the responsibility for their actions, they will learn to put the responisbility of what happens to others on the right person......No one is responsible for a death unless they are the one that pulls the trigger, or uses their hands to kill....anyone else may have put them in the way...but did not kill them

Answer 11

Well for one, we shouldn't even be at war. Iraq never attacked us. They never even had terrorist factions with any ties to Al Quaeda... those were imported like Zarquawi. Once us American Infidels attacked they had no problem enlisting insurgents, turning it into a holy war. We had no evidence of weapons of mass destruction, matter of fact we had evidence to the contrary. Osama attacked us on 9/11, not Iraq... so why do we have hardly any troops still looking for him, but we sent thousands over to Iraq?