English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

22 answers

George Bush!!!

2006-07-27 05:45:08 · answer #1 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1 1

Well everyone knows bush is an idiot, Saddam isn't much better but after all this time, money and bloodshed Bin Laden still hasn't been caught. Don't get me wrong i would like to see Bin Laden strung up on the nearest tree, but with the resources at the disposal of all the relevant governments a bit more progress in his capture probably should have been made.

2006-07-27 05:56:41 · answer #2 · answered by paul m 4 · 0 0

Well intelligence is such an abstract thing, and can mean different things to different people. Furthermore, what one sees on the television screen is such a small fraction of a man, that one cannot assess the breadth of a man’s intelligence (assuming we agree what intelligence is) just solely on that basis.

So for the sake of being more specific, lets measure which person is the most efficient at his job. If we were to compare George W.Bush, Osama Bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein I would have to say, in order of most efficient to least, it would have to be Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and then lastly, George W. Bush.

What is my definition of efficiency? Well it is the amount of product or effect one can produce based on what one has at their disposal. Keep in mind that Osama Bin Laden has less financially at his disposal as Saddam did, and only a fraction of what Bush can marshal at the stroke of pen. So the fact that this wealthy religious zealot can take loosely affiliated terrorist cells and orchestrate an attack on 9/11 that shapes the international policies of the largest Superpower, and then take these same cells and inflict some damage on the most powerful military on two fronts causing them to be trapped in a quagmire in Iraq, speaks much of him as a leader. Saddam, as dastardly a man as he was, held strong for over ten years under the burden of UN sanctions and kept his country intact, albeit through ruthless means.

Finally and lastly we have my favorite whipping boy, George W. Bush, who had to his advantage a mandate from a fear and revenge filled public, after 9/11, to do what he needed to do with impunity. Yet he squandered an opportunity and the goodwill of the American people by concentrating on a country, namely Iraq, that was irrelevant to the War on Terror. He has the most technologically sophisticated and richest military in the world and yet his decisions, and those of his puppeteers (Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz), have led to such an incompetent use of these mammoth resources that we have not been able to quash a rag tag team of insurgents and guerilla fighters. Quite frankly it is an embarrassment. It’s the equivalent of a world class boxer going into a kindergarten classroom, picking on the smallest wayward brat, and having that brat make him go ten rounds, when the boxer should have easily dispatched him – all because he had a dimwitted manager that had his hands tied together.

It is lamentable that the most immoral groups, like Al Qaeda and the former despotic Iraqi government, have the most efficient leaders, and in countries like the United States, where we are to be a beacon for truth and justice,we are helmed by blundering incompetence.

As the good book says "whoever much is given, of him will much be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked" (Luke 12:48). Bush was given much and entrusted with much and he has not produced much in return.

2006-07-27 06:27:40 · answer #3 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 0 0

Osama Bin Laden, crazy fool that is he, is softly spoken and an accomplished and well educated academic

Saddam Hussein, again nutcase that he is, is supposed to be a very charming man with an excellent record in the military

George W Bush..... its like a car full of muppets had a crash and he was made out of the carnage.

2006-07-27 05:50:07 · answer #4 · answered by Saccharin 3 · 0 0

Bin Laden

2006-07-27 05:54:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Unfortunately in descending order: Bin Laden, Hussain, Bush,.oh and Blair comes somewhere just before Bush

2006-07-27 05:48:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Who would push the nuke button first? That's the question, fool.We can all condemn the aggressors whilst we are not being personally targeted by those who have been brain washed from birth in to believing that to die for your faith will better you in the next life. Will you think before hitting back, when some child bomb walks into your death? We are all alive until some extremist takes us, removes us from our idiotic freedom to condemn, to choose. There are people called extremists and there are the millions that cheered them on, i won't forget seeing every Muslim country on TV and in my local streets, cheering at the carnage, every time the unbelievers die. Some people only respect STRENGTH. BUSH is trying, who else is rebelling against the morons. Stop thinking that the silent majority are not here. The noisy minority are gene pool slurry. ask any of the majority, but do so when they feel free to speak their minds. Tree huggers and mud people, along with Christians and bigots, will lie.

2006-07-27 05:47:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Bush

2006-07-27 05:57:49 · answer #8 · answered by speed777 2 · 0 0

Even though I am a full supporter of Bush I believe Osama because we haven't been able to find him. He is one smart man.

2006-07-27 05:45:39 · answer #9 · answered by Mags 3 · 0 0

Probably Osama although I'm not familiar with Hussein's level of education.

2006-07-27 05:47:46 · answer #10 · answered by derek_newhall 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers