Who is more dangerous, George W. Bush or Osama Bin Laden?

Answer 1

Anybody who puts President George W. Bush as an answer to this is just ignorant. You will place a sitting president of the greatest country in the world as being worse than a terrorist leader who wants nothing more than your demise. You are all so stupid it hurts.

Answer 2

That's a dumb question. Osama bin Laden is a leader
in hiding as his power has gone down the tube. Bush
is a leader, is out in the open constantly, is trying to
help Iraq become a free nation so they don't have to
be crippled by a dictator such as Castro, Osama bin
Laden, and Sadam Hussean who killed his own people
and buried them in a huge mass pits like a kid might
bury a mouse or rat. Why do people fault Mr. Bush for
trying to help people in such poor circumstances. It
takes a war to correct this kind of thing and our leader
is not afraid to take them on. Git er doneD!

Answer 3

Clearly George W. Bush is more dangerous. He has more innocent deaths on his hands.

Bin Laden, also a dangerous lunatic, is a piker by comparison.

Conservatives will interpret postings like mine as support for bin Laden and the terrorists. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. I DO NOT support bin Laden or any other terrorist. In the black and white world of absolutism that conservatives occupy, the only distinction they are capable of making is the one their pretender-in-chief made after 9/11: "either you're with us or with the terrorists".

No thank you. I will define where I stand. I am neither with the chicken-hawks in Washington who want to bring the world under their heel, nor am I with the desperadoes who want to turn their religion into an excuse for killing people indiscriminately.

Answer 4

Bush, of course.

Isn't it kind of silly to ask?

Now, I think that bin Laden is a worse person, but he simply doesn't have anywhere near the power to inflict damage that Bush has. Even if Bush's intentions are only half as evil as bin Laden's, Bush will be FAR more dangerous.

Answer 5

Mr Bush because of the stuff he has done since 9/11, he has funded more things to kill my innocents then anythign Bin Laden has infleucned!

By now also Osama Bin Laden is dead and when it's defiantley confirmed more people will do things!

But to be honest both of them are as bad as each other and years ago they were very good friends!

Answer 6

i guess dangerous is not the suitable word here, who is more terrorist work better; Bush was the cause of the death of hundreds of thousands of innocents since the war in Iraq.
He has led Iraq to the possibility of a civil war, hundreds are murdered everyday and thousands are injured, also Afghanistan.
Not to mention his blind support for Israel which makes him an indirect cause of the death of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians
Bin Laden caused the events of 9/11, so tell me who is more dangerous or terrorist?

Answer 7

How could you try to even compare these two. You have a Great leader who has not allowed a terrorist attack on the U.S since 9/11 and then you have a guy who killed over 3000 U.S Civillians in cold blood.
You Must Be A Liberal Since Your So Anti-American

Answer 8

Al Gore

This is one of the dumbest questions I've ever heard. If anyone honestly thinks OBL is worse that GWB, then go talk to the family members that lost loved ones during 9/11 and tell them that to their faces. The fact that this question is even up here is disturbing. Either you don't live in the US or you honestly don't deserve to be living here.

Answer 9

Bush has thousands of nuclear weapons, still a large stash of chemical weapons, and an army of hundreds of thousands, thousands of aircraft with bombs, and intercontinental weapon launchers

anyone who would claim Osama is more dangerous has no concept of reality

Answer 10

Truthfully Bush is just dumb its Chaney that tells him to do this stuff. And Osama attacked us because we cut off there food supply some time ago.