2006-08-17 03:30:52 · 17 answers · asked by Nymphadora Tonks 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Bush-America, Blair-England, Mugabe- Zimbabwe
2006-08-17 03:36:47 · answer #1 · answered by sophisticated 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
1) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - Iranian President
He believes it his responsability to bring back the hidden Imam, which means the destruction of most of us. He just purchased a billion dollars worth of weapons from Russia. Would terrorists groups recieve 100 million a year if he were not in power?
2) Kim Jong Il Korea
Wouldn't one Korea be a great thing. That might happen is he were not in power. Plus there's the whole nuclear thing. And his alliances.
3. President: Bashar Al-Assad Syria
Weapons from Iran travel through Syria. To where (other than Hezbollah ) is the question.
Runner up: President: Hugo Chávez - his ties to China, Castro, and his ability to shut off the oil spicket to the US ia a little more than troublesome.
2006-08-17 11:07:19 · answer #2 · answered by JB 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think i could stop at three... Is there a way to get all of them removed? Seriously, i think the only country in the world that gives their leaders a 100% approval rating is some tiny island in the south pacific with a population of 1. Even then there are days where it waivers....
2006-08-17 11:24:19 · answer #3 · answered by celtfalcon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldnt remove anyone, just mix things up a little. Let bush run Iran and The Iranian president gets Britain. Then Blair gets Syria the syrian pres takes france and Chirac goes to replace Castro and Castro comes to America. Let each of them spend a few years in the others shoes and see how things turn out. It can hardly get any worse.
2006-08-17 11:07:59 · answer #4 · answered by Ask Me 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too bad it has to be only three. I hate terrorist and would love to take out all them. I wish I could remove all the nukes and everyone who has the knowledge to make one but that would be impossble...Some nut would learn how to do it and make another one.....OH, this is so hard of a question....I honestly don't believe it would do any good to take out just three b/c there is always some other crazy evil person more than willing to take their place...
2006-08-17 10:37:43 · answer #5 · answered by Dominika 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NK, stop missle and nuke production,
Iran place someone in who has a reasonable and humane way of doing things.
Would say Iraq but that has been done.
The leader of france I'd place someone less arrogant in as leader, it would have be a Britian or American to get that done.
2006-08-17 10:37:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush
China's President Hu
Iran's President
2006-08-17 12:18:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Kofi Annan from the UN
Kim Jong Il from South Korea
Whatever Jackass is in charge of Darfur
2006-08-17 10:47:30 · answer #8 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kim Sue of North Korea, Nut Case in Iran, Wacko in Syria. I can't spell well so I use knicknames ;-) All of them are just bad for the world and worse for their countries.
2006-08-17 10:36:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
first of all prez bush because he doesn't seem to be doing his job very well.
then the leader of france due to supply certain countries with weapons to wipe out britian and the USA
for the last one, i really don't know, maybe a country causing trouble in the middle east
2006-08-17 10:36:53 · answer #10 · answered by Josh M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋