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

President Bush is not one of my favorite people because he did not keep all of his promises but I do not believe him to be a terrorist nor do I think he had us go into Irack for oil. Many believe that former President Clinten fixed every thing and President Bush is riding on him while others think otherwise. What is your thoughts?

2006-08-26 20:33:48 · 31 answers · asked by Doug favors universal insurance! 3 in Society & Culture Other - Society & Culture

He received bad information from the intel community, is that his faught?
Does anyone out there find it funny that he does not mention the promise he made that he did not keep?

2006-08-26 20:40:21 · update #1

Irac is a typo, I meant Iraq

2006-08-26 20:59:38 · update #2

31 answers

the world of policy is compeletly different with the usual world we live in. it's just based on benefits. terorists, do teror for their benefits and bush attac them for us benefits which is not necesserily the sake of whole world. what ever they say about humanity is just a cover for their actions. they say they are worry about innocent people but they don't care how many children die in lebanon, and actualy they support it. but if it was an american child, god knows what would happen. so it's not the matter of humanity it's only the matter of benefit and be sure bush attaced Iraq for some more benefits rather than oil.

2006-08-27 00:14:12 · answer #1 · answered by Mehdi ((sade del)) 3 · 1 1

I don't believe that Bush went into Iraq for the oil but at the same time they would not have gone to war if Iraq had been a country without oil. It is the oil that makes Iraq strategically important and capable of building an army and being a threat to stability in the Middle East.

There are after all plenty of African and Asian dictators that are as bad or even worse than Saddam was and nobody is lifting a finger to do something about it.

2006-08-27 03:39:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Not for oil but because he was and is misguided and thought he could win. In a sense he is a terrorist since he has the self -righteous one-sided view of conflict that terrorists have. It's a shame. America will suffer greatly from having her reputation so seriously tarnished. I've heard people people say that international unpopularity of USA is jealousy. It's a mistake to hide behind these silly naif boasts. Living in Europe, I can assure you that a decade ago there used to be some unimportant jealousy as well as healthy rivalry, mixed with admiration and real respect for Americans. America got the benefit of the doubt and many faults were over-looked. The world quite liked Clinton and his charisma.This has changed. Bush has opened the door to criticism, big and small. America is scorned and ridiculed and despaired of.
I know this hurts the American ego but America is NOT COOL. But what does the rest of the world know? They are just wrong. Right?

2006-08-27 04:00:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I don't believe that President Bush sent the troops into Iraq for oil.If that was true, the oil would be flowwing out from Iraq and there would be no problems with the price of oil on the market. It's moreso the lack of Iraqi oil that's pushing the price up so high at the moment.

2006-08-27 11:23:36 · answer #4 · answered by Kuya Bryan 2 · 0 0

President Shrub is one of my least favorite people. I'm embarrassed to seriously call him our President. So I've nicknamed him ~ Shrub.

The Shrub hid his daughters, sent the troops into Iraq - not for oil - but for revenge because Big Daddy didn't do it right the first time we were over there.

No - Shrub wasn't going after the oil there. We would never do that under any administration - the rest of the world would never forgive us for that and that would be considered an egregious act of aggression.

I just wonder which country the cowboy will send our troops to next.

Don't you think it would be a nice gesture for the Bush girls to (at least) hang out at the bars on our Army bases?

2006-08-27 04:02:51 · answer #5 · answered by Kasha 3 · 0 0

Bush went to Iraq to prevent oil production.

Iraq exports are now one half of prewar levels and our gas prices are at their all time highest!! This gave a windfall to the oil and gas companies who invested heavily in Bush's campaigns.

It is rumored that Daddy Bush early this year owned more oil futures than any other single person on the planet. If so, Bush the First may now be the richest person on the planet.

But this also explains why Bush is messing with Venezuela since they provide about 14% of US daily needs.

If the strategy of disrupting supply of a commodity seems far fetched, compare this with the DeBeers company and their control and manipulation of the worldwide diamond market.

How gullible to believe Bush went to Iraq to make gas prices lower for Americans.

2006-08-27 04:14:23 · answer #6 · answered by ericasqeeze 3 · 1 0

I believe Bush went into Iraq for oil. What other reason could he possibly have had? Saddam's regime was evil and brutal, even by Middle Eastern standards, but it wasn't a threat to the US or any other western country. Bush and Blair's invasion of Iraq turned a country that wasn't a terrorist threat into one that was. If Bush and his British and Australian hangers-on really care about cleaning up tyrannies and making the world safe, why don't they turn their attention to all their right-wing African and South American kleptocracy client states? Not to mention Saudi. Saddam won hands-down on human rights issues compared with those bastards. Oh yeah, don't forget, Osama bin Laden was Saudi and his money came from there. He and all the other 9/11 loonies had connections with either Saudi, Pakistan or Afghanistan. None with Iraq. Remember the 1980s and all those Rambo movies, and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? And the war between Iraq and Iran in the 1980s? America built up the Taliban, funded them, trained them and supplied all their military hardware. Similarly Saddam's regime. Then predictably these regimes turned against the West. With hindsight we in the West should have helped the Russians clean up Afghanistan. Whatever you think about the Soviet Union, their puppet regime in Afghanistan was much more civilised than the Taliban.

2006-08-27 03:50:37 · answer #7 · answered by zee_prime 6 · 2 1

Bush announced "America is addicted to oil". It doesnt make much sense that he would want to prolong the problem by going after more oil, which the world is fast running out of anyway. All the effort was to sort out a rogue state, one day we might know if it was worth it. Bush isn't one of my favorite people either but he won't be president forever, im sure the next president will be better.

2006-08-27 04:11:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

first and foremost the bush family, are oil tycoons, the family assets are from oil in this area not in the home state. the fact that bush is operating off of clintons agenda is not politcally correct. this is about oil and nothing else. the agenda that clinton had did not put the country in the middle of a holy war between two faction of the islamic world, that have been fighting for over 100 years. whether one likes him or not he is not to be trusted he represents the anti christ to me.

2006-08-27 04:19:16 · answer #9 · answered by robert1311948 1 · 1 0

1) not about oil.
2) Pres.Clinton fixed nothing. He jugled the books by drasticly cutting Inteligance and defence spending and then applying the so called "surplus" to other areas of the budget.
3) Pres.Bush has had his hands full fixing all the stuff "Slick Willy" screwed up,trying to oversee his own innicitaves, handle a fickle public while trying to govern a nation at war,and carry out the routine duties of an American president.
4) No politician ever carries through with all their promises.Anyone who expects them to isn't bieng very realistic in their outlook.Granted,I'm not so happy with all his decisions either,but lets cut the guy some slack ! He has the toughest job in America.
BTW/ I said "Slick Willy" 'cause I know he personaly hates that.

2006-08-27 03:57:11 · answer #10 · answered by S.A.M. Gunner 7212 6 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers